What is AMD's Next move?

[gOdman]

yeah well i guess only time will tell....
intel or amd, who will keep the crown?

dum dum dummmmmm, oh the anticipation!

LOL

[manne_29]

by making the transistors smaller its cheaper, or so i believe, though the capital costs are higher when switching over to smaller transistors (capital cost as in taping processors, getting the masks ready etc)

forget the temperature, its what, a guess? To be honest you can only say an unreleased processor may be cooler or hotter but not say that it is around 29c - THEY HAVEnT EVEN STARTED PRODUCTION or DESIGNING THE FINAL THING/revision YET!!!!!
there is no way of telling all you can say is that it might be cooler, but thats only a guess, a ball in the park figure, no one can pridict the temperature of the Perlyn core.

anyway all these are are codenames , thats all we know, they could have deigned the core and got everything ready in a few months time or they might not have done ahything et, we just dont know.

xbit labs say perlyn will be a revision of merom (the core 2 duo for mobile)



and wikipedia says this:


and you (manne_29 i mean) say this:


and that doesn't sound like a laptop core to me......


so at the end of the day what can we do, we can speculate, we can believe what others say (whether it be true or not), or WE CAN LISTEN TO INTEL FANBOYS





.....lol..... (manne_29)

ME a Intel fanboy!! No way! I fairly enjoy the notion of a AMD 64 3800+ 939single core proccessor ramping up my current system from Intel. I wouldn't mind building one with a AMD 64 5000+ AM2 X2 processor as well. It all comes down to who has the better product when function versus price is introduced. It seems as the the pot is calling the kettle black on this one.(FANBOY!!) I'm neither an Intel or AMD fanboy, I'm a realist. (take some notes). (fact),Intel has the dominent proccessor right now. (fact), Intel has 45nm on roadmap for Q3. (fact) AMD will just be introducing it's 65nm at that point. You can either close your eyes and pretend that it's not happening or you can be a big boy and MAN UP. It reality my man and sometimes the trueth hurts for you AMD fanboys, and other times the trueth hurts for Intel's fanboys. It just Intel's season to shine. Don't hate, it's allgood for the consumer. Aren't you one?

[gOdman]

ME a Intel fanboy!! No way! I fairly enjoy the notion of a AMD 64 3800+ 939single core proccessor ramping up my current system from Intel. I wouldn't mind building one with a AMD 64 5000+ AM2 X2 processor as well. It all comes down to who has the better product when function versus price is introduced. It seems as the the pot is calling the kettle black on this one.(FANBOY!!) I'm neither an Intel or AMD fanboy, I'm a realist. (take some notes). (fact),Intel has the dominent proccessor right now. (fact), Intel has 45nm on roadmap for Q3. (fact) AMD will just be introducing it's 65nm at that point. You can either close your eyes and pretend that it's not happening or you can be a big boy and MAN UP. It reality my man and sometimes the trueth hurts for you AMD fanboys, and other times the trueth hurts for Intel's fanboys. It just Intel's season to shine. Don't hate, it's allgood for the consumer. Aren't you one?

sorry but i only said it because all the talk you said was of intel as if they are gonna come out on top and have the crown for all eternity, anyway what matters if your an fanboy who (anyway you said you aren't), as long as you can see both sides of the argument then its okie

Anyway it was the way you protrayed yourself in the opening thread, dont worry i was only joking about (sorry i shouldnt really).... Anyway I have a slight lean towards intel as i have what? Now 4 intel systems at home and no amd ones does that make me an intel fanboy well no because i did in fact consider amd before core 2 duo came out, and at the end of the day i wouldn't actually want either company to go bust.
It would mean (perhaps) and end to lower prices, heck intel could have charged us £300 for a E6300 if amd weren't around, again this is only speculation...

intel takes AMD to battle.... Who will win? dum dum dum!!!!

[gOdman]

do you think that they will really release that 80 core processor? OMG think of the power!!!! One teraflop of it! wow, and what about project keifer? Cor thats only got 32 cores lol, not nearly as many ....

http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/07/10...er_32_core_uk/
http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/09/27/idf_fall_20061/

[manne_29]

do you think that they will really release that 80 core processor? OMG think of the power!!!! One teraflop of it! wow, and what about project keifer? Cor thats only got 32 cores lol, not nearly as many ....

http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/07/10...er_32_core_uk/
http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/09/27/idf_fall_20061/

Great articles. I find it hard to pick out the trueth from the hype. I do hope that it is sooner rather than later, because as they keep pumping out this ridiculous higher performing and tremindously over achieving proccessors over the next couple of years, it will give consumers like us the opportunity to pick up a reasonable priced quad core proccessor with speed that out-perform our current systems by (4) or by my system specs, (7) fold. The 80 core system would be amazing to own, but for what I would use it for would be a waiste. That is unless some awefully graphic intense games came around that would have this chip in mind and would put it to use. I can't wait for the day when we get Intel and AMD start developing 20 core chips (20 proccessors), that communicate directly with the GPU (which I think AMD has already anounced this communications link), and could take avantage of a physics chip and utilize some advanced version of ram (PC-2200mhz), which would allow us to play advanced games that are as real as movies.(visually) By maybe this is pipe dream

[gOdman]

yeah but there woud be no need for a physics chip as it would be integrated into the processor in the form of one of its cores. it makes sense doesn't it to use a however many gigahertz, say 3GHz, because it would be way faster than a physics processor. Also the OS could allocate more cores to do the umber crunching if needed, however i guess the time when we would see something like 8 cores minimum...

Quad core is not enough, i mean by the time we start making uber realistic games and have a need for a high number of floating point calculations for physics - it probably wont be enough.......more power..more....

Though if you think about a high end graphics card's GPU and the traditional dual core cpu working at 3ghz what would be faster at games, if we got a pu to do the graphics and have a seperate cpu to do OS and background apps. We also have a CPU and a GPU doing the work, whihc would be more faster?
The GPU and CPU combo, why? Because the GPU is optimised for rendering/calculating/creating etc graphics and outputting it onto a screen. This is the same for the physics. So do we integrate physics into the processor with X cores or do we have a dedicated physics unit?

However for games to be made film-like realistic games (and software) developers really need to be nudged, they need to write multicore optimised code, they need tomake code with many threads.

[gOdman]

proccessors), that communicate directly with the GPU (which I think AMD has already anounced this communications link), and could take avantage of a physics chip and utilize some advanced version of ram (PC-2200mhz),

the interconnect AMD and ATI are working on is called torrenza (i think) and uilises HTT3.0 for the dirct link betweenthe GPU and CPU.

PC-2200 is only 275mhz ddr..i guess this was a typo, so you actually meant PC3-22000 whihc would be DDR3 @ 2750mhz though im sure that to reach this speed you would need DDR4 so that means it would be PC4-22000

[manne_29]

the interconnect AMD and ATI are working on is called torrenza (i think) and uilises HTT3.0 for the dirct link betweenthe GPU and CPU.

PC-2200 is only 275mhz ddr..i guess this was a typo, so you actually meant PC3-22000 whihc would be DDR3 @ 2750mhz though im sure that to reach this speed you would need DDR4 so that means it would be PC4-22000

This direct link even with a twenty core minimum would have an advantage over just having a twenty core system with traditional set-up right? I not all that schooled on the process but it also seems that with twenty cores maybe the frequency would be ramped down because of heat and stablebility issues. (but even here I'm not sure). If you could have that many cores and keep a 3.0ghz clock than there wouldn't be the need for the physics chip. But lets say theydecrease the clock speed to 1.24 ghz. ( their reasoning being you don'y need high clock speeds if have that kind of proccessing power) , then maybe the physics card would have a place in the set-up. I wasn't sure of what type of ram it would be that's why I just put the frequency (PC-2200mhz) and not try to put they Indentification (PC4-????).
Thanks for the correction though.

[DanceswithUnix]

I don't really think the CPU is going to go past 8 cores for mass market, as most people will not see any improvement. Given the choice of cheaper or better, there comes a point on that curve when people just say "That's fine, I'll have the cheaper one please".

For example, when cars first came out their engines had a single cylinder. Rapidly both cars and motorbikes went to 2, not because it was more powerful but because for a given level of power it was smoother and a better experience. Wind forward to today, and most people still only drive 4 cylinder cars, despite 6 or 8 cylinders being far nicer to drive (and V engines sounding lovely )

[8bit]

(and V engines sounding lovely )

Sorry, OT I know but I just had to agree with you there... Gimme an Aprilia or Ducati over a Fireblade or an R1 anyday

[DanceswithUnix]

Sorry, OT I know but I just had to agree with you there... Gimme an Aprilia or Ducati over a Fireblade or an R1 anyday

Not really off topic at all...

That is why I said "for the mass market" above, there will always be those of us that want something to delight the senses and will pay a little more for it. I have an Alfa Romeo V6, my next CPU purchase will have as many cores as I can afford.

[CrazyMonkey]

More cores cheaper prices AMD really lost out to core2duo and will have to bring something pretty good out to compete with the Quad Cores, hopefully cheaper prices.

[8bit]

I have an Alfa Romeo V6

/me drools

[Tom|Nbk]

AMD are looking a bit weak atm, ive always been an AMD user, im holding off to see what there offering is, im sure it will be worth the wait and those 65mm chips should be excellent for overclocking along with the k8-l

[[GSV]Trig]

I thought K8L was just a code name or something and they werent actual chips..
PLus you gotta remember that theres always one of the two companies that looks weaker, just the way it goes...

[Tom|Nbk]

I thought K8L was just a code name or something and they werent actual chips..
PLus you gotta remember that theres always one of the two companies that looks weaker, just the way it goes...

yea its a code name for a chip afaik