Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD starting maunufacture of 65nm cpu's

Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 19, 2006 1:34:35 AM

Just read the article that AMD will be going to the 300mm wafer and starting the 65nm process this year! Anybody that would have an educated guess of what type of performance to heat we will be looking at??

Xbitlabs article
January 19, 2006 2:18:08 AM

im also looking forward into AMD's 60nm transition. i was kinda hoping they could cross the 3ghz barrier for all their processor. clock frequency may not be everything these days. but it does have an impact on performance.

But of course 60nm would also lower AMD's production cost (good for us). And not to mention power usage. :D 
January 19, 2006 3:34:09 AM

Good... they're falling behind. Though, they're always behind Intel in terms of core process size. But it doesn't really make a difference cause AMD's SOI is superior to Intel's half baked version of SOI; so die shrinks aren't as critical for AMD as they are for Intel.

-mpjesse
Related resources
January 19, 2006 3:39:38 AM

I am starting to wonder how many more die shrinks Intel thinks they can do.
They are talking 45 nanos now, but that's not much bigger than an atom.
Smaller than that, it wouldn't fall in as leakage current so much as electron migration.
January 19, 2006 3:43:41 AM

Quote:
I am starting to wonder how many more die shrinks Intel thinks they can do.
They are talking 45 nanos now, but that's not much bigger than an atom.
Smaller than that, it wouldn't fall in as leakage current so much as electron migration.



I'm thinking 16 of the cores we have today with a lot of unified cache by .032nm and then quauntum and if they dont do that then they will simply start slapping 2 16 core chips on a die and call it dual array and so on and so on.......
January 19, 2006 3:44:14 AM

Yeah. Eventually the transistor will be a thing of the past. It's just going to be impossible to keep advancing computing technology based on something as "archaic" as the transistor.

Intel and IBM have cash invested in some quantum computing firms... their future is secure. Not sure about AMD though... AMD doesn't have much capital to make such investments. Though that should change fairly soon now that AMD is turning a profit. :-)

-mpjesse
January 19, 2006 5:44:17 AM

Endyen , i don't know why i have the feeling that atoms are just more comparable with Angstroms and not with nanometers. i mean, 45*10^-9 is a little bit different than x*10^-10(where 1<=x<10) ain't it? Don't you worry about 45 nm. they will get even below that, maybe even under 10nm. Who knows.
January 19, 2006 9:09:13 AM

Will be interesting to see what they turn out of it! Of course all the 65nm stuff will be M2, and they are concentrating on that atm. So could be a while yet.

I doubt AMD are behind Intel :p  Ok yes Intel have a smaller architecture.. but they still run just as hot (or hotter).

I also wonder what size it will bottle out at. Wonder if they will ever reach the Planck Distance :lol: 
January 19, 2006 11:54:06 AM

Quote:
Even using XUVL with water lens, the best they'll ever achieve is ~40nm.
The end is near.
Using semiconductors as a basis, you're probably right, give or take. Using layers of nano-technology such as carbon tubes as the conductive part, grown/laid onto non-conductive materials as a replacement for semiconductors, who knows where things will go.
January 19, 2006 12:05:33 PM

Quote:
But it doesn't really make a difference cause AMD's SOI is superior to Intel's half baked version of SOI; so die shrinks aren't as critical for AMD as they are for Intel.
Hmm ... Considering that (as far as I know) Intel isn't even really using SoI yet (I'd still like to know why they're resisting it so much) this puts things into an interesting situation. Yes, AMD is running cooler than Intel, but then AMD's clock speeds are so much lower. Their own power consumption is already fairly up there, as is their heat, even if they are doing a lot better than Intel. So I wonder, if they had similar clock speeds, how much of a difference AMD's use of SoI would really make.

Then take into consideration that sooner or later, Intel is going to actually use SoI the way it should be, like AMD is. How much lower power consumption and thermal output will their CPUs have then? We've already seen that their PM-based designs, even without this, have dropped into a pretty impressive range.

Intel's present and recent past may suck, but their future seems fairly bright, all because they're not fully dependant on SoI to solve all of their problems. Let's hope that AMD makes similar strides to lower their power consumption and leakage problems as well so that the two companies remain comparable.
January 20, 2006 2:25:01 AM

Quote:
Intel's present and recent past may suck, but their future seems fairly bright, all because they're not fully dependant on SoI to solve all of their problems. Let's hope that AMD makes similar strides to lower their power consumption and leakage problems as well so that the two companies remain comparable.


Intel's future looks very bright indeed. And make no mistake, Intel is still the master of manufacturing processes. I'm just saying Intel still hasn't made any major strides in power consumption for desktop CPU's. Centrino rocks, no one can argue against that. AMD's answer to Centrino is pathetic at best.

Thankfully for intel, they're using Pentium M based technology for future dual core processors. Without the Pentium M where would Intel be today? We'd probably see prescott based dual cores just now hitting the roadmaps! Their scientists in Israel really saved them from AMD's wrath... for now. :-)

-mpjesse
January 20, 2006 2:50:58 AM

Well If AMD Can Do .90nm Using SOI Better Than Intel, Then Im Sure .65nm With SOI Will Also Outdo The Intel Offerings, Imagine...If They Still Run Cooler And Use Less Energy Than Intels Already .65nm Chips Using .90mm With SOI (Not Including Truly Mobile Chips) Imagine How Cool And Miserly (Power Wise) When AMD Chips Will Use .65nm w/SOI, And Imagine The Major Clock Increases That AMD Will Also Have...Imagin A Dual-Core AMD @ 2.8GHz Thats The Same $$ That The X2 4200+ Is Now... The Future Is Bright For AMD Gentalman
January 20, 2006 3:15:04 AM

Why did you capitalize every word? Wasn't that a pain in the ass to do?

-mpjesse
January 20, 2006 3:19:00 AM

Quote:
Intel's present and recent past may suck, but their future seems fairly bright, all because they're not fully dependant on SoI to solve all of their problems. Let's hope that AMD makes similar strides to lower their power consumption and leakage problems as well so that the two companies remain comparable.


Intel's future looks very bright indeed. And make no mistake, Intel is still the master of manufacturing processes. I'm just saying Intel still hasn't made any major strides in power consumption for desktop CPU's. Centrino rocks, no one can argue against that. AMD's answer to Centrino is pathetic at best.

Thankfully for intel, they're using Pentium M based technology for future dual core processors. Without the Pentium M where would Intel be today? We'd probably see prescott based dual cores just now hitting the roadmaps! Their scientists in Israel really saved them from AMD's wrath... for now. :-)

-mpjesse

It's funny, I just read an article stating that for the past year or so, Intels mobile division is the only one that has actually been making any money. Basically caring the rest through their recent blunders.
January 20, 2006 3:30:55 AM

Nah, Its Not Relly A Pain, I Trained Myself To Type That Way (Not Relly Sure Why, And This Was 15 Years Ago When I Aqured My First PC) So Its Second Nature.... I Guess You Could Call It My "Trademark"
January 20, 2006 3:12:51 PM

Quote:
It's funny, I just read an article stating that for the past year or so, Intels mobile division is the only one that has actually been making any money. Basically caring the rest through their recent blunders.
That wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. Intel has really been screwing up in the desktop market. :lol: 
January 20, 2006 3:17:23 PM

Quote:
Well If AMD Can Do .90nm Using SOI Better Than Intel, Then Im Sure .65nm With SOI Will Also Outdo The Intel Offerings
Except that Intel hasn't even been using SoI yet and their PM-based lineup is already putting AMD to shame in power usage and thermal design. Imagine when Intel starts taking SoI seriously and drops their P4s for PMs on the desktop line. About all that AMD will have going for them then is better FP performance ... assuming that Intel doesn't buff up the FP performance in the PMs during that time.

As much as I like AMD right now, I'm not so convinced of the brightness of their future in comparison. Unless they've been hiding R&D from us, they've been sitting on their laurels a little too long IMHO.
January 20, 2006 3:19:02 PM

Quote:
I Guess You Could Call It My "Trademark"
I think I'll call it an affliction, thank you. :tongue:

(It at least certainly is one on us.)
January 20, 2006 3:28:45 PM

I agree completely with you there.
It looks like intel is rolling merily along on cruise control with long term strategic planning and just went through a static session, now things are going to get jumping.
This is where big corporate mentality pays off.
Time will tell.
January 20, 2006 3:29:31 PM

Quote:
Why did you capitalize every word? Wasn't that a pain in the ass to do?

-mpjesse



Copy/Paste -> Winword.exe

Format/Change Case.

...ah... I can read again...


Quote:
Well if amd can do .90nm using soi better than intel, then im sure .65nm with soi will also outdo the intel offerings, imagine...if they still run cooler and use less energy than intels already .65nm chips using .90mm with soi (not including truly mobile chips) imagine how cool and miserly (power wise) when amd chips will use .65nm w/soi, and imagine the major clock increases that amd will also have...imagin a dual-core amd @ 2.8ghz thats the same $$ that the x2 4200+ is now... The future is bright for amd gentalman
January 20, 2006 3:36:21 PM

Until I see AMD really whomp Intel, I plan on staying with my Wintel setups. Technology's always been a game of leapfrog, so you really can't jump ship every time a new benchmark comes out.

I do have a good reason for sticking with Intel, though, besides thier reputation. In the past, my experiences with chipsets have been tainted (Was SIS, I know, but still...)

I know that my Intel chipset is not only going to mesh well with my processor, but the IO is going to be top-notch (As long as you don't count the integrated graphics :roll: Any self-respecting enthusiast vies away from that anyhow)

I've been sold on Intel since the 440BX... Ah... what a nice chipset that was....

It would be nice if thier reference drivers were a little better, though.
January 20, 2006 4:02:21 PM

Quote:
Until I see AMD really whomp Intel, I plan on staying with my Wintel setups. Technology's always been a game of leapfrog, so you really can't jump ship every time a new benchmark comes out.
No, but you'd have to be blind to have missed that AMD has really been whomping Intel for over a year now...

If I were building a system right now, I wouldn't hesitate to build AMD.

If I were planning on building a system in a year or more from now, at the moment I'd have to be looking at Intel more closely than AMD.

There's no reason not to jump ship when you're starting over from scratch. What works best is what works best, regardless of who makes it.
January 20, 2006 4:15:02 PM

Still in agreement, 3 xmas's ago, I built AthlonXP, xmas past, I built Intel, this xmas, I built Opteron 175, next xmas, probably with Intel again.
January 20, 2006 4:35:39 PM

Quote:
Still in agreement, 3 xmas's ago, I built AthlonXP, xmas past, I built Intel, this xmas, I built Opteron 175, next xmas, probably with Intel again.
Wow. I wish that I could build a new system every Yule. I'm still stuck with my 2.6C NW from years ago. Assuming that it even still works, which I still haven't heard from my insurance agent about yet. **sigh** Well, maybe now that I'm getting divorced I'll be able to afford it in Yule 06, but at what cost...
January 20, 2006 5:01:30 PM

Quote:
Until I see AMD really whomp Intel, I plan on staying with my Wintel setups. Technology's always been a game of leapfrog, so you really can't jump ship every time a new benchmark comes out.
No, but you'd have to be blind to have missed that AMD has really been whomping Intel for over a year now...

SSShhhhhhhhhhh..... Over a year's benchmarks and repeated beatings doesn't constitute a whomping. (It's more like manslaughter). That's not the point :)  I recently built a 2.4 scottie on a 955X, knowing I was going to knock out the proc with a new dual-core presler in a year or so. Risky, I know, but Intel dind't let me down. The preslers seem solid so far. Apart from lack of SLI, it's a solid system.

Quote:
There's no reason not to jump ship when you're starting over from scratch. What works best is what works best, regardless of who makes it.



I disagree somewhat. When you buy a platform, you're married to that platform. Let's say I get a Presler now on a 975X chipset. Intel's been pretty good about keeping their chipsets forward-compatable. Even with AMD's chips nailing the P4, Intel is still a solid investment, and when (erm, if) Intel jumps ahead, I won't need to build a new system to take advantage of it. I can just drop a new chip in and have the latest-greatest system. Even if Intel doesn't make a quantum leap beyond AMD, I know that I've got a clear, inexpensive upgrade path that I trust.

Now that's assuming they don't make some screwy pin changes or major IO changes. PCIe should be around for a few more years (I Hope), but then again, we never thought we'd need to get rid of AGP 8x for a while, either.

It's all a risk, but Intel's been good to me, and I'm not bailing for a small performance boost that may be negated anyway by the next-gen chips.
January 20, 2006 5:07:35 PM

P.S. I'm not afraid to admit that I'm a stubborn Intel Nazi. I know AMD's been whomping Intel. I'm know I'm scammering for excuses as to why I stay with them :)  I'm just keeping the faith :) 
January 20, 2006 5:15:51 PM

Quote:
I disagree somewhat. When you buy a platform, you're married to that platform. Let's say I get a Presler now on a 975X chipset. Intel's been pretty good about keeping their chipsets forward-compatable. Even with AMD's chips nailing the P4, Intel is still a solid investment, and when (erm, if) Intel jumps ahead, I won't need to build a new system to take advantage of it. I can just drop a new chip in and have the latest-greatest system. Even if Intel doesn't make a quantum leap beyond AMD, I know that I've got a clear, inexpensive upgrade path that I trust.
Yeah, but you get pretty much the same upgrade options either way. Unless you're buying the absolute latest chip on a socket that's about to be tossed anyway...
!