Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD June 2006 Roadmap Inc. FX-66

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 6, 2006 7:40:46 PM

Quote:
The Athlon 64 FX-64 will be AMD's desktop flagship processor until Q3'07 when the Athlon 64 FX-66 arrives.

NB-This is for DUAL CORE and SINGLE CORE processors:


http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3170 :lol: 

More about : amd june 2006 roadmap

a c 471 à CPUs
a c 118 À AMD
July 6, 2006 7:48:21 PM

That's really nice but the Conroe E6600 and E6700 should be able to give the FX-66 a good run for the money. I hope for AMD's sake they bring down the price of the FX series. Otherwise only hardcore fanboys will be paying several hundreds of dollars more for a CPU that may only be marginally faster at stock speeds.
July 6, 2006 7:49:22 PM

Sad imo... that by 3rd quarter 2007 the FX-66 will be the fastest AMD has to offer... I assume that to be simply a FX-62 but running at 3.2GHz x2...
That will still be slower than todays Conroes E6700, which will only cost $520... And Intel's roadmap indicates by then they will have much faster chips to contend with...
July 6, 2006 8:02:32 PM

Hopefully clovertown will be out by then.
July 6, 2006 8:09:46 PM

No mention of the 3600+
July 6, 2006 8:09:55 PM

:lol:  :lol:  90nm FX-66, that thing is gonna burn the socket =)
July 6, 2006 8:12:59 PM

Quote:
:lol:  :lol:  90nm FX-66, that thing is gonna burn the socket =)


Not to mention, have zero overclockability... :?
July 6, 2006 8:24:22 PM

Quote:
Hopefully clovertown will be out by then.


Clovertown is supposed to launch before the end of this year. **Supposedly**
July 6, 2006 8:27:43 PM

Let me see if I got it...

FX-62 = 2.8 GHz
FX-64 = 3 GHz
FX-66 = 3.2 GHz
:?: :?: :?:

Finally AMD is getting close to Intel clocks???
July 6, 2006 8:30:03 PM

Quote:
Sad imo... that by 3rd quarter 2007 the FX-66 will be the fastest AMD has to offer... I assume that to be simply a FX-62 but running at 3GHz x2...
That will still be slower than todays Conroes E6700, which will only cost $520... And Intel's roadmap indicates by then they will have much faster chips to contend with...


Since AMD and Intel come to the market with quad-core in 1Q2007 don't you think that the FX-66 will be quad core as well ?
Personally I would spend my money on AMD purely cause it's the underdog and cause they have shown in the past to come forward with surprisingly superiour tech.
Don't forget that the only benchmarks from Conroe are not really accurate and were done with a NON production type chip.
And since AMD has got to have it from fast memory (CAS 2) which is available in 1Q2007 I'm not too worried that AMD will have the last laugh...
July 6, 2006 8:48:34 PM

If they don't have 65nm down by 3rd quarter 2007 I'm going to stay very very far away from AMD.
July 6, 2006 8:57:50 PM

Quote:
Since AMD and Intel come to the market with quad-core in 1Q2007 don't you think that the FX-66 will be quad core as well ?


are you kidding? a 90nm quadcore?

the thing is going to be soo huge and hot it will need a new socket...
a much bigger socket.

Quote:
Don't forget that the only benchmarks from Conroe are not really accurate and were done with a NON production type chip.


Ummm... there have been plenty of benchmarks done on production type chips, ya know...
July 6, 2006 9:19:00 PM

Quote:
Again, we must emphasize that our testing situation was not optimal, because the Intel system had been preconfigured and didn't represent the final version.
THG


Quote:
Server roadmaps shown by company executives confirmed that the company's Opteron processor will move to a quad-core architecture beginning in 2007, together with the ability to scale to 32 processors and above. Similar roadmaps presented for the company's desktop processor roadmap lacked the quad-core disclosure, however, which could indicate that quad-core, AMD-based PCs will arrive in 2008 or later.
extremetech


Isn't Opteron 90 nm ?
July 6, 2006 9:24:32 PM

Quote:
Sad imo... that by 3rd quarter 2007 the FX-66 will be the fastest AMD has to offer... I assume that to be simply a FX-62 but running at 3.2GHz x2...
That will still be slower than todays Conroes E6700, which will only cost $520... And Intel's roadmap indicates by then they will have much faster chips to contend with...



The 5200+ will be the better choice but look how many people paid for 965EE, which is BARELY faster than my 4400+ and in a lot of cases gets whipped.
July 6, 2006 9:30:33 PM

Quote:
The 5200+ will be the better choice but look how many people paid for 965EE, which is BARELY faster than my 4400+ and in a lot of cases gets whipped.

No it will not be better choice, the Core2 Duo E6600 is faster and less expencive than the 5200+. Those who bought 965EE, paid a lot of money but that was in the past and they will not buy 965EE at the thime when 5200+ will be available. They will probably buy something more powerfull and competetive, like Conore.
July 6, 2006 9:37:51 PM

Its funny reading some of this. What you people dont seem to understand is that you get what you pay for, no matter whether you pick Intel or AMD. The prices will be competative no matter which you buy, its as simple as that and thats the way Intel and AMD have been for 10 years. AMD is not going to sell a FX-64 for $1000 when a comparative performance conroe costs $300, it just doesnt work that way and it never will.
July 6, 2006 9:38:35 PM

Quote:
The 5200+ will be the better choice but look how many people paid for 965EE, which is BARELY faster than my 4400+ and in a lot of cases gets whipped.

No it will not be better choice, the Core2 Duo E6600 is faster and less expencive than the 5200+. Those who bought 965EE, paid a lot of money but that was in the past and they will not buy 965EE at the thime when 5200+ will be available. They will probably buy something more powerfull and competetive, like Conore.


Do I have to hold your hand all day? I meant OF COURSE a better choice than the FX66.
July 6, 2006 9:41:05 PM

Yeah but you used Intel as a comparison, so if you think about it, it makes sense what he's aying.
July 6, 2006 9:44:46 PM

Quote:
The 5200+ will be the better choice but look how many people paid for 965EE, which is BARELY faster than my 4400+ and in a lot of cases gets whipped.

No it will not be better choice, the Core2 Duo E6600 is faster and less expencive than the 5200+. Those who bought 965EE, paid a lot of money but that was in the past and they will not buy 965EE at the thime when 5200+ will be available. They will probably buy something more powerfull and competetive, like Conore.


Do I have to hold your hand all day? I meant OF COURSE a better choice than the FX66.
July 6, 2006 9:45:15 PM

Quote:
The 5200+ will be the better choice but look how many people paid for 965EE, which is BARELY faster than my 4400+ and in a lot of cases gets whipped.

No it will not be better choice, the Core2 Duo E6600 is faster and less expencive than the 5200+. Those who bought 965EE, paid a lot of money but that was in the past and they will not buy 965EE at the thime when 5200+ will be available. They will probably buy something more powerfull and competetive, like Conore.


Do I have to hold your hand all day? I meant OF COURSE a better choice than the FX66.
July 6, 2006 10:05:03 PM

Well theres no details on how many Cores or How much Cache they will have or even Clock Speeed,But I guess we can guess. Wouldnt that 4X4 platform be out right along the lines of these proc's of Late Q4 06'-Q1 of '07, so at least one of them has to be Quad Core?
I Hope the 66 is, But Q3 of 07 will be "late" being as they probably wanna have them ready by Vistas launch to make it "the CPU of choice" dont they?Well I dunno, looks like well just have to wait and see, or at least get a couple more sources. I cant believe they even have 90nm set for Q3 of 07.
July 6, 2006 10:06:40 PM

Q3 07 and no K8L?
July 6, 2006 10:07:07 PM

Baron... Get a new keyboard... :p  [/Action Man]
July 6, 2006 11:04:56 PM

Unbelivable, AMD will stay 1 more year with the same tech they have today??????????????
I was almost sure they will have the 65nm will be out by year end.
If todays' Core2 can outperform the FX of Q4 2007, who the hell will buy AMD?
I just don't get it :roll:
The days of P4C V.S Athalon XP will look like heaven for AMD.
WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON!!!!!!!!!
a c 471 à CPUs
a c 118 À AMD
July 6, 2006 11:15:00 PM

Quote:
Q3 07 and no K8L?


You know, I didn't notice that until you pointed it out.

Nehalem (Conroe's sucessor) should be out by Q3 2008 assuming Intel can maintain it's 2 year schedule.

So K8L is not coming out until possibly Q4 2007 or Q1 2008? If K8L doesn't come out by Q4 2007, then AMD may face the possiblity that people may wait for Nehalem to be released before upgrading. If Conroe can come close to living up to the hype then people "in the know" may simply skip K8L all together.

I was going to upgrade to an Athlon 64 X2 earlier this year, until I read about Conroe.
July 6, 2006 11:22:49 PM

Quote:
Unbelivable, AMD will stay 1 more year with the same tech they have today??????????????
I was almost sure they will have the 65nm will be out by year end.
If todays' Core2 can outperform the FX of Q4 2007, who the hell will buy AMD?
I just don't get it :roll:
The days of P4C V.S Athalon XP will look like heaven for AMD.
WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON!!!!!!!!!


The roadmap says that 65nm is due in 1Q07, but don't be surprised if something shows up earlier! :wink:
I also think that the document is for dual core and single core processors. :wink:
July 7, 2006 12:22:40 AM

Quote:
Unbelivable, AMD will stay 1 more year with the same tech they have today??????????????
I was almost sure they will have the 65nm will be out by year end.
If todays' Core2 can outperform the FX of Q4 2007, who the hell will buy AMD?
I just don't get it :roll:
The days of P4C V.S Athalon XP will look like heaven for AMD.
WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON!!!!!!!!!


The roadmap says that 65nm is due in 1Q07, but don't be surprised if something shows up earlier! :wink:
I also think that the document is for dual core processors. :wink:

Yeah I dont buy that either. I know 65nm will be released by year end.
That roadmap is for Intels eyes, it just doesnt show the shortcuts. :lol: 
July 7, 2006 12:23:28 AM

engineering samples are usually worse than the retail processors... duh
July 7, 2006 12:28:38 AM

Quote:
Q3 07 and no K8L?


You know, I didn't notice that until you pointed it out.

Nehalem (Conroe's sucessor) should be out by Q3 2008 assuming Intel can maintain it's 2 year schedule.

So K8L is not coming out until possibly Q4 2007 or Q1 2008? If K8L doesn't come out by Q4 2007, then AMD may face the possiblity that people may wait for Nehalem to be released before upgrading. If Conroe can come close to living up to the hype then people "in the know" may simply skip K8L all together.

I was going to upgrade to an Athlon 64 X2 earlier this year, until I read about Conroe.


That was a DESKTOP ROADMAP. K8L is a SERVER chip.
July 7, 2006 12:29:50 AM

OK OK... Then AMD has a very sad Desktop outlook... :lol: 
July 7, 2006 12:35:33 AM

Chronologically speaking, the server/workstation CPUs have been ready before desktop CPUs, isn't it?
So, K8L should be ready before everybody thinks... I guess...
July 7, 2006 12:46:14 AM

Quote:
OK OK... Then AMD has a very sad Desktop outlook... :lol: 

It looks so bad, it is like this can't be :cry: 
Of cource as consumers we should go with the best for us as in the most for our money.
I have an AMD now, but before I had a P4, what ever is coming to be best, it will be my next system.
I wonder about those who are just loyel! Why? How loyal is AMD when they price FX-62 at $1200!!!!!!!!!
July 7, 2006 12:51:24 AM

Quote:
OK OK... Then AMD has a very sad Desktop outlook... :lol: 

It looks so bad, it is like this can't be :cry: 
Of cource as consumers we should go with the best for us as in the most for our money.
I have an AMD now, but before I had a P4, what ever is coming to be best, it will be my next system.
I wonder about those who are just loyel! Why? How loyal is AMD when they price FX-62 at $1200!!!!!!!!!
it costs that much because of what it takes to make them.

A CPU fresh off the floor is worth no more than 24 dollars.
July 7, 2006 12:55:24 AM

Quote:
OK OK... Then AMD has a very sad Desktop outlook... :lol: 

It looks so bad, it is like this can't be :cry: 
Of cource as consumers we should go with the best for us as in the most for our money.
I have an AMD now, but before I had a P4, what ever is coming to be best, it will be my next system.
I wonder about those who are just loyel! Why? How loyal is AMD when they price FX-62 at $1200!!!!!!!!!
it costs that much because of what it takes to make them.
Come on, the 4000+ is an FX-53, how come it was priced a lot less. I don't buy it!
the FX-60 was 1200, now it is $800, how come?
The cost to make should be the same
July 7, 2006 1:11:41 AM

Parrot,

If you "r e a d" the legend it specifically states the Single core processors are the WHITE non-shaded areas.

So it is NOT dual core only!
July 7, 2006 1:14:11 AM

Quote:
OK OK... Then AMD has a very sad Desktop outlook... :lol: 

It looks so bad, it is like this can't be :cry: 
Of cource as consumers we should go with the best for us as in the most for our money.
I have an AMD now, but before I had a P4, what ever is coming to be best, it will be my next system.
I wonder about those who are just loyel! Why? How loyal is AMD when they price FX-62 at $1200!!!!!!!!!
it costs that much because of what it takes to make them.

A CPU fresh off the floor is worth no more than 24 dollars. How would you know spud? Do you work at a place that manufacter's processors?
July 7, 2006 1:14:29 AM

Anyone happen to notice where they are focusing their efforts?

Lower end products are moving to the 65nm market first. With a gradual ramp up of more/potentially competitive procs to come much later in Q307.

With the enthusiasts chips not even touched!!

Hmmmmmmmmm!!

It is like they are saying "ok Intel you win this round".
July 7, 2006 1:18:15 AM

Quote:
The Athlon 64 FX-64 will be AMD's desktop flagship processor until Q3'07 when the Athlon 64 FX-66 arrives.

NB-This is for DUAL CORE processors:


http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3170 :lol: 
looks really good! thx for posting this..

i just hope AMD would lower the price on FX-66, if it only performs on par with Conroe E6700.
July 7, 2006 1:23:11 AM

I am not sure for a current release "top o the line" processor that they would take a more than 50% hit in price. While still sometimes losing to the E6700 OC'd, and while the next Conroe the E6800 will probably eat its lunch.

Just not sure!

Edited for clarification!
July 7, 2006 1:39:14 AM

This chart leaves me asking the question of why the TDP does not improve for a given clock rate when they move from 90nm to 65nm processes. The chart reflects a consistant TDP clock for clock 90nm to 65nm. I would have expected to see substantial improvement given AMD's historical focus on power consumption.
July 7, 2006 1:40:36 AM

Quote:
Sad imo... that by 3rd quarter 2007 the FX-66 will be the fastest AMD has to offer... I assume that to be simply a FX-62 but running at 3.2GHz x2...
That will still be slower than todays Conroes E6700, which will only cost $520... And Intel's roadmap indicates by then they will have much faster chips to contend with...


It seems most of the replies have based on the assumption that Conroe is gonna reign forever.........but from what's been given to us, it does seem that way though.
Guess roadmaps are like that, they want to let you know about it but not in detail..................

For the Conroe E6700 @$520 a pop (assuming that will be the retail price)..........it still aint cheap for a CPU.....forget the FX series, their prices are ridiculous.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.......who is going to buy a $520 Conroe if he/she is only going to use their PC to browse the internet and do some word processing?.....I would think that $520 is close to the budget for the PC that will do everything they need!!
July 7, 2006 1:51:40 AM

Quote:
OK OK... Then AMD has a very sad Desktop outlook... :lol: 


In terms of Core 2 perhaps but AMD is pushing for thin clients with thick servers for business (Raiden) so if they can get 65nm at a good cost, they will not need to charge as much and their volume should increase.

Of course they don't mention whether the K8L version of AM2 is in the roadmap. They may ASSUME that everyone knows they will add the new features to dual core as it was said by Henri Richard - 9inch nails linked to it.
July 7, 2006 1:56:53 AM

Not really, same thing happened with winchester.
July 7, 2006 1:57:18 AM

Yeah ;) 

Quote:
Anyone happen to notice where they are focusing their efforts?

Lower end products are moving to the 65nm market first. With a gradual ramp up of more/potentially competitive procs to come much later in Q307.

With the enthusiasts chips not even touched!!

Hmmmmmmmmm!!

It is like they are saying "ok Intel you win this round".
July 7, 2006 1:58:23 AM

Quote:
K8L is a SERVER chip.


Since when?
July 7, 2006 2:02:30 AM

Perhaps its more about costs then speed.
July 7, 2006 2:03:21 AM

This would actually make sense given the information released during their "Price Reduction" press release. They also announced "as you know" that the 1M versions were going away!

What better way to bring them back in 65nm form as a now specialty chip! This smells of Intel marketing for which the AMD folks fussed about! Higher clocks and bigger cache..

Again, Hmmmmmmmm!!
a c 471 à CPUs
a c 118 À AMD
July 7, 2006 2:11:22 AM

Quote:
Q3 07 and no K8L?


You know, I didn't notice that until you pointed it out.

Nehalem (Conroe's sucessor) should be out by Q3 2008 assuming Intel can maintain it's 2 year schedule.

So K8L is not coming out until possibly Q4 2007 or Q1 2008? If K8L doesn't come out by Q4 2007, then AMD may face the possiblity that people may wait for Nehalem to be released before upgrading. If Conroe can come close to living up to the hype then people "in the know" may simply skip K8L all together.

I was going to upgrade to an Athlon 64 X2 earlier this year, until I read about Conroe.


That was a DESKTOP ROADMAP. K8L is a SERVER chip.
the bolded area is wrong,
read this http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2388

Yeah, that's what I thought.

Socket F should be the server version of the K8L, while the desktop version will be either AM2 or AM3.
July 7, 2006 2:13:49 AM

The 65nm chips should be overclockers and they'll no doubt be cheap. A good combination for enthusiasts.
!