Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

No AMD K8L processors until 2008

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 10, 2006 1:27:50 PM

http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20060710A1001.html
Quote:
Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) has recently indicated that its new K8L processor for its next-generation Socket AM3 platform will not be available until 2008, according to sources at Taiwan-based motherboard makers.
July 10, 2006 1:41:10 PM

This was sort of to be expected, but 2008 is really bad.
July 10, 2006 1:43:51 PM

I think Hector Ruiz had already made it clear in an interview... When he said that AMD's next architecture will be out in 2008.

But many AMD fans took this to mean that K8L will indeed be out in 2007 (even 2006, according to some people), and a K10 or some other architecture will debut in 2008.

Anyway, good find. This makes things more clearer.
Related resources
July 10, 2006 1:47:18 PM

Quote:
Yeah, this is not going to be good for AMD -- shortly around the K8L timeframe, Nahelem will be out to compete so 2008 is a :?:


Yep, so K8L will compete with Nehalem; not Core products.

2008 is really late for K8L.

It looks like Intel will have a really big lead until 2008 at least. And after 2008, it could be anybody's game.
July 10, 2006 1:47:56 PM

wow

Looks like AMD didn't learn from netburst and is gonna use the same architecture for countless years...
July 10, 2006 1:54:41 PM

There is a big difference between Netbusrt and K8 though. Just like Conroe is not a completely new architecture.... it's a revised older architecture.... it's possible for K8 to be that good also with additions.
July 10, 2006 1:55:27 PM

Quote:
http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20060710A1001.html
Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) has recently indicated that its new K8L processor for its next-generation Socket AM3 platform will not be available until 2008, according to sources at Taiwan-based motherboard makers.


Not so unexpected but I wouldn't take those "sources" for granted.
July 10, 2006 2:04:04 PM

By my logic, AMD have no chance to bring K8L before H2 07, and it is most likely they will have it at 1H 2008.
We have to see 65nm K8 first, than we have to see quadcore K8 and than we can think about K8L.
July 10, 2006 2:22:53 PM

Quote:
The only way AMD will sell more CPUs, is for them to crack up the GHz, so new/uninformed PC buyers will fall for the "more GHz = better performance" crap.


Lowering prices seems to work as well. I don't see why it wouldn't work here?
July 10, 2006 2:28:34 PM

Quote:
By my logic, AMD have no chance to bring K8L before H2 07, and it is most likely they will have it at 1H 2008.
We have to see 65nm K8 first, than we have to see quadcore K8 and than we can think about K8L.


Right, we haven't even seen a simple thing such as the benefits of it's transition from 90 to 65 nm yet. Core and K8 are much alike so the battling ahead will be with the slight respective modifications.
July 10, 2006 2:34:32 PM

Cause Intel is using extremely aggressive prices.
And lowering prices would harm their profits, probably they'll have to go in the red anyway.
If they can't get K8L out in 2007, as recently announced, then they're gonna be in trouble.
July 10, 2006 2:49:58 PM

Yes because thats exactly when a new intel archetecture comes out, they thought they would be competing with core, they will be competing with nahelm I think...correct me if im wrong on the core name because theres one in 2008 and 2010 (nahelm, gesher). But I think all of the AMD horde just died, im pretty sure of it, K8L was their last string of hope which just got cut.
a c 474 à CPUs
a c 119 À AMD
July 10, 2006 2:58:00 PM

Yeah, I kinda guess that since AMD's latest product chart thru Q3 2007 listed the FX-66 as their performance CPU. I figured K8L may come out in Q4 2007 though since that quarter was not part of the graph.
July 10, 2006 2:59:53 PM

Quote:
There is a big difference between Netbusrt and K8 though. Just like Conroe is not a completely new architecture.... it's a revised older architecture.... it's possible for K8 to be that good also with additions.


Unfortunately, designing processor isn't like baking cookies. You can't just "make additions" and improve a batch. It requires alot of time and effort. Changes to the architecture need to be validated and then the physical layout of the chip needs to be carefully redesigned to accommodate the changes. Once, the chip is produced, it must be extensively tested to catch any possible errors missed in the design phase.
July 10, 2006 3:05:50 PM

What happened to HT2?

I guess instead of pushing out a stopgap solution like the prescott, they're going to keep pace with their plans. That's a good thing, but it is really stretching the timetable. Even so, AM2 doesn't look to be lasting all that long... :( 
July 10, 2006 3:09:17 PM

Hmm, but that roadmap did not include server CPUs.
K8L might start as a server CPU somewhere in 2007.
July 10, 2006 3:09:37 PM

Quote:
There is a big difference between Netbusrt and K8 though. Just like Conroe is not a completely new architecture.... it's a revised older architecture.... it's possible for K8 to be that good also with additions.


Unfortunately, designing processor isn't like baking cookies. You can't just "make additions" and improve a batch. It requires alot of time and effort. Changes to the architecture need to be validated and then the physical layout of the chip needs to be carefully redesigned to accommodate the changes. Once, the chip is produced, it must be extensively tested to catch any possible errors missed in the design phase.

Of course I am aware of that.... all I am saying is that K8 CAN be that fast with additions. I know they won't pump them out tomorrow, just simply replying to the guy that said they should not have held on to K8 like Intel did with Prescott.... my point is, Prescott was flawed to start with..... where as K8 CAN be improved to be a much faster CPU.... but I will reiterate.... I don't think it will happen anytime soon.
July 10, 2006 3:11:40 PM

remember, the AM3 cpu's can be used in an AM2 motherboard according to reports.... so, you may be correct about the CPU's only being around for 1.5 years but the socket is reported to be compatable with K8L whenever it releases.
a c 474 à CPUs
a c 119 À AMD
July 10, 2006 3:14:47 PM

Quote:
Hmm, but that roadmap did not include server CPUs.
K8L might start as a server CPU somewhere in 2007.


I haven't seen any indications of K8L being designed for the server market and then migrated over to the desktop.

Then again, I don't really pay any attention to AMD's or Intel's server side of the business.
July 10, 2006 3:15:31 PM

So K10 when, 2010? :lol: 
July 10, 2006 3:17:59 PM

That's just too bad. :(  :x

I was hoping for a "good fight" between Intel and AMD in 2007. Now, if true, let's hope for a clash of the titans in 2008 between NEHALEM and K8L or whatever it is AMD has.

Until then, I'll use Core2Duo. :twisted:
July 10, 2006 3:21:59 PM

Well, yes, is designed for quad core from the ground up, and the new HT3.0 technology has also been developed with that purpose, 4 16bit HT links which can be split in 8 8bit links, etc.
July 10, 2006 3:23:02 PM

Quote:
So K10 when, 2010? :lol: 


K10, at the moment, is just vaporware.
July 10, 2006 3:36:58 PM

Quote:
http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20060710A1001.html
Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) has recently indicated that its new K8L processor for its next-generation Socket AM3 platform will not be available until 2008, according to sources at Taiwan-based motherboard makers.



I wish they would makeup their minds. An interview with Henri richard "implied" that it woul dbe out "in the middle of net xyear. I personally won't lose anythign either way.

But liek I said Intel had 3 years to have something not crappy much less better than AMD so OEMs will give AMD a year. After all, K8 is a great platform. I can see AM2 replacing A LOT of PD in low-mid range PCs, with Core 2 being the high end.


This though is an interesting case because Core doesn't have a high end price except for the 6800.

Funny I type this as an Alienware Turion ad sits at the top of the page.

AMD will be fine.


Also I won't be surprised if demand pushes Core 2 higher because Intel will lose even more than AMD because AMD has plenty chips that people want while Intel has to rid themselves of several million (maybe tens of millions) inexpensive space heaters (see Anand's new budget PC article) whose only saving grace is the inexpensive part.
July 10, 2006 3:40:27 PM

Hence the release date of 2010+
a b à CPUs
July 10, 2006 3:46:01 PM

I will agree that it took Intel from October 2003 until now to release a CPU worthy of there name.
(there last great desktop CPU being the Northwood "C" series).

But when you think about it.. it took 3 years for Intel's sales to even begin to decline a tad. With Core Duo 2 and the aggressive pricing Intel have undertook.. AMD would need to sell there Athlon64 X2's at Sempron prices to compete.

When a lowly 2.4GHz Core Duo 2 bests an AthlonFX-62... you know AMD's got problems.

AMD needs 65nm to at least try to up there clock speeds a bit. But either way I see AMD hitting the red again. There core customers being the Entry level PC/enthusiast/server markets are all under attack by Intel's Core Duo 2 (with the new Xeon obliterating the Opteron in 2-Way configs (the bulk of server shipments)).

So what will AMD do? Wait it out, until 2008.
I'm pretty sure that I won't be recommending an AMD PC to anyone until 2008.
July 10, 2006 3:51:35 PM

Not really news... but AMD is definitely going to face some tough competition next year. If they can ramp up clock speeds w/ 65nm, they should be ok. But I wouldn't be surprised to see AMD lose some desktop market share in Q2, 3, and 4 next year.

Buuuut... Dell is going to be a big "what if" in this whole scenario. If Dell decides to really push AMD desktop products, it might just keep AMD going very well next year.
July 10, 2006 4:10:22 PM

Quote:
I wish they would makeup their minds. An interview with Henri richard "implied" that it woul dbe out "in the middle of net xyear. I personally won't lose anythign either way.

He implied to an upgrade on K8 in 2007 and next generation architecture in 2008. K8L looks like a next-gen micro architecture to me more than just an upgrade.

Quote:
But liek I said Intel had 3 years to have something not crappy much less better than AMD so OEMs will give AMD a year.

I don't know what OEMs will give AMD, but I agree about the crappy Netburst. It was like Intel were trying to break the wall with head.
Quote:
After all, K8 is a great platform.

yes K8 is the best x86 platform at the moment, but this month that will be changed.
Quote:
I can see AM2 replacing A LOT of PD in low-mid range PCs, with Core 2 being the high end.

Well you see through the prism of AMD fanboyism, it is ok. But there will be no sAM2 K8 competetive to Core2 Duo, performance/price. And there are a lot of PD competetive to X2. Intel have cheaper production process, you know.

Quote:
This though is an interesting case because Core doesn't have a high end price except for the 6800.

What do you mean, Core doesn't have high end price? What is high end?

Quote:
Funny I type this as an Alienware Turion ad sits at the top of the page.

AMD will be fine.

It is OK to be an AMD fanboy.

Quote:
Also I won't be surprised if demand pushes Core 2 higher because Intel will lose even more than AMD because AMD has plenty chips that people want while Intel has to rid themselves of several million (maybe tens of millions) inexpensive space heaters (see Anand's new budget PC article) whose only saving grace is the inexpensive part.

What you've said is so contrary. Everybody is not going to buy new computers just becouse there is faster chip available at the market. 90% of the population on the earth never heard about Core2, K8 and Netburst.
Why do you think that people want AMD chips, just check out how many Netburst chips are sold and how many K8. And if I use your logic if someone want what is better than he will go after Core2 or if it is unavailable will wait and buy it latter, just like I will do.
July 10, 2006 4:18:42 PM

Quote:
Hmm, but that roadmap did not include server CPUs.
K8L might start as a server CPU somewhere in 2007.


I haven't seen any indications of K8L being designed for the server market and then migrated over to the desktop.

Then again, I don't really pay any attention to AMD's or Intel's server side of the business.


yes K8L is LGA for servers. Why intro quad core on the desktop first? They have said that the K8L improvements will make it into the dual core chips. This is logical for product differentiation. So when they go to 6-8 cores for server, desktop will move up to 4. IMO.

I am still pissed about this because now the Intel crew will be chest and ignorant for 18 months.


While AMD will steadily open new server markets and infiltrate the corporate desktop with chips "in between" PD and Core 2.
July 10, 2006 4:49:37 PM

Im really wondering have you ever owned an Intel Pentium 4 chip ?, because ill tell you right now, my amd processor only was around 10 degrees cooler under load then my 2.4 ghz P4 overclocked too 3.6 ghz on stock voltage and cooling. And guess what I was happier with that cpu, as it was stable all of the time, and its performance was consistent. With my current setup netiher are consistent when overclocked a mere 400 mhz. How ever this system is slightly faster in gaming, and I mean really slightly faster, even in games like source. The only game that saw a benifit was UT2004 which I dont even like or play anymore. ^^ what you are stating above is not good for amd, as intel will have had quad cores for 1 year now, making them "leap ahead" of amd. k8L coming out in 2008 is not a good thing, nahelm will nail down k8L.
July 10, 2006 4:51:57 PM

My X2 4800+ isn't really all that faster than my old Northwood C at 3.6GHz.
July 10, 2006 4:53:52 PM

This is not good, okuy, not good at all okuy.
Looks like AMD got caught with their pants down okuy, taking a dump on the front lawn okuy.
No changes to the architecture is bad okuy, same performance until 2008 is very bad okuy.
Looks like a mass exodus to Intel whenever that comes out okuy.
July 10, 2006 5:15:53 PM

Quote:
I will agree that it took Intel from October 2003 until now to release a CPU worthy of there name.
(there last great desktop CPU being the Northwood "C" series).

But when you think about it.. it took 3 years for Intel's sales to even begin to decline a tad. With Core Duo 2 and the aggressive pricing Intel have undertook.. AMD would need to sell there Athlon64 X2's at Sempron prices to compete.

When a lowly 2.4GHz Core Duo 2 bests an AthlonFX-62... you know AMD's got problems.

AMD needs 65nm to at least try to up there clock speeds a bit. But either way I see AMD hitting the red again. There core customers being the Entry level PC/enthusiast/server markets are all under attack by Intel's Core Duo 2 (with the new Xeon obliterating the Opteron in 2-Way configs (the bulk of server shipments)).

So what will AMD do? Wait it out, until 2008.
I'm pretty sure that I won't be recommending an AMD PC to anyone until 2008.



That's a double standard. Intel hopes that people will forgive them anything so they can do whatever they want and still sell 79.1% of the market.

Woodcrest only wins in WKSTA benches. AMD is still the KING of SQL.

They don't have to rush, their customers still want AMD. is everyone so blinded by intels "bling-bling" that they can't see the forest for the trees?
Most people in the industry agree that AMD will continue to increase share even int he face of Core 2 which won't be the majority of Intel's shipments until Q2 07. Also remember that now Intel has to compete with themselves.
Who wants a PD after Core 2 is released?

Dell is going to have a helluva time with this. Not because I don't like Intel but because that's how it is.
July 10, 2006 5:16:42 PM

Quote:
My X2 4800+ isn't really all that faster than my old Northwood C at 3.6GHz.



Except for that 1GHz clock speed difference.
July 10, 2006 5:21:10 PM

Quote:
My X2 4800+ isn't really all that faster than my old Northwood C at 3.6GHz.



Except for that 1GHz clock speed difference.

It is a shame that AMD can not break free from the thermal chains that forever bind them to a ceiling of 3GHz... :roll:
July 10, 2006 5:25:19 PM

Quote:
Im really wondering have you ever owned an Intel Pentium 4 chip ?, because ill tell you right now, my amd processor only was around 10 degrees cooler under load then my 2.4 ghz P4 overclocked too 3.6 ghz on stock voltage and cooling. And guess what I was happier with that cpu, as it was stable all of the time, and its performance was consistent. With my current setup netiher are consistent when overclocked a mere 400 mhz. How ever this system is slightly faster in gaming, and I mean really slightly faster, even in games like source. The only game that saw a benifit was UT2004 which I dont even like or play anymore. ^^ what you are stating above is not good for amd, as intel will have had quad cores for 1 year now, making them "leap ahead" of amd. k8L coming out in 2008 is not a good thing, nahelm will nail down k8L.



I'm usign a P4 right now. I think i'm going to buy a Turion X2 so that I don't have to anymore. These cheap Optiplex's make me sick. Every company has these CRAPPY THINGS and THEY SUCK FOR HEAVY USE AND DEVELOPMENT WORK. from my experience.

Like I tell people I have had both running nearly side by side. P4 at work 3200+ at home - Doing the same work, I was NOTICEABLY faster with the 3200+.

You can say whatever but everyone knows that everyone doesn't use the PC the same. That's why there are Users, Power Users, and administrators. I am a power user. Intel has left me flat. core 2 looks good but I reserve "money"(judgement) until I get MY hands on one in MY environment.

Other people care about power.
July 10, 2006 5:33:51 PM

Quote:

I'm usign a P4 right now. I think i'm going to buy a Turion X2 so that I don't have to anymore. These cheap Optiplex's make me sick. Every company has these CRAPPY THINGS and THEY SUCK FOR HEAVY USE AND DEVELOPMENT WORK. from my experience.


It all depends on what type of "work" you are doing. My Dell Precision 530 at work outperforms my AMD 3200+ 64 at home when it comes to image processing tasks. However, my AMD system greatly outperforms the Dell when it comes to games.
July 10, 2006 5:47:33 PM

Quote:
My X2 4800+ isn't really all that faster than my old Northwood C at 3.6GHz.



Except for that 1GHz clock speed difference.

It is a shame that AMD can not break free from the thermal chains that forever bind them to a ceiling of 3GHz... :roll:


They were never looking for clock speed remember? They were out to make a monster chip that operates very cool. 8XX still runs the high end (up to 8 procs) with no one in sight including Sparc, Power 5, Itanium, etc.

Check out tpc.org


Just admit that AMD poked Intel in teh eye and beat them with a stick for 3 years and now they still haven't reached the end of the tunnel because Woody is MIA and Core 2 may have to plug into a toaster socket :lol:  8O , with no real volume for either (Merom too) until next year.


By then AMD wil have gained another 4% share. That's a minimum depending upon how much dell picks up. everyone knows build a great server and the desktop will come.

And stop with the double standards. Intel flopped for years and AMD still has AN EXCELLENT platform whether Core 2 is faster or not.

IT people remeber the year(s) of complaining about power while Intel MADE SURE that AMD stayed outof Dell systems. Now that they will have some watch what happens.

I will be glad to see an X2 in a Dell dev box. Core has only just caught up with AMDs speed in compiling code - even with an Intel compiler.
July 10, 2006 5:53:17 PM

IMO AMD beat Intel at tops for almost 2 years, not 3 years as you state as fact...
July 10, 2006 5:54:52 PM

Quote:
Not really news... but AMD is definitely going to face some tough competition next year. If they can ramp up clock speeds w/ 65nm, they should be ok. But I wouldn't be surprised to see AMD lose some desktop market share in Q2, 3, and 4 next year.

Buuuut... Dell is going to be a big "what if" in this whole scenario. If Dell decides to really push AMD desktop products, it might just keep AMD going very well next year.



The smaller company doesn't NORMALLY lose share when the larger company "leaps ahead." Peopel will not stop buying AMD because Core 2 may be 40% of Intel's inventory NEXT YEAR.


They are still not going for clock speed, but platform flexibility. I like their plans and I'm sure I'm not alone with Turion X2 laptops showing up on every tier 1 OEM and every mobo manuf having MULTIPLE AM2 boards.


nVidia's chipset will account for some of AMDs future popularity as will ATis btu AMDs cooperative streak will do mor ethan every Intel "special deal" because the companies involved with AMD don't have to worry about them "invading their market."


Again AMD will be fine. if not, i'll still have a job and a fast PC so whatever, but the industry is really embracing AMD right now, especially with their MUCH BETTER product differentiation and less product overlap.
July 10, 2006 5:56:19 PM

where did you find that there will be "no real volume" for the core 2 duo's?

you know that intel has been stockpiling them for months?

and where did you get 4%??

Dell does whats cheapest, and that certainly isn't going to be AMD for much longer...
July 10, 2006 6:00:36 PM

Quote:
IMO AMD beat Intel at tops for almost 2 years, not 3 years as you state as fact...



Opteron released in Oct 2003. it's moving up on Oct 2006 and Woody is MIA. That's NEARLY three years DEPENDING UPON when Woodcrest is readily available and being used in data centers 24/7 for at least 60 days.

until then the count doesn't stop. See you in October.
July 10, 2006 6:07:53 PM

Quote:
where did you find that there will be "no real volume" for the core 2 duo's?

you know that intel has been stockpiling them for months?

and where did you get 4%??

Dell does whats cheapest, and that certainly isn't going to be AMD for much longer...



Intel's roadmap shows 40% Core 2 in Q107. 4% is a figure based on the fact that as Intel struggles to get rid of P4/PD in the face of their own chip REALLY embarassing it people will feel more comfortable with a compnaythat has had 3 sockets and ALL compatible chipsets for the last few years.

Do any of you understand how INVENTORY works? core 2 will sell, but then PD won't,so they will not get rid of NetBust until Q207 maybe longer depending upon how much extra stock is left after the SLOW Q2 and how much they made afterwards - they have to maintain a surplus for "rushes."

Core 2 won't help Intel until next year. Right now it will just make it harder to sell NetBust/Xeoff. Sorry I couldn't resist. Netburst/Xeon.
July 10, 2006 6:33:24 PM

Quote:
where did you find that there will be "no real volume" for the core 2 duo's?

you know that intel has been stockpiling them for months?

and where did you get 4%??

Dell does whats cheapest, and that certainly isn't going to be AMD for much longer...



Intel's roadmap shows 40% Core 2 in Q107. 4% is a figure based on the fact that as Intel struggles to get rid of P4/PD in the face of their own chip REALLY embarassing it people will feel more comfortable with a compnaythat has had 3 sockets and ALL compatible chipsets for the last few years.

Do any of you understand how INVENTORY works? core 2 will sell, but then PD won't,so they will not get rid of NetBust until Q207 maybe longer depending upon how much extra stock is left after the SLOW Q2 and how much they made afterwards - they have to maintain a surplus for "rushes."

Core 2 won't help Intel until next year. Right now it will just make it harder to sell NetBust/Xeoff. Sorry I couldn't resist. Netburst/Xeon.



I think there are several flaws in your analysis; Core 2 Duo will come out this month, yes. Will everyone and their mom flock to buy it? NO! I am the only one in my family who knows what Core 2 Duo is besides my father who's in the engineering business. And, we ALL have laptops/computers. Only the geeks and enthusiasts like us really know about this. The vast majority of consumers out there will buy whatever is cheap and what they are told has enough performance to get them through websurfing and the like. And from all indications, Intel is ramping Core 2 Duo hard right now; they've had engineering samples for at least a year (it takes roughly a year between tape-out/samples to actual launch). C'mon BaronMatrix, I thought you worked in the computing/software business!!
July 10, 2006 6:53:16 PM

Then you must be fanboying it because from my personal experience this computer is not much faster at gaming, everything else it is in fact slower. 3d rendering with rhino, photoshop rendering, multitasking..etc. You shouldnt be comparing a cheap dell system to something you personally built at home,all prebuilt pcs are garbage intel or amd no matter who makes em. The system you are using at work is probably a cheap 2.8 ghz p4, I was using a 2.4 ghz one oced too 3.6 ghz, my 3200 + @ 2.4 ghz which is realistically a 3800 + doesnt keep up to my p4 in non gaming related tasks. And in gaming I hardly notice the difference, source actually stutters more with this system.
July 10, 2006 6:56:06 PM

I see Conroe as only the beginning for the resurgence of Intel's
product line. And u see AMD gaining market share.

How do u see that? How often do u read in this forum, I'm switching
from Intel to AMD. Very Little.

How often do u read, I'm switching from AMD to Intel? A lot more.
(me for one)

I understand that most buyers don't even know that conroe is coming
out. So I guess, you are hoping for ignorance on the part of the
consumer. But if you know anything about sales, you know
HYPE is what it's all about. So if Intel can produce enough chips for the demand. Not a pretty picture for AMD.

I believe AMD's popularity was born from people like us
who demand performance, and chose not to believe the hype from
Intel's camp. Faster clock - doesn't mean better performance.
Sooner or later, those same people will be changing to the Intel camp,
unless AMD can respond.
July 10, 2006 7:07:40 PM

So finally R.I.P. K8 2002-2008? Only to add "L"?! Get the Fouke out of here.

,,
July 10, 2006 7:31:01 PM

SELL SELL SELLL!!!!
July 10, 2006 7:33:39 PM

Intel will have a new chip codenamed nahelm, amd wont have a counter for core 2 by the time nahelm comes out, amd has lost before the big battle starts.
July 10, 2006 7:54:38 PM

Quote:
By my logic, AMD have no chance to bring K8L before H2 07, and it is most likely they will have it at 1H 2008.
We have to see 65nm K8 first, than we have to see quadcore K8 and than we can think about K8L.


Do you thing Intel was working on clovertown whie it was working on Core 2?

I think they are just playing it safe. Why rush when they are the darling of the OEM world? I just wanted to see K8L listed on TPC next summer. If you look at athe Analyst day slides it shows a new core in 2007 and in 2008. When you consider that AMD always releases server chips first, I ind of assumed that K8L for the server would come out middle of next year and a few months later for desktop/mobile.

Then when the SUPER-NEW core came out in 2008, it would be even faster quad so the K8L would be lowend and the NEW ARCH woul dbe high end.

Thsi is still no tout of the realm of possibility. No matter who said what, as I said 9 inch nails posted an interview that stated K8L woul dbe ready H2 07. As a matter of fact the article was on Digitimes so someone is screwing with people.
!