AMD to release first 65 nm processors in December

6? I think first Intel 65nm was presler and yonah, it is more than 6 months.

Wow, fanyboy maybe? Is this something new or something that has been a trend with AMD for quite some time..... they are always behind Intel when moving to a new process. But until now it has not hurt them to bad. And even now, it is the architecture not the process that is playing the biggest role in the performance difference..... next time post something worth reading. Sorry is I seem a little hostile, probably nicotine withdrawls or maybe caffine withdrawls.... my body hates me, for now.

AMD's 90nm die process has actually been competing quite well against Intel's 65 die process especially when Presler came out.

Exactly. What reason did AMD have for switching to a new process? Intel's switch to 65nm didn't really do too much with heat until C2D, and that was on a completely new architecture.

Meh. At this point, I don't really care. Just release the damn product so enthusiasts can stop bickering.

AMD's 90nm die process has actually been competing quite well against Intel's 65 die process especially when Presler came out.

When are people going to realise that it is not about the process, but the ARCHITECTURE that is magic key.

Betcha that the Intel Core arch on 90nm would be a heck lot more competitive than Presler. :wink:

I'm eager for it to come just to see how it matches Conroe...if its better or worse...and I'm eager to see how the consumer public deals with...Will they care since its so far behind Conroe? Or will it actually have a huge jump in sales, since Dell is now making AMD computers?

AMD's 90nm die process has actually been competing quite well against Intel's 65 die process especially when Presler came out.

When are people going to realise that it is not about the process, but the ARCHITECTURE that is magic key.

Betcha that the Intel Core arch on 90nm would be a heck lot more competitive than Presler. :wink:

Architecture is key when it comes to performance. The die process is more about economies of scale and reduced heat and power consumption.
AMD's Athlon 64 X2 gets trumped by Core 2 Duo in performance. However, AMD's 90nm CPUs are pretty competitive when it comes to power consumption.

We will just have to wait and see just how well the K8L core can compete against current generation CPUs.

Architecture is key when it comes to performance. The die process is more about economies of scale and reduced heat and power consumption.
AMD's Athlon 64 X2 gets trumped by Core 2 Duo in performance. However, AMD's 90nm CPUs are pretty competitive when it comes to power consumption.

No, arch is the key for both performance and power consumption. Imagine example: IF Core arch were built on 90nm, it would NOT be as powerhungry as Pentium D (smithfield) processors just because "they would both be built on the same 90nm".

Pentium D had enormously long pipelines, which is one main reason of its high power consumption.

The Core arch on 90nm would do good things. It's not just the process that matters   It's the combination.



Yeah, competitive.

December which year exactly?  

I think AMD realized that they can't just jump into 65nm and go right into 45nm in a short period of time. They have to perfect the 65nm before moving on. Intel has been doing the research and so will AMD. Yes, you are right, Intel has always been ahead. I totally agree!