45nm Penryn CPU's - 1st Qtr 2007?

[Jake_Barnes]

Reported in X-bit labs: (I assume you guys have seen this ... no fanboy wars please - just information )

Intel Corp. on Monday said that the first prototypes of microprocessors using 45nm process technology have been produced. The announcement once again illustrates Intel’s very aggressive process technology transition roadmap and proves that Intel Corp. has delivered on its promise to tape out its first 45nm chip this quarter....
.... Intel’s sampling of the code-named Penryn processor at 45nm fabrication process occurs amid the company’s arch-rival Advanced Micro Devices still have not announced a single processor made using 65nm fabrication process, which is used to manufacture the majority of Intel’s central processing units (CPUs) these days. According to the director of Intel, the company is on-track to produce Penryn in volumes and ship them to customers in the second half of 2007.

Intel Samples 45nm “Penryn” Microprocessors
Copyright (c) 1999-2006 X-bit labs

 

[Doughbuy]

We've already discussed this quite a bit in another thread. AMD is either really quiet because they're going to take the world by storm, or really quiet because they really don't have anything. There's the 4x4 vs. QX6700 test that was just done, and it didn't seem promising to say the least...

Then again, AMD has been on top for a long time now, which means not only is Intel pushing really hard to get back on track to be the top again, but AMD might have gotten a little lazy and slacked off...

We'll see what the future holds.

 

[m25]

We've already discussed this quite a bit in another thread. AMD is either really quiet because they're going to take the world by storm, or really quiet because they really don't have anything. There's the 4x4 vs. QX6700 test that was just done, and it didn't seem promising to say the least...

Then again, AMD has been on top for a long time now, which means not only is Intel pushing really hard to get back on track to be the top again, but AMD might have gotten a little lazy and slacked off...

We'll see what the future holds.

It is what I was just thinking; AMD has definitely been caught by the Intel syndrome; They did nothing special after the first K8's were launched except for the straightforward moves like X2 and dual channel controller,...ah yes, they also switched two sockets :lol:

 

[qcmadness]

Reported in X-bit labs: (I assume you guys have seen this ... no fanboy wars please - just information )
Intel Corp. on Monday said that the first prototypes of microprocessors using 45nm process technology have been produced. The announcement once again illustrates Intel’s very aggressive process technology transition roadmap and proves that Intel Corp. has delivered on its promise to tape out its first 45nm chip this quarter....
.... Intel’s sampling of the code-named Penryn processor at 45nm fabrication process occurs amid the company’s arch-rival Advanced Micro Devices still have not announced a single processor made using 65nm fabrication process, which is used to manufacture the majority of Intel’s central processing units (CPUs) these days. According to the director of Intel, the company is on-track to produce Penryn in volumes and ship them to customers in the second half of 2007.

Intel Samples 45nm “Penryn” Microprocessors
Copyright (c) 1999-2006 X-bit labs

Expected to roll out in Q3 07.

 

[jaguarskx]

Yeah, it's actually quite refreshing that despite own admitance (back in July 2006) that mid 2007 was a very aggressive target date, it seems that they are capable of meeting that goal. At least for the time being.

 

[Jake_Barnes]

I'm hating Intel for this simple reason ... I was going to build a e6600 (C2D) system after the holidays (hoping for DDR2 price drop, and mobo's etc) - so now, I see, I need to wait on the Penryn chips as these 45 nm C2D chips will, clearly require a different socket ... right?

Or maybe the 65 nm stuff will drop enough in price that it's a much better deal to build with the current socket chips and just OC and pocket the difference. Does this sound right? :?

 

[dasickninja]

Not necessarily. What might get you is the different VRM. Intel went from 90nm to 65nm all on LGA775. But from Prescott to Conroe, the voltages needed changed. Thats why 915P chipsets don't work with Core 2 Duo's.

 

[qcmadness]

Not necessarily. What might get you is the different VRM. Intel went from 90nm to 65nm all on LGA775. But from Prescott to Conroe, the voltages needed changed. Thats why 915P chipsets don't work with Core 2 Duo's.

915 chipsets don't work with C2Ds becuase they do not support dual-core, but not the VRM problem.

 

[dasickninja]

You're telling me the 915 VRM can support the Core 2?

 

[djgandy]

I'm hating Intel for this simple reason ... I was going to build a e6600 (C2D) system after the holidays (hoping for DDR2 price drop, and mobo's etc) - so now, I see, I need to wait on the Penryn chips as these 45 nm C2D chips will, clearly require a different socket ... right?

Or maybe the 65 nm stuff will drop enough in price that it's a much better deal to build with the current socket chips and just OC and pocket the difference. Does this sound right? :?

Yes that sounds right. The low end of core2 are cheap anyway. They offer the best for your money. You won't see these Penryn's around for quite a while. The only other option i can think of is play the wait game, where you wait forever for the new thing and never buy anything

No point hating them though, they could put it off for another year, but that would just mean technology would advance slower. That's not really feasible either.

 

[qcmadness]

You're telling me the 915 VRM can support the Core 2?

Grantsdale (915 series) and Alderwood (925X) do not support dual-core due to the silicon design.

The reason for that is that Asus tried to use 875P to power up dual Xeon processors. Then Intel designed Grantsdale and Alderwood so that they cannot support multi-core designs.

 

[IcY18]

Penryn wouldn't necessarily require a new socket but that doesn't mean a new one might not come out for it and that would eventually support Intel's native quad core down the road. Right now what to watch out for is Intel's new chipsets that are coming as you might want to wait for them. Not that big of a deal but upgrade-ability could definitely come into play.

 

[dasickninja]

You keep missing my point. I'm saying the 915 VRM cannot support Core 2. You keep coming at me with the fact that I already know, that it cannot support Dual Core. Do you understand me yet? I'm talking about the VRM. Nothing else.

 

[qcmadness]

You keep missing my point. I'm saying the 915 VRM cannot support Core 2. You keep coming at me with the fact that I already know, that it cannot support Dual Core. Do you understand me yet? I'm talking about the VRM. Nothing else.

If you know that a Athlon64 cannot be plugged in a Socket 478 motherboard, will the motherboard be prepared (or to be prepared) for the voltages (1.1V / 1.3-1.35V) for Athlon64s?

 

[dasickninja]

I give up. My point was pretty simple yet you complicate it so much. The analogy is quite simple. 915P is a 775 chipset as is 975. I was using the different VRM's in each chipset in this case to illustrate the difference and the possible problems that would occur when moving from 65nm to 45nm. Seriously. It wasn't supposed to take up that many posts. *sneeze*

 

[qcmadness]

I give up. My point was pretty simple yet you complicate it so much. The analogy is quite simple. 915P is a 775 chipset as is 975. I was using the different VRM's in each chipset in this case to illustrate the difference and the possible problems that would occur when moving from 65nm to 45nm. Seriously. It wasn't supposed to take up that many posts. *sneeze*

I don't think there are VRM-11 powered 915s.

Also 915 chipset will be discontinued very soon.

 

[quantumsheep]

You keep missing my point. I'm saying the 915 VRM cannot support Core 2. You keep coming at me with the fact that I already know, that it cannot support Dual Core. Do you understand me yet? I'm talking about the VRM. Nothing else.

If you know that a Athlon64 cannot be plugged in a Socket 478 motherboard, will the motherboard be prepared (or to be prepared) for the voltages (1.1V / 1.3-1.35V) for Athlon64s?

Where the bloody hell did you hear that from?

They haven't had the same socket since the days of the K6-2!

 

[dasickninja]

*Sniff* Do you get my point though? I don't give a flying boat about if there is a VRM-11 for 915P. I was trying to show the different VRM's for different process sizes even among the same chipset. Ah what the hell. I'm gonna go find that flu medicine.

 

[qcmadness]

You keep missing my point. I'm saying the 915 VRM cannot support Core 2. You keep coming at me with the fact that I already know, that it cannot support Dual Core. Do you understand me yet? I'm talking about the VRM. Nothing else.

If you know that a Athlon64 cannot be plugged in a Socket 478 motherboard, will the motherboard be prepared (or to be prepared) for the voltages (1.1V / 1.3-1.35V) for Athlon64s?

Where the bloody hell did you hear that from?

They haven't had the same socket since the days of the K6-2!

I just use an example to illustrate that motherboard manufacturers will not update the VRM of 915-based motherboards to "fit" newer processors.

 

[qcmadness]

*Sniff* Do you get my point though? I don't give a flying boat about if there is a VRM-11 for 915P. I was trying to show the different VRM's for different process sizes even among the same chipset.

Sorry.... I still can't get your point .

 

[quantumsheep]

You keep missing my point. I'm saying the 915 VRM cannot support Core 2. You keep coming at me with the fact that I already know, that it cannot support Dual Core. Do you understand me yet? I'm talking about the VRM. Nothing else.

If you know that a Athlon64 cannot be plugged in a Socket 478 motherboard, will the motherboard be prepared (or to be prepared) for the voltages (1.1V / 1.3-1.35V) for Athlon64s?

Where the bloody hell did you hear that from?

They haven't had the same socket since the days of the K6-2!

I just use an example to illustrate that motherboard manufacturers will not update the VRM of 915-based motherboards to "fit" newer processors.


Ahh that makes sense...although the AMD/Intel crossover idea wasn't too good!

 

[dasickninja]

I don't think I could break it down any more without patronizing you.

 

[quantumsheep]

Bit o' good ole patronizing aint that bad every now and then!

 

[qcmadness]

I don't think I could break it down any more without patronizing you.

I just wonder why AMD boards can go smoothly over 130nm / 90nm / 65nm CPUs without changing the powering module. My guess is from the Cool'n'Quiet idea. But it seems that the support of new 65nm CPUs will "require" a BIOS update.

 

[dasickninja]

It was still the same m/arch. Core 2 and Netburst are polar opposites. Not to mention different m/archs.