What is this? AMD chip with Lvl 3 cach?

99.9% YES: It's a 1200 series opteron and they don't have L3. Also, the 1200 series should be all 90nm up to now. If it were a Barcelona core; they're not even planned to clock to 2.8GHz for the moment.
It could be an experimental hybrid though but I work a lot with Photoshop and it's a lot more easy to overlay that 2048K L3

I hope its real, but why is it lacking that SSSE3 thing that is on the C2D'S?

If it is realy genuine, and they already got to 2.8 on an unreleased chip on 65nm, think how high it could go. 3.7ish?

This has been posted and discussed before. It's possible that it is an early ES of the dual-core version of Barcelona.

It would clearly not be a notebook chip...

Barcelona is quad server.Stars is desktop dual and quad,I wasnt aware of a x2 barcelona server chip and the core name is too short to validate what you have said.

I agree with baron on kuma,pretty much on everything he said about it bieng ready as well.

Rather than this regurgitated screen id rather see benches with all identifying features edited out.

Grawr, I never said the core name was Barcelona.

That photo has made the rounds before. The key is lookng at the code name. The only AMD codename that small is Kuma. It wil have L3 and is a dual core.

It is definitley not Opteron but it could be a Barcelona chip. I am of the opinion that AMD has Kuma ready as it will most likely be the mobile chip also.

Just like a "AMD Athlon(tm)/Opteron(tm) CPU-model unknown" is a Barcelona Chip ....

Yeah, this is the real McKoy guys.... Barcelona is HERE!!! Hip Hip Horrayyy..... 3 Cheers for Barcelona.....

We should see the stock bounce back to the 20's tomorrow wouldn't you suppose Baron??

At least the timing is right....

JacK! for the love of god.. maneers!!!






dont say jokes while im eating.. you made me spit on my monitor.. you meanie!

Must be a K10 since AMD demoed them already

I would just say it's clocked that high for testing purposes. Then clocked down for future production. Also, for energy saving, maybe they are letting the processor throttle the HTT speeds back when they are idling ?

I dunno, but this looks half real to me, doesn't look like the normal faked shots you see...

6 of one,half a dozen of the other. No one is sure what the mobile versions of barceolna will be, and if they are realy low power with an amd chipset,then we may well see up to 3ghz chips, otoh one would think that amd wouldnt have the cpu id the same as an opty 1200 series proc...but who knows...:shrugs: we shall see

Well the photo is taken on the angle of a CRT monitor... I think it would involve some serious skills to fake that without leaving obvious tell tales of manipulation...

I'm no image expert, but this image doesn't strike any normal "FAKE FAKE FAKE" alerts in my head.

But hey, this isn't fake either..



So who knows

Having a weird name show up in the name field in CPUz is normal for an ES. It's an ES, they didn't bother to program a new name for it because it doesn't have one. Right?

Having an L3 cache that CPUz doesn't even know to look for show up isn't... gOJDO do you want to expand on that? Are you sure?

Lower image quality is hardly an indication that the image wasn't faked. Come on, all they had to do was create the fake image then display it on a screen THEN take a picture of it effectively masking any editing errors in the faking of the image. Enough with the "I photoshoped red-eye out of my cousin's wedding photos once and I think that picture [does/doesn't] look fake." It's really pointless. If you see an image error point it out, none of us give a crap about unsubstantiated opinions from random anonymous forum posters who claim to be imaging experts.

Ok, so it looks like it's supposed to be a Kuma ES... but it also looks fake.

WHERE DID IT COME FROM? Who supposedly took this picture? Who posted it? Where? When?

"IMGIGITAL IXUS 40 JPEG Firmware Version 1.00 Martin Storz " That's the camera that supposedly took it, so you can stop worrying about how someone would make a photoshop effect that made it look like they used a camera, cuz that would be retarded. Either way they just used a camera to take the picture.

"Canon Canon DIGITAL IXUS 40 ´
´
2007:01:31 23:20:42"
And that's when they supposedly took it.

Did AMD have working Kuma ES chips last month? I don't think so.

Now if you excuse me, I need to get back to beating this dead horse here...