Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

K8L, is it worth waiting for ?

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Product
Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 30, 2007 1:13:26 PM

I want to buy a new pc ,but the report it said that the K8L was 40% higher than the C2D,I dont know about the truth

What can i do now? waiting or going to buy a E4300? :?:

More about : k8l worth waiting

March 30, 2007 1:17:23 PM

Barcelona will be for servers only. And comparing it to a E4300 in price is nuts because Barcelona is going to cost a big premium.
March 30, 2007 1:34:31 PM

Quote:
I want to buy a new pc ,but the report it said that the K8L was 40% higher than the C2D,I dont know about the truth

What can i do now? waiting or going to buy a E4300? :?:


Go with AMD if you want to wait another 7-12 months and most likely end up disappointed.

AMD won't release benchmarks on their K8L and are comparing it to what will be Intel's budget line processors at the time of its release.

K8L is all AMD fluff at this point.
Related resources
March 30, 2007 2:11:53 PM

I am still using a AMD Athlon XP 2500+(oc to 3200+),bought at four years ago,that is the reason i like AMD more,I just hope the K8L can have a good performance as C2D so that i can give myslef a reason to buy it
March 30, 2007 2:25:54 PM

i just ordered a x2 3600. i hope i like it but i have seen alot of ppl talking good about it. i know it will rock 8) and be better then my p4 1.5ghz :oops: 
March 30, 2007 2:30:23 PM

Quote:
I want to buy a new pc ,but the report it said that the K8L was 40% higher than the C2D,I dont know about the truth

What can i do now? waiting or going to buy a E4300? :?:

There are a lot of estimates out there right now, but nothing really solid so until we all get some solid benchmarks, we're all in the dark... I think it's fair to say that clock-for-clock the AMD is going to be a faster processor... but that could be a problem for AMD as their initial round is going to be clocking in around 2.3 GHz while Intel is cruising past 3.0 GHz.

I think it's great we all want to be educated buyers, but education and prognastication or two completely different concepts.
March 30, 2007 2:31:36 PM

Quote:
i just ordered a x2 3600. i hope i like it but i have seen alot of ppl talking good about it. i know it will rock 8) and be better then my p4 1.5ghz :oops: 

I actually owned a P4 1.5 and it was a dog of a processor to say the least... shame on Intel for pushing that crap on us! And just to set the record straight... I didn't actually BUY it... it was a hand-me-down.
March 30, 2007 2:35:53 PM

Don't wait for AMD... they wont have anything good in the upcoming months, just get the C2D after the price drop. From all the specs it looks like E6600 and higher will rip upcoming AMD's CPU apart.
March 30, 2007 3:17:04 PM

Quote:
Don't wait for AMD... they wont have anything good in the upcoming months, just get the C2D after the price drop. From all the specs it looks like E6600 and higher will rip upcoming AMD's CPU apart.


There is no way that can be determined since there are no benches for the new cpu's from AMD so your statement is just utter crap.

Crap? Don't think so. I've seen them and worked with them, so can't be really crap. Engineering versions of these CPUs were out a long time ago.
March 30, 2007 3:19:34 PM

Quote:
Don't wait for AMD... they wont have anything good in the upcoming months, just get the C2D after the price drop. From all the specs it looks like E6600 and higher will rip upcoming AMD's CPU apart.


There is no way that can be determined since there are no benches for the new cpu's from AMD so your statement is just utter crap.

Crap? Don't think so. I've seen them and worked with them, so can't be really crap. Engineering versions of these CPUs were out a long time ago.

Where did you get it?
Give us proof :D 
March 30, 2007 3:23:59 PM

Quote:
Don't wait for AMD... they wont have anything good in the upcoming months, just get the C2D after the price drop. From all the specs it looks like E6600 and higher will rip upcoming AMD's CPU apart.


There is no way that can be determined since there are no benches for the new cpu's from AMD so your statement is just utter crap.

Crap? Don't think so. I've seen them and worked with them, so can't be really crap. Engineering versions of these CPUs were out a long time ago.

Where did you get it?
Give us proof :D 

Engineering samples are used for testing and development by large OEMs. They are shipped out 6-9 months before release. As a proof I can post cell phone shot if the chip a bit later.
March 30, 2007 3:35:30 PM

Oh, so you mean the lowest-clocked dual core K10 extremely early engineering sample was beaten by an E6600?

Way to go, tool.

There is no way to tell how things will really pan out. K10 will be good, but how good is really up in the air. Your system pales in comparison to any modern system. A C2D build now would work out very, very well for you. Conversely, if you want to stick with AMD, that could work out very well for you also by simply building a system now with an X2 3600+, overclocking to the ~2.8Ghz range and waiting for Agena / Kuma (codenames for the non-server quad-core versions and dual-core versions of K10, respectively) to be released.
March 30, 2007 3:48:24 PM

I mean that Santa Rosa (2c) and Barcelona (4c) are very unimpressive with engineering samples that were received lately, not talking about P0 versions (7 months ago). It's not the best practice to compare these vs C2D, as they are server CPU's. However, I've seen that there is no way you can get same performance from Barcelona as you can get from Tigerton (upcoming Intel's server chip) and the same trend will follow into the desktop market. They are different in terms of performance for different applications, and the only application were AMD can compete is where the RAM access is the key and that holds true for low-mid amounts of RAM (up to 16G). In this area AMD's CPUs perform a bit better but not significantly better.

Desktop CPUs will follow the same rules here. K10 and whatever comes next will be matching or exceeding C2 only in RAM access, until Intel will release it's integrated mem controller... In all other areas AMD's CPUs are loosing to the respective competitors from Intel by a sizable margin.
March 30, 2007 3:56:33 PM

BTW the Barcelonas used in testing are p1 2.8GHz samples
March 30, 2007 3:58:07 PM

Quote:
I want to buy a new pc ,but the report it said that the K8L was 40% higher than the C2D,I dont know about the truth

What can i do now? waiting or going to buy a E4300? :?:


If I remember correctly, AMD did not say its new cpu would be 40% faster than C2D, but 40% faster than the current AMD cpu. A bit of a difference there, though it still means the new AMD will be very fast.

Whether or not its worth waiting for is a more of questions that can only be determined later. No one knows at this point how it will compare to Intel's chips, what price it will be, or even how long you'll have to wait before its available.
March 30, 2007 3:59:00 PM

Quote:
BTW the Barcelonas used in testing are p1 2.8GHz samples


Not possible, Barcelonas will top at about 2.3GHz this year.
March 30, 2007 3:59:33 PM

This guy knows what he's talking about.

:|
March 30, 2007 4:07:32 PM

Quote:
What can i do now? waiting or going to buy a E4300? :?:


I strongly suggest that you wait, both for K10 and for Duke Nukem Forever! :twisted:
March 30, 2007 4:11:43 PM

Quote:
What can i do now? waiting or going to buy a E4300? :?:


I strongly suggest that you wait, both for K10 and for Duke Nukem Forever! :twisted:

No, you did not!? :oops: 
March 30, 2007 4:12:36 PM

:arrow: Buy C2D now,until AMD actually releases Barcelona everyone is re-hashing old rumors and speculation,maybe it will be better maybe it won't.
March 30, 2007 4:18:10 PM

Quote:
BTW the Barcelonas used in testing are p1 2.8GHz samples


Not possible, Barcelonas will top at about 2.3GHz this year.

In early summer you will see OEMs coming out with 4 cpu servers having 2.8 Barcelonas and up 128G of RAM on board. I have a few early builds in the lab that are still not ready for prime time, but in a month or so it will be taping out. So I would expect to see market appearance this summer.

By the way anand and tom will have a coverage of the upcoming IDF which will have a builds with new Intel's CPUs. That's when we'll see a lot of independent benchmarks.
March 30, 2007 4:20:52 PM

Quote:
BTW the Barcelonas used in testing are p1 2.8GHz samples


Not possible, Barcelonas will top at about 2.3GHz this year.

No, that's only the quad-cores. There are 2.9Ghz dual-cores announced for launch or near-launch.

But no 2.8Ghz models, :roll:

It sounds like a bunch of FUD from an Intel fanboy to me. He has no proof.

I could just as easily say "Yeah, I work for a large system builder. We got some K10 ES and they destroy the Intel systems. Here, let me show you this cell phone picture of an X2 4200+ I have laying around and tell you that it's a K10 ES."
March 30, 2007 4:21:25 PM

Quote:
BTW the Barcelonas used in testing are p1 2.8GHz samples


Not possible, Barcelonas will top at about 2.3GHz this year.

In early summer you will see OEMs coming out with 4 cpu servers having 2.8 Barcelonas and up 128G of RAM on board. I have a few early builds in the lab that are still not ready for prime time, but in a month or so it will be taping out. So I would expect to see market appearance this summer.

By the way anand and tom will have a coverage of the upcoming IDF which will have a builds with new Intel's CPUs. That's when we'll see a lot of independent benchmarks.

I seriously doubt your information as AMD's fabrication process is not good enough to ramp such a high-clock quad-core CPU.
March 30, 2007 4:22:05 PM

Quote:
No, you did not!? :oops: 


No, I'm still waiting for Microsoft Bob 2.0! :lol: 

Quote:
but in a month or so it will be taping out. So I would expect to see market appearance this summer.


TIME OUT!

That would mean that it tapes out in May and hits the market a couple of months later? I have it from an authority significantly higher than Deities (Jumping Jack) that the time from taping out to market is more like 8 months!

Am I smoking something weird or are you? :lol: 
March 30, 2007 4:23:32 PM

Quote:
BTW the Barcelonas used in testing are p1 2.8GHz samples


Not possible, Barcelonas will top at about 2.3GHz this year.

In early summer you will see OEMs coming out with 4 cpu servers having 2.8 Barcelonas and up 128G of RAM on board. I have a few early builds in the lab that are still not ready for prime time, but in a month or so it will be taping out. So I would expect to see market appearance this summer.

By the way anand and tom will have a coverage of the upcoming IDF which will have a builds with new Intel's CPUs. That's when we'll see a lot of independent benchmarks.

I seriously doubt your information as AMD's fabrication process is not good enough to ramp such a high-clock quad-core CPU.

You're right. Read my last post. 2.3Ghz is the highest expected quad-core as of now, unless AMD really feels the need to release a 2.5Ghz model later this year to compete.
March 30, 2007 4:48:09 PM

He's not being truthful with us.
March 30, 2007 4:53:30 PM

Quote:
He's not being truthful with us.


Well, thank goodness that there is someone around here who can back up his wild claims with HARD EVIDENCE! ME!

Yes, I will confess. I work for Intel at a top secret underground facility in an old converted NORAD base in Wyoming. And I have a Nehalem CPU right here for testing. I've had to blank out some critical information, but you wanted proof, here is your proof!!!





:lol: 
March 30, 2007 4:54:07 PM

Quote:
He's not being truthful with us.


Yea where do all these damn fanboys come from anyway and why do the all seem to want to end up here?

They lurk in the cybernetic bushes, looking to waylay some poor innocent traveler. They just don't understand that there are some people who know better than to believe their fantasy stories.
March 30, 2007 4:55:53 PM

Quote:
He's not being truthful with us.


Well, thank goodness that there is someone around here who can back up his wild claims with HARD EVIDENCE! ME!

Yes, I will confess. I work for Intel at a top secret underground facility in an old converted NORAD base in Wyoming. And I have a Nehalem CPU right here for testing. I've had to blank out some critical information, but you wanted proof, here is your proof!!!

:lol: 

A dream 5GHz CPU 8O 8)
March 30, 2007 4:59:38 PM

Quote:
A dream 5GHz CPU 8O 8)


I'll bet there are already some guys on here trying to figure out what WC/TEC rig to run to OC it to 6.5GHz! :D 
March 30, 2007 5:02:29 PM

Quote:
It sounds like a bunch of FUD from an Intel fanboy to me.


Thats rich coming from the likes of you :lol: 
March 30, 2007 5:05:42 PM

Quote:
He's not being truthful with us.


Well, thank goodness that there is someone around here who can back up his wild claims with HARD EVIDENCE! ME!

Yes, I will confess. I work for Intel at a top secret underground facility in an old converted NORAD base in Wyoming. And I have a Nehalem CPU right here for testing. I've had to blank out some critical information, but you wanted proof, here is your proof!!! :lol: 

About these fantasies that you're experiencing. If you tell me where you live, perhaps I can recommend a good psychiatrist for you to talk to. I know it must get lonely up there in Wyoming with only the deer and the antelope to talk to.
March 30, 2007 5:08:25 PM

Quote:
A dream 5GHz CPU 8O 8)


I'll bet there are already some guys on here trying to figure out what WC/TEC rig to run to OC it to 6.5GHz! :D 
I have just got another CPU to compete with your CPU :D 

March 30, 2007 5:12:18 PM

Quote:
A dream 5GHz CPU 8O 8)


I'll bet there are already some guys on here trying to figure out what WC/TEC rig to run to OC it to 6.5GHz! :D 
I have just got another CPU to compete with your CPU :D 



I'll see your 6600 and raise you a 9900! :lol: 

March 30, 2007 5:21:44 PM

Hey thx for backing me up. I have to say that I was a little misled, as I was working on the Tigertons for awhile now. The Barcelonas are binned 1.2 and 2.0 in eng samplesm that's for 4 cores, and 2.8 for 2 cores.

They will hit the market with 2 core chips this summer. Quads will come in later. 2GHz Quads are very unstable. With 1.2GHz AMD will look like a joke.

When I compared perfomance as it appears I've looked at 2.8 dual core chip, and it does work slower then the Intel's chips.

I'll post pics of quad when I'll get them off my cell phone


features: xxxxxxx<cpuid,tscp,cmp,cx16,sse3,nx,asysc,sse2,sse,pat,cx8,pae,mca,mmx
cpu0: initialized cpu module 'cpu.generic'


cpu0: x86 (chipid 0x0 AuthenticAMD family 16 model 0 step 2 clock 2000 MHz)

cpu0: AMD Engineering Sample

cpu1: x86 (chipid 0x0 AuthenticAMD family 16 model 0 step 2 clock 1200 MHz)

cpu1: AMD Engineering Sample


cpu2: x86 (chipid 0x0 AuthenticAMD family 16 model 0 step 2 clock 2000 MHz)

cpu2: AMD Engineering Sample


cpu3: x86 (chipid 0x0 AuthenticAMD family 16 model 0 step 2 clock 2000 MHz)

cpu3: AMD Engineering Sample


cpu4: x86 (chipid 0x1 AuthenticAMD family 16 model 0 step 2 clock 2000 MHz)

cpu4: AMD Engineering Sample
--------------------------------------------------
Manufacturer: AMD Version: AMD Engineering Sample Serial Number: NULL
Asset Tag: NULL
Location Tag: CPU 0
Part Number: NULL

Family: 1 (other)
CPUID: 0x178bfbff00100f02
Type: 3 (central processor)
Socket Upgrade: 1 (other)
Socket Status: Populated
Processor Status: 1 (enabled)
Supported Voltages: 1.5V
External Clock Speed: Unknown
Maximum Speed: Unknown
Current Speed: Unknown
L1 Cache: 5
L2 Cache: 6
L3 Cache: 7

ID SIZE TYPE
5 27 SMB_TYPE_CACHE (processor cache)

Location Tag: L1-Cache

Level: 1
Maximum Installed Size: 131072 bytes
Installed Size: 131072 bytes
Speed: Unknown
Supported SRAM Types: 0x10
SMB_CAT_PBURST (pipeline burst)
Current SRAM Type: 0x10 (pipeline burst)
Error Correction Type: 5 (single-bit ECC)
Logical Cache Type: 4 (data)
Associativity: 5 (4-way set associative)
Mode: 2 (varies by address)
Location: 0 (internal)
Flags: 0x1
SMB_CAF_ENABLED (enabled at boot time)

ID SIZE TYPE
6 27 SMB_TYPE_CACHE (processor cache)

Location Tag: L2-Cache

Level: 2
Maximum Installed Size: 1048576 bytes
Installed Size: 1048576 bytes
Speed: Unknown
Supported SRAM Types: 0x10
SMB_CAT_PBURST (pipeline burst)
Current SRAM Type: 0x10 (pipeline burst)
Error Correction Type: 5 (single-bit ECC)
Logical Cache Type: 5 (unified)
Associativity: 5 (4-way set associative)
Mode: 2 (varies by address)
Location: 0 (internal)
Flags: 0x1
SMB_CAF_ENABLED (enabled at boot time)

ID SIZE TYPE
7 27 SMB_TYPE_CACHE (processor cache)

Location Tag: L3-Cache

Level: 3
Maximum Installed Size: 0 bytes
Installed Size: Not Installed
Speed: Unknown
Supported SRAM Types: 0x2
SMB_CAT_UNKNOWN (unknown)
Current SRAM Type: 0x2 (unknown)
Error Correction Type: 2 (unknown)
Logical Cache Type: 2 (unknown)
Associativity: 2 (unknown)
Mode: 3 (unknown)
Location: 0 (internal)
Flags: 0x0

ID SIZE TYPE
8 126 SMB_TYPE_PROCESSOR (processor)
March 30, 2007 5:23:35 PM

Quote:

About these fantasies that you're experiencing. If you tell me where you live, perhaps I can recommend a good psychiatrist for you to talk to. I know it must get lonely up there in Wyoming with only the deer and the antelope to talk to.




NOW do you believe me?

:lol: 
March 30, 2007 5:26:14 PM

Quote:
Barcelona will be for servers only. And comparing it to a E4300 in price is nuts because Barcelona is going to cost a big premium.


Pure speculation. Do you own a crystal ball or are you still trying to make poster of the year by averaging 23 posts a day?

Barcelona will surely be superior to C2D, however Intel will release something just as good before or shortly after Barcelona.
AMD doesnt need to beat Intel to be successful, they only need to offer similar performance for similiar price in the mid to low end range.
They know they cant compete with Big Intel as Intel has thousands more engineers than AMD so they choose to go down other roads. Cel phone chips, fusion, integrated graphics, etc. for the mainstream.
Can you read or do you only go on about post count? Barcelona will be for server only. AMD said so themselves. Agena will be for desktop.
March 30, 2007 5:26:53 PM

Quote:
...
Level: 3
Maximum Installed Size: 0 bytes
Installed Size: Not Installed
Speed: Unknown
Supported SRAM Types: 0x2
SMB_CAT_UNKNOWN (unknown)
Current SRAM Type: 0x2 (unknown)
Error Correction Type: 2 (unknown)
Logical Cache Type: 2 (unknown)
Associativity: 2 (unknown)
Mode: 3 (unknown)
Location: 0 (internal)
Flags: 0x0

ID SIZE TYPE
8 126 SMB_TYPE_PROCESSOR (processor)


I'm no tech guru, but those specs look right to me. Anyone else chime in? :oops: 
March 30, 2007 5:33:18 PM

Quote:
Hey thx for backing me up. I have to say that I was a little misled, as I was working on the Tigertons for awhile now. The Barcelonas are binned 1.2 and 2.0 in eng samplesm that's for 4 cores, and 2.8 for 2 cores.

They will hit the market with 2 core chips this summer. Quads will come in later. 2GHz Quads are very unstable. With 1.2GHz AMD will look like a joke.

When I compared perfomance as it appears I've looked at 2.8 dual core chip, and it does work slower then the Intel's chips.

I'll post pics of quad when I'll get them off my cell phone


features: xxxxxxx<cpuid,tscp,cmp,cx16,sse3,nx,asysc,sse2,sse,pat,cx8,pae,mca,mmx
cpu0: initialized cpu module 'cpu.generic'


cpu0: x86 (chipid 0x0 AuthenticAMD family 16 model 0 step 2 clock 2000 MHz)

cpu0: AMD Engineering Sample

cpu1: x86 (chipid 0x0 AuthenticAMD family 16 model 0 step 2 clock 1200 MHz)

......


Apologize to you.

But I have a couple of questions about the specification given......
March 30, 2007 5:45:59 PM

That was from the runs, tested with differently binned CPUs.
March 30, 2007 5:48:55 PM

Quote:
...
Level: 3
Maximum Installed Size: 0 bytes
Installed Size: Not Installed
Speed: Unknown
Supported SRAM Types: 0x2
SMB_CAT_UNKNOWN (unknown)
Current SRAM Type: 0x2 (unknown)
Error Correction Type: 2 (unknown)
Logical Cache Type: 2 (unknown)
Associativity: 2 (unknown)
Mode: 3 (unknown)
Location: 0 (internal)
Flags: 0x0

ID SIZE TYPE
8 126 SMB_TYPE_PROCESSOR (processor)


I'm no tech guru, but those specs look right to me. Anyone else chime in? :oops: 

eng samples =) duals are complete, quads are cut. You will see from the pics tonight, need to get home to post them
March 30, 2007 5:49:56 PM

Quote:
That was from the runs, tested with differently binned CPUs.


I know you are not modifying the data above.

But as far as I know, the caching system you've tested is even worse than the AMD K8 architecture. So I doubt it. :?

And what have you tested the "Rana" 2.8GHz CPU?
And what is the Intel CPU you tested?
March 30, 2007 6:01:27 PM

It'll be interesting to see if the more advanced thread-handling in Vista will allow the AMD platform to be competitive again... then again, as already mentioned, its not really an ideal gaming platform.
March 30, 2007 6:15:37 PM

Quote:
That was from the runs, tested with differently binned CPUs.


I know you are not modifying the data above.

But as far as I know, the caching system you've tested is even worse than the AMD K8 architecture. So I doubt it. :?

And what have you tested the "Rana" 2.8GHz CPU?
And what is the Intel CPU you tested?

I live on the intel's side of the things and don't really touch AMDs that much, though the live in the same lab and I can see what's going on there.

I saw the differences in the performance on the test platforms based on Intel and AMD chips of the same class, both eng samples and some things removed as you can see from the test run header I've posted.

About intel things the CPU's I've tested were:

Step: E-0
Segment: Server
Cores: 4
Clock: 2.40GHz
Bus: 1066
Cache: 2x4
80W
Pre-Qual Sample

and

Step: E-0
Segment: Server
Cores: 2
Clock: 2.40GHz
Bus: 1066
Cache: 2x4
80W
Pre-Qual Sample

Both Tigertons...

Here we don't really test the CPUs, as it's not our job to find the problems with CPUs as we test the system around CPUs. So the eng samples that we get are not always full speed/complete feature set. However, from my experience the amount of reduction of functionality is the same for intel's and Amd's parts. Lately Intel got things going and they are taking the lead, there is nothing significant from AMD unfortunately.
March 30, 2007 6:26:02 PM

Quote:
It sounds like a bunch of FUD from an Intel fanboy to me.


Thats rich coming from the likes of you :lol: 

Ok?


It's not that I don't believe you, Gianti (I don't, actually - it requires nothing to create some CPUID strings), but even the stuff you've just said backs up what I said earlier, even if you've worked on them, they're early engineering samples that would, logically, give only little indication as to their future performance.

So, you've worked with 2.4Ghz Tigertons - neat - where is the 2.4Ghz K10 part you're comparing it to? Oh, claiming a dual-core K10 part. K.

Besides, AMD said quad-core server parts are coming first several times, as with their previously stated intent to prefer the higher-margin server area. And there are no 2.8Ghz dual-cores on the roadmaps if my memory serves me correctly (someone fill me in if I'm wrong, I could be).
March 30, 2007 6:28:31 PM

Quote:
Besides, AMD said quad-core server parts are coming first several times, as with their previously stated intent to prefer the higher-margin server area. And there are no 2.8Ghz dual-cores on the roadmaps if my memory serves me correctly (someone fill me in if I'm wrong, I could be).


Yes, there will be desktop parts for 2.8GHz dual-core NGA (Next Generation Architecture, trying to avoid the K8L / K10 names) parts. But that should be Kuma with 2MB shared L3 cache.
March 30, 2007 6:30:36 PM

Quote:
Besides, AMD said quad-core server parts are coming first several times, as with their previously stated intent to prefer the higher-margin server area. And there are no 2.8Ghz dual-cores on the roadmaps if my memory serves me correctly (someone fill me in if I'm wrong, I could be).


Yes, there will be desktop parts for 2.8GHz dual-core NGA (Next Generation Architecture, trying to avoid the K8L / K10 names) parts. But that should be Kuma with 2MB shared L3 cache.

Are you sure? I was under the impression the clock steppings would be 1.9 / 2.1 / 2.3 / 2.5 / 2.7 / 2.9.
March 30, 2007 6:33:28 PM

Quote:
Yes, there will be desktop parts for 2.8GHz dual-core NGA (Next Generation Architecture, trying to avoid the K8L / K10 names) parts. But that should be Kuma with 2MB shared L3 cache.


Are you sure? I was under the impression the clock steppings would be 1.9 / 2.1 / 2.3 / 2.5 / 2.7 / 2.9.

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?nam...

I can't remember which link will refer to the clock-speed of Kuma (2.0GHz-2.9GHz). You may find it out at the links for AMD's processors part. :wink:
March 30, 2007 6:43:41 PM

its going to be april soon, where are the K10 benchies? AMD is really dissapointing us.
March 30, 2007 6:51:42 PM

Quote:
its going to be april soon, where are the K10 benchies? AMD is really dissapointing us.



Wait till IDF, AMD will have to respond to it with something.
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!