"AMD: 45nm, DDR3 and Socket AM3 in 2008"

[zarooch]

Check This Out! But first where is K10? Period!

Good Comments/Suggestion => ON
Flames => OFF

EnjoyYy

 

[zornundo]

Future plans can and do change. Not that I have much faith in AMD right now.

 

[zarooch]

I hope they do not, if K10 is still a future plan then its a pretty bad situation. The roadmap is more aggresive and I don't think they would stick to it. Let's wait and see.

 

[yakyb]

as you said tho where is K10 (i know i know Q3)
im not all that interested in next year until they can deliver on this year's promises or provide some info

 

[chunkymonster]

Interesting read. I hope AMD stays on schedule with the AM3. But I noticed where they said the roadmap for AM3 from 2006 is not the same as AM3 for 2008. The 2006 AM3 will become the AM2+? It seems as though AMD wants to keep the AM number deisgnation consistent with the memory support, i.e.; AM2 and AM2+ support DDR2 whereas AM3 supports DDR3. I look forward to the performance gain DDR3 brings given the noticeable performance boost it gave video cards.

Memory support aside, I'm more interested in socket compatibility. If AMD can repeat their Skt939 success with AM2/AM3 and make cpu upgrades a matter of a simple BIOS update, then they'll be able to keep the enthusiasts happy. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

 

[samael]

But first where is K10? Period!

Hmm ... let's see, we have a few choices here...
1)It was kidnapped by aliens ...
2) The monster of Lockness ate it ...
...
:lol:

 

[fidgewinkle]

Outside of the usual promises that they will not deliver behind schedule like they have in the past, I got a distinct impression that AM2/AM3 compatibility may not be as expected. Obviously, we need to get closer to release before we know what is going to happen.

 

[JeanLuc]

Check This Out! But first where is K10? Period!

Good Comments/Suggestion => ON
Flames => OFF

EnjoyYy

Call me sceptical but I live in the UK and so far I can’t get a hold of any the recent AMD chips namely the Energy Efficient chips or any of the new 65nm chips, not to mention the R600 delays.

Frankly AMD should concentrate on getting these products to market first rather then worry about trying to catch up with Intel with its paper launches.

 

[eregular]

how can they talk about 45nm native quadcores with bigger l3 cache's when we haven't seen one 65nm native quad!?

I AM OFFENDED SIR!! YOU INSULT MY HONOR!

 

[fidgewinkle]

It is always more pleasant to talk about the future when the present stinks.

 

[Harrisson]

Call me sceptical but I live in the UK and so far I can’t get a hold of any the recent AMD chips namely the Energy Efficient chips or any of the new 65nm chips, not to mention the R600 delays.

Frankly AMD should concentrate on getting these products to market first rather then worry about trying to catch up with Intel with its paper launches.

Interesting, in my country (Lithuania) its hard to get any AMD cpu NOT 65nm

As much as everyone is blaming AMD for R600, it wasnt really their fault. Their joined the party when R600 was already almost "cooked" From what we know, R600 was slowish and power hungry (~240W rumoured), so I think its where AMD steped in and postponed for ~3 months and pushed hard 65nm release.

We will see real AMD produced video cards in R700 or even R800, since R700 team should be working for some time now, as all chip makers have several teams working on two-three next gen cards/cpu's.

 

[Harrisson]

AMD doesnt like 65nm. Its only got a spotlight life of under a yearon k10. and to date is there shortest lived node.

I think 65nm is really problematic for AMD.

I agree 65nm was short lived node for AMD, but I'm not aware of their problems at this tech, majority of their cpus and video cards released as we speak are 65nm. Actually AMD forced ATI to migrate from 80nm to 65nm in less than 6 months afaik.

Even if they had some issues at the start with 65nm, its already ironed out, so IMO push to 45nm is based on "being on giant shoulders" - IBM. If IBM can provide more or less smooth transition for AMD to 45nm, then the faster they migrate, the better for them from any point of view, since Intel is heavily pressuring them atm.

 

[eregular]

poor 65nm...trying to kill amd...

 

[RichPLS]

maybe they cancelled barc or intend it to be in boutique quantities until the 45nm switch, and this is their way of admitting that Barc IS NOT READY FOR PRIME TIME...

 

[zarooch]

AMD doesnt like 65nm. Its only got a spotlight life of under a yearon k10. and to date is there shortest lived node.

I think 65nm is really problematic for AMD.

if 65nm is problematic for AMD, then won't the transition to 45nm be even more problematic even if (as some other poster said) IBM is helping them in the transition to 45nm. If it is so, then isn't IBM helping AMD with 65nm tech?

 

[zarooch]

maybe they cancelled barc or intend it to be in boutique quantities until the 45nm switch, and this is their way of admitting that Barc IS NOT READY FOR PRIME TIME...

then this means that Intel will not only be ahead of AMD in processor manufacturing process (45nm) but also in the uArch of the processors itself (Nehalem '08) and then Gesher (Sandy Bridge). Intresting, let's wait and see. It seems like another win for Intel even before the war started.

 

[zarooch]

AMD doesnt like 65nm. Its only got a spotlight life of under a yearon k10. and to date is there shortest lived node.

I think 65nm is really problematic for AMD.

if 65nm is problematic for AMD, then won't the transition to 45nm be even more problematic even if (as some other poster said) IBM is helping them in the transition to 45nm. If it is so, then isn't IBM helping AMD with 65nm tech?

They spent as long on researching 45 nm as intel and posted test drams of it around when intel did. So no; They wanted to skip 65nm alltogether but were forced by c2d to produce on it. They essentially had next to nothing for 65nm but transition chips.

I don't remember AMD showing any SRAM for 45nm like Intel did (maybe I missed). If AMD had already decided to skip 65nm, don't they have to completely re-tool there fabs? from where they were going to get the money? they bought out ATi which is not producing competitive enough GPUs. I think AMD should stop all the things they are currently doing. Restart with new plans, build on currently what they have. Come up with a new Architecture, maybe focus on torrenza or maybe materialize what they have on paper about Barcelona uArch. Then make a come back and compete with Intel, otherwise they should accept that they are now way behind Intel (if they really have canceled Barcelona).

 

[ZOldDude]

Check This Out! But first where is K10? Period!

Good Comments/Suggestion => ON
Flames => OFF

EnjoyYy

Nice.
I still have a few years of service on my 939 builds from last year however.

Buy the time my won't run new games correctly this new stuff will be old and cheap.

 

[zarooch]

any link on that so that I can read on it. And yes, I'm bit out of the loop but I'll catch up. I used to read TomsHardware but now they talk more about cars than CPU/GPU/Motherboards/HDD etc etc...

 

[function9]

Hmm, this situation seems familiar.
http://news.com.com/Intel+makes+performance+claims,+AMD+rebuffs+them/2100-1006_3-6043587.html

"It's driven by the fact that they can't talk about their current products, because everybody knows their current products aren't very good," said Henri Richard

I don't know if it's karma or what. But it seems almost everything AMD has said and done it the past few years is coming around to bite them in the ass.

 

[zarooch]

Hmm, this situation seems familiar.
http://news.com.com/Intel+makes+performance+claims,+AMD+rebuffs+them/2100-1006_3-6043587.html
"It's driven by the fact that they can't talk about their current products, because everybody knows their current products aren't very good," said Henri Richard

I don't know if it's karma or what. But it seems almost everything AMD has said and done it the past few years is coming around to bite them in the ass.

you see what goes around comes around! :twisted: :lol:

 

[MU_Engineer]

I think that it is in fact ready for the prime time. However, I think that AMD will barely give a peep about K10 until it's virtually already been rolled out. Why? Intel has working 45 nm silicon and everybody knows it. Intel is also not afraid to push designs to their melting point if that is what it takes, and everybody knows that too. AMD is scared that if they tip their hand too early, Intel will realize exactly what it is that they have to beat. And they know Intel will put an even bigger foot up their butt of the engineers and get Penryn out sooner if that it what it takes to do so. If AMD can keep Intel unaware as long as possible, or lead them along into thinking that the K10 is a flop, it will maximize the time that it has an advantage over Intel and maximize profits.

AMD isn't big enough to battle Intel head-on and win, especially in a field where there is a significant R&D and capital cost. AMD has to be clever in how they do things in order to be able to pick up a little more share here and there without getting being forced into a war of attrition that they'd never win. They did get into one of those with the recent price war and look at what it did. Intel had to lay off workers, but they are now turning a profit. AMD is still bleeding. That is why AMD bought ATi- it's an area in which they can have a competitive advantage over Intel without having to fight them directly.

 

[zarooch]

heres a pic to entertain as I search for the info.

http://search.amd.com/query.html?col=&ht=2135426192&la=en&qt=45nm&qs=|+language%3Aen&ct=1325960345&qm=1&ql=&lk=1&rf=0&ws=0&tqmhak=0&lap=en

Feel free to help dig.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,51_104_543_13744~114948,00.html

They just presented papers on that. No sample(s)? Still Intel is ahead as they demonstrated working 45nm SRAM in Jan'06

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20060125comp.htm

 

[Shadow703793]

AMD= All talk and no actions (yet)

 

[exit2dos]

I don't think AMD ever announced that they had a 45nm DRAM. IBM announced their 45nm production at the same time as Intel.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070130-8732.html

I'm sure IBM will be sharing this with AMD, but at what cost?