AMD has kept it's wordan dhave announced a whole raft of products aimed at lowering power consumption to 45W on every SKU. Some of the Kuma chips may even be 35W next year.
Already in May the company reportedly plans to start production of AMD Athlon X2 BE-2350 (2.10GHz) and Athlon X2 BE-2300 (1.90GHz) processors for current AM2 platform with 45W TDP using its 65nm process technology. In August the chipmaker is expected to start making AMD Athlon X2 BE-2400 (2.30GHz) chip as well as single-core LE-1200, LE-1250 and LE-1300 processors, which also have power consumption of about 45W. Sometime late this year, in the fourth quarter, AMD is projected to drive its next-generation micro-architecture to low-power PCs by introducing several Phenom X2 processors with 45W TDP as well as 1.90GHz, 2.10GHz and 2.30GHz clock-speeds based on code-named Kuma core. The new Phenom microprocessors will be made in AM2+ form-factor. In the first quarter of next year AMD reportedly intends to introduce several single-core chips with Spica core, which TDP will also be trimmed to 45W.
Is kind of nice that they're lowering power again. Already using over 80 watts an hour with my processor. Would rather be using ~50 watts and having the same power. Hopefully it's in the realm of possibility.
Maybe the could share this with the ATI crew they certainly need some help with wattage on the "Hot Dewd 2900 Xtreme Temperature".
Any 700 milon transistor IC is going to be hot. Because of the highly parallel nature of GPUs he key is to enable shuttng off parts that aren't being stressed.
Also, the R650 wil be 65nm so it will definitely drop power reqs. It is funny though that everyone EXCEPT ATi expected R600 to be faster than G80.
Also, the R650 wil be 65nm so it will definitely drop power reqs. It is funny though that everyone EXCEPT ATi expected R600 to be faster than G80.
I supposed in matters which of the 8800 cards is the one in question. I never expected that it should be as fast as the 8800 GTX. That would be unreasonable in my opinion. I did expect it to compete with the GTS 640 version, which it seemingly does, though that depends a bit on which review you read. There still seems to be some driver troubles as well, which I thought should have been solved by now, this late in the game. Nvidia had its driver problems as well, so I don't mean to imply that the 8800 was better in that, only that ATI had the last 6 months to solve such problems and it apparently hasn't solved them yet.
My biggest objections with the 2900 XT involve the power useage, heat produced and noise. A smaller size may help with the power usage, but I also figure that the more transistors, etc that are used, the more power will be needed. That leaves me thinking that a better, quieter cooler should have been devised. As it is, if I get one of these cards, I'll be thinking heavily towards water cooling for it to solve both the heat and noise issues.
Maybe the could share this with the ATI crew they certainly need some help with wattage on the "Hot Dewd 2900 Xtreme Temperature".
Any 700 milon transistor IC is going to be hot. Because of the highly parallel nature of GPUs he key is to enable shuttng off parts that aren't being stressed.
Also, the R650 wil be 65nm so it will definitely drop power reqs. It is funny though that everyone EXCEPT ATi expected R600 to be faster than G80.
The key is limiting the leakage current in the silicon then power consumption and heat both drop. Shutting off parts that aren't being stressed is a trick to reduce average consumption (which AMD is way better than Intel at). That gets you some performance increase under normal operation but it has no effect on temperatures when tested at maximum output.
Why do you say it's not faster than G80 that isn't quite true it was supposed to compete with the 8800 GTS which it does well. The competition for the GTX the XTX version wasn't working out (Probably melted through the test bench top) and was not released.
You misread his post. He didn't say the R600 was supposed to compete w/ G80; he actually said the exact opposite. He said everyone except ATI thought that, which is AMD's fault.
The biggest mistake AMD made was leading everyone to believe the R600 was the answer to the G80. If they had known that wasn't going to be the case they should have informed enthusiast sites. Not doing so has left a bad taste in everyone's mouth about the R600 launch. Like Baron said, everyone thought R600 was supposed to compete except AMD. AMD should have clarified, but that would probably have led to major declines in stock prices. Analysts don't seem to notice poor performance, they pay more attention to bad news. (Jackasses)
Most folks can live with delays. What people can't live with are delays for a inferior product that's been pumped as superior. Get my meaning?
i thought all the x2xxx's gpus would be 65nm!? someone help me please!!
AMD is probably gonna really try and get a couple markets on lockdown...extreme high end datacenter crap with k10 and its children and all the compys that gov't agencies buy with super low watt chips...but intel is workin on a 10watt c2d! how are they gonna beat that? even if their semprons hit that... *sigh*
