Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Official from AMD: Slow Barcelona clocks confirmed.

Last response: in CPUs
Share
June 29, 2007 1:36:16 PM
June 29, 2007 1:56:57 PM

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,...

Quote:
AMD to Ship Industry’s First Native x86 Quad-Core Processors In August

—AMD’s Stable Infrastructure Strategy Enables Availability of Systems from Platform Partners in September—

Sunnyvale, Calif. -- June 29, 2007 --Continuing to lead the shift of mainstream enterprise computing to energy-efficient processors, AMD (NYSE:AMD) announced today that Quad-Core AMD Opteron™ processors, code-named “Barcelona,” are planned for shipment in both standard and low power versions at launch later this summer. This would be the first time AMD has made both standard and low power parts immediately available as part of a new processor launch.
Additionally, AMD today updated its projected timing on “Barcelona” availability and provided additional product details. AMD expects that the processors will begin shipping for revenue in August 2007, with systems from AMD platform partners beginning to ship in September 2007. Due to its enhanced architecture – it is the world’s first x86 CPU to integrate four processing cores on a single die of silicon – Quad-Core AMD Opteron™ processors can deliver significant performance and performance-per-watt enhancements over existing processor architectures yet are designed to be backwards compatible with existing AMD Opteron platforms.
With planned availability at launch in a range of frequencies up to 2.0 Ghz, AMD expects its native quad-core processors to scale to higher frequencies in Q407 in both standard and SE (Special Edition) versions. Designed to operate within the same thermal envelopes as current generation AMD Opteron processors, AMD estimates that the new processors can provide a performance increase up to 70 percent on certain database applications and up to 40 percent on certain floating point applications, with subsequent higher frequency processors expected to significantly add to this performance advantage. “More than ever before, customers are expecting energy-efficiency and performance-per-watt leadership as much as absolute performance. With this new reality of computing, greater performance at the expense of greater power consumption is no longer an option,” said Randy Allen, corporate vice president, Server and Workstation Division at AMD. “AMD has prioritized production of our low power and standard power products because our customers and ecosystem demand it, and we firmly believe that the introduction of our native Quad-Core AMD Opteron processor will deliver on the promise of the highest levels of performance-per-watt the industry has ever seen.”


Obviously they are pitching Barcelona on performance-per-watt rather than performance itself.
June 29, 2007 2:01:42 PM

The Inquirer had the link to the Barcelona price/sku in there. I had forgotten about that, but if Barcelona does indeed make the august launch, at $390 bin, for the 2.0Ghz that makes it exceptionally attractive compared to the $856 2.4Ghz Tigerton supposedly launching in september.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
June 29, 2007 2:05:01 PM

looks like a non event
June 29, 2007 2:06:41 PM

Obviously they are pitching Barcelona on performance-per-watt rather than performance itself.[/quote]
what does that mean??? if it has a higher performance per-watt will it not be a better chip? just asking
June 29, 2007 2:08:07 PM

Quote:
what does that mean??? if it has a higher performance per-watt will it not be a better chip? just asking


Slower but more energy efficient chip e.g. difference between a Ferrari and a Prius.
June 29, 2007 2:10:35 PM

Quote:
The Inquirer had the link to the Barcelona price/sku in there. I had forgotten about that, but if Barcelona does indeed make the august launch, at $390 bin, for the 2.0Ghz that makes it exceptionally attractive compared to the $856 2.4Ghz Tigerton supposedly launching in september.


Tigerton and Barcelona dont compete in the two socket arena. Barcelona prices for the 3+ socket chips are going to be be in the Tigerton price range.
June 29, 2007 2:13:14 PM

Quote:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,...

AMD to Ship Industry’s First Native x86 Quad-Core Processors In August

—AMD’s Stable Infrastructure Strategy Enables Availability of Systems from Platform Partners in September—

Sunnyvale, Calif. -- June 29, 2007 --Continuing to lead the shift of mainstream enterprise computing to energy-efficient processors, AMD (NYSE:AMD) announced today that Quad-Core AMD Opteron™ processors, code-named “Barcelona,” are planned for shipment in both standard and low power versions at launch later this summer. This would be the first time AMD has made both standard and low power parts immediately available as part of a new processor launch.
Additionally, AMD today updated its projected timing on “Barcelona” availability and provided additional product details. AMD expects that the processors will begin shipping for revenue in August 2007, with systems from AMD platform partners beginning to ship in September 2007. Due to its enhanced architecture – it is the world’s first x86 CPU to integrate four processing cores on a single die of silicon – Quad-Core AMD Opteron™ processors can deliver significant performance and performance-per-watt enhancements over existing processor architectures yet are designed to be backwards compatible with existing AMD Opteron platforms.
With planned availability at launch in a range of frequencies up to 2.0 Ghz, AMD expects its native quad-core processors to scale to higher frequencies in Q407 in both standard and SE (Special Edition) versions. Designed to operate within the same thermal envelopes as current generation AMD Opteron processors, AMD estimates that the new processors can provide a performance increase up to 70 percent on certain database applications and up to 40 percent on certain floating point applications, with subsequent higher frequency processors expected to significantly add to this performance advantage. “More than ever before, customers are expecting energy-efficiency and performance-per-watt leadership as much as absolute performance. With this new reality of computing, greater performance at the expense of greater power consumption is no longer an option,” said Randy Allen, corporate vice president, Server and Workstation Division at AMD. “AMD has prioritized production of our low power and standard power products because our customers and ecosystem demand it, and we firmly believe that the introduction of our native Quad-Core AMD Opteron processor will deliver on the promise of the highest levels of performance-per-watt the industry has ever seen.”


Obviously they are pitching Barcelona on performance-per-watt rather than performance itself.

Did you actually read the article before you made your statement?
June 29, 2007 2:16:27 PM

true but they did say that two version will come out std and low powered so...
June 29, 2007 2:16:38 PM

I personally like the lower power consumption model for most applications. It may not be as fast, but it is an alternative when attempting to go green (at least a little bit).


Anyway, whether or not this is good news depends on how the market and manufacturers perceive the new processor. I mean, really, who on toms hardware doesn't want more power (obligatory tim allen: hohohoh)?

Anyway, there has been over 100 threads talking about this... once the product is out for the general public, I hope everyone comes back and talks about it some more!.... And I hope it wont be like the fx72s (forgotten).
June 29, 2007 2:19:17 PM

Until benchmarks are released, this chip remains a non event from the little leaked benchies we've encountered which were very non flattering. I am actaully getting tired of AMD :? , and waiting for Penryn at this point.
June 29, 2007 2:21:10 PM

Well at least we now have a timeframe in which we can expect proper benchmarks.

The initial slow clocks are disappointing but not a train smash. However, the clock-for-clock performance differential between K10 and Core/Penryn will now be the determining factor. We dont have that number yet ... only confusing hints ... but at least we know we are going to get this number soon.
June 29, 2007 2:24:48 PM

Quote:
The Inquirer had the link to the Barcelona price/sku in there. I had forgotten about that, but if Barcelona does indeed make the august launch, at $390 bin, for the 2.0Ghz that makes it exceptionally attractive compared to the $856 2.4Ghz Tigerton supposedly launching in september.


Tigerton and Barcelona dont compete in the two socket arena. Barcelona prices for the 3+ socket chips are going to be be in the Tigerton price range.

Thats too bad for AMD then.
June 29, 2007 2:25:19 PM

I can't believe we still don't have solid benchmarks. It sucks that we have to sit here and speculate about the performance of barcelona by analyzing the semantics of a press release. :x


By the way congrats on becoming mods Turpit and Comptia(when the heck did that happen 8O )
June 29, 2007 2:25:28 PM

Thanks for the info Wombat. You've been really posting some good ads of late.

:D 
June 29, 2007 2:29:41 PM

Quote:
Until benchmarks are released, this chip remains a non event from the little leaked benchies we've encountered which were very non flattering. I am actaully getting tired of AMD :? , and waiting for Penryn at this point.


Interesting, you are tired of waiting for non-existent benchmarks so you will wait for a non-existent CPU instead which has no reliable benchmarks published for it either.

Until CPU's in comparable market segments are available and can be compared there is not much point in deciding which way to jump, although I am sure that won't stop you putting in your pre-order.
June 29, 2007 2:34:42 PM

One more issue: How overclockable are the K10 desktop and server chips really going to be if instead of shipping at their target clocks of 2.7-2.8 GHZ, they release at 2 GHZ? That a 30% clock deficit. I dont see how the K10 is going to overclock well.

If confirmed, this is going to kill AMD on the desktop high performance side given the likely extreme overclockability of the new 1333 FSB Cores and upcoming Penryns.
June 29, 2007 2:45:10 PM

Oh my word ... to add insult to injury:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20070628163848...

Quote:
Advanced Micro Devices, the world’s second largest manufacturer of x86 central processing units (CPUs) will delay the roll-out of its new enthusiast-class platform to next year, according to sources familiar with the plans of AMD.
June 29, 2007 2:46:22 PM

Quote:
but if Barcelona does indeed make the august launch, at $390 bin, for the 2.0Ghz that makes it exceptionally attractive compared to the $856 2.4Ghz Tigerton supposedly launching in september.

As has already been pointed out Tigerton is competing with the Opteron 8 Series, with the 8216 dual-core (2.4 GHz) currently listing at $873:
http://www.amd.com/gb-uk/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,...

So $856 for a MP 2.4GHz quad core has to be seen as cheap and will only add more pricing pressure on AMD.

Note. $856 is for the dual-core and not quad; they come in at $1980 according to Digitimes: http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20070628PD213.html
June 29, 2007 2:52:19 PM

Quote:
I can't believe we still don't have solid benchmarks. It sucks that we have to sit here and speculate about the performance of barcelona by analyzing the semantics of a press release. :x


By the way congrats on becoming mods Turpit and Comptia(when the heck did that happen 8O )


Dunno....woke up one morning, and the mod fairy left had left a suprise on my login :wink:
a b à CPUs
June 29, 2007 3:24:06 PM

Quote:
One more issue: How overclockable are the K10 desktop and server chips really going to be if instead of shipping at their target clocks of 2.7-2.8 GHZ, they release at 2 GHZ? That a 30% clock deficit. I dont see how the K10 is going to overclock well.

If confirmed, this is going to kill AMD on the desktop high performance side given the likely extreme overclockability of the new 1333 FSB Cores and upcoming Penryns.


Yeah and on the Server front Tigerton will not be introducing CSI with the Clarksboro chipset in the Caneland platform. Instead it will have the same number of FSB's as it will have sockets. Thus there should be no Bandwidth issues with 4P+ anymore for Intel. All this, you guessed it, around September time.

EDIT: Roadmaps changed and CSI to be introduced in Q1, 2008 with Tukwila Itanium Platform.
June 29, 2007 3:24:28 PM

If you're not the best at what really counts, make up another category (or two!) that you can excel at... you see this ALL the time in TV commercials. All of this hype and that's the bone they're going to throw us? Performance-per-watt? Bleh.
June 29, 2007 3:41:15 PM

Quote:
Well at least we now have a timeframe in which we can expect proper benchmarks.

The initial slow clocks are disappointing but not a train smash. However, the clock-for-clock performance differential between K10 and Core/Penryn will now be the determining factor. We dont have that number yet ... only confusing hints ... but at least we know we are going to get this number soon.


True enough, the initial clocks are very disappointing, but I wonder about the overclock potential. The AMD 3800+ for instance, looks disappointing compared to a FX60, yet the 3800+ can be overclocked above the stock FX60 speed and will even pretty much match an overclocked FX60. So, if these initial Barcelona chips can be overclocked pretty high, they may not be disappointing at all. Only when they get into the hands of some overclocking enthusiasts will we know for sure.
June 29, 2007 3:50:37 PM

wow man I gotta keep this computer just a lil longer. P.S. Congrats turpit.
June 29, 2007 4:07:08 PM

Quote:
True enough, the initial clocks are very disappointing, but I wonder about the overclock potential. The AMD 3800+ for instance, looks disappointing compared to a FX60, yet the 3800+ can be overclocked above the stock FX60 speed and will even pretty much match an overclocked FX60. So, if these initial Barcelona chips can be overclocked pretty high, they may not be disappointing at all. Only when they get into the hands of some overclocking enthusiasts will we know for sure.

Surely the reason they are being released at such low speeds is due to the current stepping not yielding more than they are releasing them at. If they were good over-clockers they would be released at higher speeds in the first place!
June 29, 2007 4:18:06 PM

Quote:
True enough, the initial clocks are very disappointing, but I wonder about the overclock potential. The AMD 3800+ for instance, looks disappointing compared to a FX60, yet the 3800+ can be overclocked above the stock FX60 speed and will even pretty much match an overclocked FX60. So, if these initial Barcelona chips can be overclocked pretty high, they may not be disappointing at all. Only when they get into the hands of some overclocking enthusiasts will we know for sure.

Surely the reason they are being released at such low speeds is due to the current stepping not yielding more than they are releasing them at. If they were good over-clockers they would be released at higher speeds in the first place!

On that reasoning, that "If they were good overclockers they would be released at higher speeds in the first place", one could ask why the 3800+ chips were released in the first place, or any other cpu that can be overclocked. They get released because there is demand for them now and the factory doesn't want to take the extra time to experiment with getting higher speeds. After the initial release, time can be taken to raise the speeds.
June 29, 2007 4:21:25 PM

You should be happy.
AMD also used performance per watt per dollar in the past.
OK, they only did it once and never again, but still...
June 29, 2007 4:47:14 PM

[quote=" Performance-per-watt? Bleh.[/quote]

well that's exactly what intel claimed when describing core 2 duos ...
they made a bench while everybody was talking about how bad it will be...
June 29, 2007 5:21:27 PM

Quote:
Well at least we now have a timeframe in which we can expect proper benchmarks.

The initial slow clocks are disappointing but not a train smash. However, the clock-for-clock performance differential between K10 and Core/Penryn will now be the determining factor. We dont have that number yet ... only confusing hints ... but at least we know we are going to get this number soon.


But we already know even to make some educated guessed. From the article Fishboi posted:

Quote:
On some jobs, Barcelona will beat Intel's fastest chips, and on some jobs Intel may report better results, Mr. Allen said. In February, by contrast, AMD had asserted that Barcelona would have a 40% performance advantage over Intel's products


This is Randy Allen, AMD vp of server/work station btw. Anyway, if K10 beat Intel on every task, or most tasks, on an IPC basis, then wouldn't he spin K10 that way? If he now says that K10 will wins some and lose some, this can only mean that the per-clock performance is not what's expected.

The lack of spin speaks volumes....
June 29, 2007 5:49:42 PM

Quote:

On that reasoning, that "If they were good overclockers they would be released at higher speeds in the first place", one could ask why the 3800+ chips were released in the first place, or any other cpu that can be overclocked. They get released because there is demand for them now and the factory doesn't want to take the extra time to experiment with getting higher speeds. After the initial release, time can be taken to raise the speeds.

Except in the case of the 3800+, AMD already had faster CPUs on the market when it was launched and when AMD was profitable and had a firm grip on the performance leadership.
June 29, 2007 5:50:16 PM

Im happy to admit in this case i was wrong from what i said in earlier threads. Cannot wait to see what that little Spaniard can do.
June 29, 2007 5:54:35 PM

Quote:
On that reasoning, that "If they were good overclockers they would be released at higher speeds in the first place", one could ask why the 3800+ chips were released in the first place, or any other cpu that can be overclocked. They get released because there is demand for them now and the factory doesn't want to take the extra time to experiment with getting higher speeds. After the initial release, time can be taken to raise the speeds.


Well... how about the fact that there were X2 4200+ and 4600+ models available as well? :lol: 

It's true, if AMD could get clockspeeds far in excess of 2GHz, why wouldn't they? It's not like they have the performance crown and can afford to sit on clockspeeds like Intel is doing atm, if AMD had the chance to release a 2.5GHz+ K10 they'd do it in a heartbeat.
June 29, 2007 5:54:36 PM

Unfortunately we have been spoiled to get a processor like Conroe, a cpu that has had most likely the best overclockability we've seen. The real reason for this was because Intel knew right out of the gates that Core 2 was going to faster than any AMD chip at low clock speeds. There is no need for Intel to raise the GHz level when they don't need to. All it does is leave us more head room to overclock.

The situation for AMD is obviously different, you can pretty much guarantee that there chips will not be superior overclockers. Why on earth would AMD release a new chip below its targeted speed to get beat by current Intel cpus, but then for some miraculously reason it overclocks very well. The only reason Core 2's overclockability was so high was because you can say Intel "underclocked" it. If AMD had a much more competitive chip at the time i can guarantee you that those chips would have range from 2.4Ghz-3.4Ghz, not 1.8Ghz-2.9Ghz. And instead of awesome 75% overclocks we'd be managing to get around 25-50%

Hopefully AMD gets down to this speedbug thing in a timely fashion so that they can release a chip in their targeted speed range. Might get Intel to hurry up with their nahalem and other high performing stuff.
June 29, 2007 6:04:33 PM

Intel is not sitting on clockspeed right now, matter of fact for desktop cpu's AMD has the highest clocked processor on the market right now with the X2 6000+ at 3.0Ghz.

Intel's highest clocked processor is 2.93Ghz and it definitively out performs a X2 6000+.

The potential plan for Intel is that if Barcelona is any good and threatens Intel's performance they can ramp up the clockspeed to compensate. Granted we have no clue how well either Phenom or Yorkfield will perform. Also don't forget Nehalem is scheduled for a mid 2008. If Intel delivers again, and AMD does well with Barcelona, they still only may see a short window of better performing cpu's.
June 29, 2007 6:11:37 PM

By 'sitting on clockspeeds' I meant Intel is deliberately holding some headroom in reserve should AMD come out with a competitive product. So I'm actually agreeing with you. ;) 

I don't think we will see Nehalem until late 08 at the earliest, Intel will only have just ramped up Penryn by mid 08.
June 29, 2007 6:14:54 PM

Quote:
On that reasoning, that "If they were good overclockers they would be released at higher speeds in the first place", one could ask why the 3800+ chips were released in the first place, or any other cpu that can be overclocked. They get released because there is demand for them now and the factory doesn't want to take the extra time to experiment with getting higher speeds. After the initial release, time can be taken to raise the speeds.


Well... how about the fact that there were X2 4200+ and 4600+ models available as well? :lol: 

It's true, if AMD could get clockspeeds far in excess of 2GHz, why wouldn't they? It's not like they have the performance crown and can afford to sit on clockspeeds like Intel is doing atm, if AMD had the chance to release a 2.5GHz+ K10 they'd do it in a heartbeat.

To both you and easyg and others. Yes, I'm aware that AMD had some other CPUs out as well as the 3800+. I'm also aware that AMD has been having problems with getting higher clock speeds, with some of the blame going to the motherboards having stability problems as the speeds increased. I don't know who is more to blame in that, AMD or the mobo companies, only the end effect.

My point was more meant that AMD needs to get some chips out on the market, and its better to start with a low end chips and work up the clock speeds as time permits then to not release a chip at all. I don't like the delays, and I'd like to see the Agena coming out sooner, higher clock speeds on the Barcelona and everything else. Unfortunately, that's not going to happen anytime soon.

Right now, AMD is bleeding money and needs to get revenue from the Barcelona, even if its clock is low at the moment. Besides, I look at the low initial clock speed as a challenge. What can be done to make it run faster? Ok, maybe nothing, but maybe some trick will be found that unlocks its potential. I don't know the answer to that, only the challenge.

@ IcY18- I agree, we have been spoiled by Conroe. Its a fantastic chip, made even better by the price wars that have brought it into easy reach of most people. I'm not sure if Intel underclocked it or was playing things safe by keeping the clock speed low and thus effecting the heat and power draw. They had learned some hard lessons over Prescott and all. And yes, I hope AMD gets the speedbug fixed, whether its with the chip itself or with the motherboards. I'm planning at present for a X38 based build, but I'd sure like to see AMD come up with something competitive or Intel will have little reason to keep the prices down.
June 29, 2007 6:23:19 PM

Quote:
On that reasoning, that "If they were good overclockers they would be released at higher speeds in the first place", one could ask why the 3800+ chips were released in the first place, or any other cpu that can be overclocked.

ROFL. :roll:

Quote:
They get released because there is demand for them now and the factory doesn't want to take the extra time to experiment with getting higher speeds. After the initial release, time can be taken to raise the speeds.

Translation: AMD are desperate to get something out the door even if they are embarrassed by what they have to offer. They will be desperately running around like headless chickens trying to get their manufacturing process sorted so that they release some higher clocked CPUs that they can charge a lot more money for.
June 29, 2007 6:30:38 PM

Quote:
On that reasoning, that "If they were good overclockers they would be released at higher speeds in the first place", one could ask why the 3800+ chips were released in the first place, or any other cpu that can be overclocked.

ROFL. :roll:

I don't think you got my point, and I was meaning to be a bit sacrcastic in my statement. But if it gave you a laugh, then good.


Quote:
They get released because there is demand for them now and the factory doesn't want to take the extra time to experiment with getting higher speeds. After the initial release, time can be taken to raise the speeds.

Translation: AMD are desperate to get something out the door even if they are embarrassed by what they have to offer. They will be desperately running around like headless chickens trying to get their manufacturing process sorted so that they release some higher clocked CPUs that they can charge a lot more money for.

That's exactly right, AMD is desperate. If they don't get something out, they will financially bleed to death. It doesn't make much difference to me as far as what I buy, as I'm planning an Intel X38 platform. I just hope AMD can keep going so the Intel pricing stays relatively low.
June 29, 2007 7:05:18 PM

Quote:
On that reasoning, that "If they were good overclockers they would be released at higher speeds in the first place", one could ask why the 3800+ chips were released in the first place, or any other cpu that can be overclocked.

ROFL. :roll:

I don't think you got my point, and I was meaning to be a bit sacrcastic in my statement. But if it gave you a laugh, then good.
Would you kindly step down from your rarefied atmosphere and explain to this mere mortal exactly what your point was? From what I could see the point was to make you look like a newb.
a b à CPUs
June 29, 2007 7:07:36 PM

Quote:
On that reasoning, that "If they were good overclockers they would be released at higher speeds in the first place", one could ask why the 3800+ chips were released in the first place, or any other cpu that can be overclocked.

ROFL. :roll:

I don't think you got my point, and I was meaning to be a bit sacrcastic in my statement. But if it gave you a laugh, then good.
Would you kindly step down from your rarefied atmosphere and explain to this mere mortal exactly what your point was? From what I could see the point was to make you look like a newb.

Make Love not war... :wink:
June 29, 2007 7:18:02 PM

Quote:
Make Love not war... :wink:

Good point.

I do get wound up at times by people that can’t admit they possibly made a mistake, probably because it reminds me of my father. I just felt he was digging himself a small hole by not acknowledging that his initial premise was a bit fanciful and then dug himself a much larger hole in the process of trying to defend his position.
Escalation is the process in action.

To Sailer: Waves white flag and offers a beer.
a b à CPUs
June 29, 2007 7:24:31 PM

Quote:
Make Love not war... :wink:

Good point.

I do get wound up at times by people that can’t admit they possibly made a mistake, probably because it reminds me of my father. I just felt he was digging himself a small hole by not acknowledging that his initial premise was a bit fanciful and then dug himself a much larger hole in the process of trying to defend his position.
Escalation is the process in action.

To Sailer: Waves white flag and offers a beer.

I've said much worse.. I get easily ticked off or annoyed myself :) 
June 29, 2007 7:25:55 PM

At the beginning of this month wasn’t AMD only running at a 1.6. I would say that this is an improvement of 25% in one month. I have hopes for a faster chip soon.
June 29, 2007 7:32:06 PM

Quote:
At the beginning of this month wasn’t AMD only running at a 1.6. I would say that this is an improvement of 25% in one month. I have hopes for a faster chip soon.


Yeah because an actual chip running at 1.6GHz and an announcement that you will have a 2GHz chip in the next 3 months constitutes a '25% improvement in one month'. :roll: :lol: 

AMD should just announce they will have a 45nm 3.2GHz K10 by 2009... '100% improvement in one month'. :lol:  :wink:
June 29, 2007 7:39:28 PM

If they are releasing in August then they are manufacturing them now at that speed. So yes they had the 1.6 at the beginning of this month and a 2.0 now. Where do you get the 3 months at? Are you working from the same calendar as everyone else, or did you make your own.
June 29, 2007 7:43:13 PM

Quote:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,...

AMD to Ship Industry’s First Native x86 Quad-Core Processors In August

—AMD’s Stable Infrastructure Strategy Enables Availability of Systems from Platform Partners in September—

Sunnyvale, Calif. -- June 29, 2007 --Continuing to lead the shift of mainstream enterprise computing to energy-efficient processors, AMD (NYSE:AMD) announced today that Quad-Core AMD Opteron™ processors, code-named “Barcelona,” are planned for shipment in both standard and low power versions at launch later this summer. This would be the first time AMD has made both standard and low power parts immediately available as part of a new processor launch.
Additionally, AMD today updated its projected timing on “Barcelona” availability and provided additional product details. AMD expects that the processors will begin shipping for revenue in August 2007, with systems from AMD platform partners beginning to ship in September 2007. Due to its enhanced architecture – it is the world’s first x86 CPU to integrate four processing cores on a single die of silicon – Quad-Core AMD Opteron™ processors can deliver significant performance and performance-per-watt enhancements over existing processor architectures yet are designed to be backwards compatible with existing AMD Opteron platforms.
With planned availability at launch in a range of frequencies up to 2.0 Ghz, AMD expects its native quad-core processors to scale to higher frequencies in Q407 in both standard and SE (Special Edition) versions. Designed to operate within the same thermal envelopes as current generation AMD Opteron processors, AMD estimates that the new processors can provide a performance increase up to 70 percent on certain database applications and up to 40 percent on certain floating point applications, with subsequent higher frequency processors expected to significantly add to this performance advantage. “More than ever before, customers are expecting energy-efficiency and performance-per-watt leadership as much as absolute performance. With this new reality of computing, greater performance at the expense of greater power consumption is no longer an option,” said Randy Allen, corporate vice president, Server and Workstation Division at AMD. “AMD has prioritized production of our low power and standard power products because our customers and ecosystem demand it, and we firmly believe that the introduction of our native Quad-Core AMD Opteron processor will deliver on the promise of the highest levels of performance-per-watt the industry has ever seen.”


Obviously they are pitching Barcelona on performance-per-watt rather than performance itself.


AMD has been talking perf/watt since 2005 or 2006. They have already talked about the perf. I mean if you have 100+ servers and a choice of saving on powering them, a CIO will want to save the money.

AMD has a popular set of ads in NYC that said things like:

You could light up Broadway, Off-Broadway and Off-Off-Broadway with the money waste using a non AMD processor. They also had or may still have a parody of the National debt ticker that counts how much money is wasted not using AMD.
June 29, 2007 7:55:15 PM

Yup, I seen'em. The biggest laugh is when you realize that AMD, not having the competitive processor, is showing you what you've spent so far. That ticker has to go a LOOOONG way to go in reverse... further every day!, and it might not go in reverse too fast either! W000T

LMFAO

f61
June 29, 2007 7:57:10 PM

AMD's had 2.0Ghz chips supposedly for awhile. It's not just this month that they've gotten to it. They real news is that they now have come out saying that they won't be able to hit their target speed of 2.5Ghz which iexplains why they only had 1.6 and 2.0Ghz chips.
!