Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Penryns in trouble?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 25, 2007 11:40:48 AM

hello everyone,

i came across this at www.hothardware.com :

Intel has been performing nearly flawlessly of late, but a rumor has surfaced regarding their allegedly revised release schedule. At this time it is only a rumor, and shouldn't be taken as fact until we hear more. Allegedly Intel's 45 nm High-K isn't working too well with low-end chips.
“The problem with this one is that changing the process like that would basically need a complete re-layout of the chip. Unless this was planned from day one, the effort involved would be huge, expensive, and very unlikely to happen.

The next bit is sort of related, word is trickling out that Intel scrapped a whole run of Harpertowns. What a "run" is defined as is beyond me, but it gets ads up to the same point as the 45nm volume problems. This one has been neither second sourced or denied, but then again, Intel tends not to talk about such things.

This leads us to problem, availability, or lack thereof, of Harpertowns. They are nowhere, and you can't order a system from a major vendor for love nor money. A month after launch of mainstream parts, this is not what Intel usually wants, or is it?”

This entire issue of delays and limited availability isn't new. It's quite common for manufacturers to have a "ramping up" phase when they move to some new manufacturing process. Intel's amazingly quick ramp up for their 65nm process may have led some to forget just how long it took the firm to get a handle on 90nm. Adding to this difficulty is that Intel traditionally doesn't do a simple shrink of an existing product, but rather they take the opportunity to release new features on their CPUs whenever they improve their manufacturing process."

has anyone heard about this from any other source? would it have an effect on the dual core penryns ?

thanks in advance

More about : penryns trouble

December 25, 2007 12:01:53 PM

It has been semi-confirmed by Intel employee, that this is only a rumor, nothing else. If Intel can't get HK/MG to work with 45nm chips in the first place, then they wouldn't sell any chips made with them. Simply put, the 45nm chip productions have been progressed so far, that any yield related rumors are unlikely to be true.

IMO, its just people who wants to make sense of the recent rumored (yes, again) Yorkfield delay.
a b à CPUs
December 25, 2007 12:48:56 PM

^Agreed. Probably some AMD Fanboy @ hothardware started this.
Related resources
December 25, 2007 12:52:34 PM

Rumor or not, Intel has confirmed that they will take their merry time coming out with anything new. Right now they are a full process and performance generation ahead of the competition. Intel can sit back and be as slow as they want because AMD won't have anything that matches a QX9770 until 2009 most likely. If theres a problem on Intel's side, they have all the time in the world to fix it.
December 25, 2007 1:01:40 PM

I dunno... sites like ncix are still claiming a couple of weeks delivery on Yorkies that are suposed to come out in March! I think that Hector might be sitting at home with nothing to do since Santa just crapped down his chimny and starting all these rumors! :) 
December 25, 2007 1:12:54 PM

Intel doesn't have to rush out their new chips - they're miles ahead of AMD as it is. Pulling themselves too far ahead of AMD would probably be frowned upon by Anti-monopoly bodies, which could lead to hefty fines etc. It makes perfect Business sense for Intel to keep these CPUs in reserve at the moment, only releasing them when AMD has a product to compete.
December 25, 2007 1:17:22 PM

Don't you think that the oposite scenario would be the case? Holding back inovation from the marketplace could be seen as an anticompettive cartel? The antitrust guys usualy only step in when the monopoly exists already.
a b à CPUs
December 25, 2007 1:23:59 PM

Couldn't ya get a motorbike analogy in there OlSkool??

I agree tho ... your comments might be right.

heh heh
December 25, 2007 1:37:08 PM

Reynod said:
Couldn't ya get a motorbike analogy in there OlSkool??

I agree tho ... your comments might be right.

heh heh


No prob, anything for my friends down unda!

Harley went crying to Ronald Reagan saying that the Japanese superbikes were going to put them out of business. So he slapped a huge import tax on anything that could remotly be considered competition to Harley. The Japanese were forced to sell crapy 700 cc bikes for several years since their 750s and up were taxed bigtime. So the Big 4 Japanese pulled out their checkbooks and got some heavy duty lobbysts to convince Congress that the tax held back inovation from the marketplace. On that basis they got the tax recinded.

And BTW I'd swim across the ocean right now for some of that 40 C temps you're having! It's -7 C right now! But we do have Xmas snow! :) 
December 25, 2007 1:38:53 PM

This is very good news and it brings a smile to my face! Intel are an evil Corporate company! so it's great seeing them mess up.

AMD is already gaining back market share...Intel will be finished soon...Evil always gets it's comeuppance!

AMD4Life!

a b à CPUs
December 25, 2007 1:41:06 PM

Of course there is a game plan when Intel releases their chips to compete with AMD and Intel is playing the game. It's more of a marketing thing to sit back and wait for releases at this point.

Although sitting back and taking it easy appears to be the thing to do, look at how long AMD was ahead of Intel and they chose to "sit back" and you see where they are now. If AMD applied the pressure even further and pushed for progress as if they had to catch up AMD wouldn't be in this mess they are in now.

It would be in Intels best interest to keep applying the pressure, otherwise in 2-3 years they could easily find themselves on the bottom again trying to catch up...

Just bring me the fastest chips boys, all of you view this the same. If AMD started smoking Intel again you will be overhauling your systems next week and visa versa. I have actually been the opposite. I was an avid Intel user while AMD was ahead and now visa versa. I guess you can say I support the underdog...
December 25, 2007 1:42:24 PM

thanks everyone for your views, assuming intel does release the penryn dual cores on dec 20 as scheduled , any guess on what the new prices for current core 2 duos would be ?
December 25, 2007 2:07:13 PM

thunderman said:
This is very good news and it brings a smile to my face! Intel are an evil Corporate company! so it's great seeing them mess up.

AMD is already gaining back market share...Intel will be finished soon...Evil always gets it's comeuppance!

AMD4Life!


Dude....lay off the crack-pipe....
December 25, 2007 2:10:32 PM

thunderman, you're right! Intel will be finished soon... finished stomping AMD into the dirt. :)  Do they let you near sharp objects at the home?

kaaliya, wolfies are supposed to be shiping on Jan. 20 and competing C2Ds would have to come down in price although there has been no confirmaton of the amount. I'd think 15% or so. Not too much. They're still valid parts.
December 25, 2007 2:12:54 PM

Where did you get that candy bar picture? Cause it is freakin' awesome!
December 25, 2007 2:36:22 PM

monsterrocks said:
Where did you get that candy bar picture? Cause it is freakin' awesome!


I got a pic of a Brit Yorkie bar (they're really good... wish we could get them here) and then photoshoped the hell outa it. I can send you a higher res version if you like! :wahoo: 
December 25, 2007 2:37:57 PM

Clock for clock people expected the Phenom CPU to perform miracles against the already excellent K8 architecture... they are missing the whole point. The Phenom will be hugely powerful, more so than Intel's fake Quad when all of the cores are used. Reason being for this is because the AMD phenom has a more efficient design, so it multi-tasks better than the Intel Quad. Phenom is the future of multi-threaded gaming and Software designed for all of the cores.
Intel realize that they need to rise to this challenge, because otherwise they will be left behind. Intel are panicking and have decided to do an exact copy of the K10 for 'Their' Nehalem Native Quad. In their rush they have renamed Hypertransport to a really silly name 'Quickpath' and have copied the Memory controller too. This is an Evil corporate company ripping off the little Honest hardworking firm who have spent dedication and passion producing K10.

Intel are Evil! rise against the Empire!
December 25, 2007 2:41:30 PM

Thunderman! Dude! How are ya? :) 

December 25, 2007 2:59:09 PM

thunderman said:
Clock for clock people expected the Phenom CPU to perform miracles against the already excellent K8 architecture... they are missing the whole point. The Phenom will be hugely powerful, more so than Intel's fake Quad when all of the cores are used. Reason being for this is because the AMD phenom has a more efficient design, so it multi-tasks better than the Intel Quad. Phenom is the future of multi-threaded gaming and Software designed for all of the cores.
Intel realize that they need to rise to this challenge, because otherwise they will be left behind. Intel are panicking and have decided to do an exact copy of the K10 for 'Their' Nehalem Native Quad. In their rush they have renamed Hypertransport to a really silly name 'Quickpath' and have copied the Memory controller too. This is an Evil corporate company ripping off the little Honest hardworking firm who have spent dedication and passion producing K10.

Intel are Evil! rise against the Empire!


When did AMD stop being a corporation? If they were in Intel's position they would do the same thing. And when they were ahead, they did, see the K8 prices, as soon as Core2's release they halved, so it was obvious price inflation by AMD.

Nahelem is nowhere near an exact copy of K10. It is actually a very different setup, from any of the current processors of either company. Sure it borrows from the K8 design, but what company hasn't used something of its competitors design if it is a big performance increase. And don't say AMD, they started as an Intel clone, then surpassed it, and have now fallen back due to K10 issues.
a c 159 à CPUs
a b å Intel
December 25, 2007 3:17:21 PM

Post removed
December 25, 2007 3:26:36 PM

thunderman said:
Clock for clock people expected the Phenom CPU to perform miracles against the already excellent K8 architecture... they are missing the whole point. The Phenom will be hugely powerful, more so than Intel's fake Quad when all of the cores are used. Reason being for this is because the AMD phenom has a more efficient design, so it multi-tasks better than the Intel Quad. Phenom is the future of multi-threaded gaming and Software designed for all of the cores.
Intel realize that they need to rise to this challenge, because otherwise they will be left behind. Intel are panicking and have decided to do an exact copy of the K10 for 'Their' Nehalem Native Quad. In their rush they have renamed Hypertransport to a really silly name 'Quickpath' and have copied the Memory controller too. This is an Evil corporate company ripping off the little Honest hardworking firm who have spent dedication and passion producing K10.

Intel are Evil! rise against the Empire!


ThunderKiddy,

Intel First Designed "HyperTransport" back in 2000 and designed a chip to use it, but it required RAMBUS memory which wound up failing. Intel Realized that DDR and DDR2 really gained little from HyperTransport until very fast memory was available. Hence, the reason why Intel waited until DDR3 to re-introduce it. AMD actually is using something Intel originally designed. However, AMDs processors are much slower than Intels.

The Phenoms have been tested using all 4 cores against Intel's Quads and AMD gets stomped.
The Pheonoms have been tested using all 4 cores against Intel's Dual Core Chips and AMD gets stomped.

AMDs next generation chip is finally here and losses to what is not 1.5 year old Intel Tech.
In fact it gets Destroyed by Intel's Old Technology.

Sadly for AMD, Intel will have newer Tech out in Q1.
Then in Q4 they will leap even further ahead.

Thunder, could you not at least bring a whimper to your arguement?
So so sad.

DELETED
December 25, 2007 3:28:11 PM

zenmaster said:
ThunderKiddy,

Intel First Designed "HyperTransport" back in 2000 and designed a chip to use it, but it required RAMBUS memory which wound up failing. Intel Realized that DDR and DDR2 really gained little from HyperTransport until very fast memory was available. Hence, the reason why Intel waited until DDR3 to re-introduce it. AMD actually is using something Intel originally designed. However, AMDs processors are much slower than Intels.

The Phenoms have been tested using all 4 cores against Intel's Quads and AMD gets stomped.
The Pheonoms have been tested using all 4 cores against Intel's Dual Core Chips and AMD gets stomped.

AMDs next generation chip is finally here and losses to what is not 1.5 year old Intel Tech.
In fact it gets Destroyed by Intel's Old Technology.

Sadly for AMD, Intel will have newer Tech out in Q1.
Then in Q4 they will leap even further ahead.

Thunder, could you not at least bring a whimper to your arguement?
So so sad.

DELETED



DELETED atleast Baron backs his up with facts.. cherry picked, but facts none the less.
December 25, 2007 3:42:43 PM

thunderman said:
This is very good news and it brings a smile to my face! Intel are an evil Corporate company! so it's great seeing them mess up.

AMD is already gaining back market share...Intel will be finished soon...Evil always gets it's comeuppance!

AMD4Life!

could you please pass the acid your on...I want to trip like youDELETED,keep playing on your AMD welfare pc
December 25, 2007 3:53:02 PM

thunderman said:
This is very good news and it brings a smile to my face! Intel are an evil Corporate company! so it's great seeing them mess up.

AMD is already gaining back market share...Intel will be finished soon...Evil always gets it's comeuppance!

AMD4Life!


I hope that made you feel better. Honestly, who are you trying to fool? Wake up and smell the Ghz.
December 25, 2007 4:06:19 PM

Hello thunderman, my little troll. everyone stop feeding him, he is mine!
December 25, 2007 4:20:19 PM

Some times I'm wondering if some people are reading the same cpu charts here on this site that I am.... AMD isn't as bad off on performance as some people make them out to be, the updated cpu charts here show that. Though, as a side note, why do they have the phenoms on there now, but not the X2 6400+? They do real good in apps, but lose in games, unless they're multi threaded for more cores. But, like I've said before, knock the enthusiast models off and put them on a seperate chart from the mainstream models. And we see a closer picture, and a more realistic one for those of us who don't want to spend a grand on a proc.

Hypertransport wasn't created by Intel. The early P4's that used RDRam used a quad pumped front side bus, Double Data Rate 100Mhz. You're thinking of Intels Hyperthreading abilities that the Extreme edition p4's at that time used, which allowed them to have a second virtual core.

As far as Intel holding back on releasing their new 45nm processors. There could be multiple reasons. They feel AMD isn't competitive right now, so they aren't releasing their new stuff to cause people to feel resentment towards AMD for hampering the CPU industry. They also realize AMD's financial situation. If they drive AMD out of business, they have to worry about the federal government stepping in due to a monopoly on consumer x86 processors. At which point they end up losing part of their fabs, and R&D teams to being broken down into smaller companies. Which is how AMD and Cyrix came into existance for the most part. It could also be that Intel my be having yield issues, as well, not a suprise when it comes to new tech. It could be any reason when it comes down to it.
December 25, 2007 4:46:06 PM

Mathos, I'm not talking about P4. I'm talking about the Timna processor. It was developed by Intel but since it was designed specifically for RAMBUS which failed, the chip never made it beyond Engineering Samples. A complete system would have been too expensive to be marketable due to the cost of RAMBUS memory.

Secondly, Intel is not holding back or delaying their chips.
The only date that Intel has ever announced for their chips it Q1 '08.
Intel has stated that date has not changed.

Now, there are different dates that have been speculated.
If a site gives one date originally in Q1 as a guess and then later state that it going to be a different date in Q1, its not Intel changing dates.
It's the site claiming a change in dates by Intel rather than them giving wrong info. In fact, still nobody knows when the chips will be released in Q1.

And Yes, People do look at the charts and prices for normal X2 processors. The fact that the E2160 at $80 will out perform any processor created by AMD in any price range means that AMD really does not make much sense unless you are on a very tight budget and go for a very low end X2 and a very low end motherboard.

It's not resentment towards AMD.
It's a matter of making an impartial recommendation.
Prior to C2D, most of those recommending Intel Now where recommending AMD. Unfortunately, AMD has not risen to Intels challenge and are now offering inferior products.

If you really don't need computing power, you are best at getting a retail system which are priced nice for your average person. If I was going to be recommending a WebSurfing/MS Office type of system I would likely direct somebody to BestBuy/CirCuit City and likely recommend the AMD system since it will be a few dollars less and still meet their needs.

However, I can't see recommending a X2-6000 , 6400+, 5000+ BE, or Phenom when they are all quite a bit slower than the E2160, more expensive than the E2160, and use more power and generate more noice.

There will always be Intel and AMD fanboys.
However, most here recommend what is currently best.
December 25, 2007 4:47:28 PM

I love reading these forums,but people its Intel's turn to be #1 again.AMD had a run of a few years being #1 with their Athlon 64 cpu's.Now Intel is back on top.I've always stuck with Intel,they are my choice,just as some of you stick with AMD.There is no need to bash each other personally for our choice of cpu.I want AMD to survive,just to keep Intel on their toe's.
December 25, 2007 5:29:02 PM

Well said Kelly..
December 25, 2007 5:40:29 PM

By popular request. Just download by right clicking then Save As...

BEFORE



AFTER

December 25, 2007 6:40:29 PM

OlSkoolChopper said:
I got a pic of a Brit Yorkie bar (they're really good... wish we could get them here) and then photoshoped the hell outa it. I can send you a higher res version if you like! :wahoo: 


That would be awesome. I wanna use it as my desktop background if you don't mind.
December 25, 2007 6:46:47 PM

skittle said:
Hello thunderman, my little troll. everyone stop feeding him, he is mine!

Please keep your troll on a leash. :lol: 
December 25, 2007 6:51:51 PM

:o 

The "DELETED" is in Christmas colors!

I love flame wars...
December 25, 2007 6:52:10 PM

zenmaster said:
Mathos, I'm not talking about P4. I'm talking about the Timna processor. It was developed by Intel but since it was designed specifically for RAMBUS which failed, the chip never made it beyond Engineering Samples. A complete system would have been too expensive to be marketable due to the cost of RAMBUS memory.


Actually, Timna didn't have the equivalent of Hypertransport; it did, however, have an IMC... which fell flat for the reasons you stated.

This does not imply that Intel copied Hypertransport from AMD, though. QuickPath has been in development for at least 8 years, though it's been called a half-dozen different names internally: Next Generation Bus, SCIDlink, CSI, etc. In fact, Nehalem's been on the roadmap for almost as long. Specs on the processor called "Nehalem" changed-- and even which process generation it would intercept: back in '02 it was slated to be on 90nm-- but the one thing which always stayed the same was that Nehalem would be the first processor with the next generation bus architecture.

People who think Intel copied Hypertransport are wrong, but you can see why they'd think so; it's not like Intel publishes the depths of its internal projects to the press. Where AMD deserves significant credit is that the K8 forced Intel's hand: put QuickPath out (finally!) or face decreasing share in the multicore server (and ultimately desktop) market.
December 25, 2007 7:00:18 PM

Delay or not, Intel doesn't have to worry about anything. They can take their sweet time at this point.
December 25, 2007 7:00:26 PM

The fact remains Intel tried to create a memory controller... but they failed! We can all try to create something...if it's not actually achieved it means very little.
Intel failed with their Memory controller and they want to steal Hypertransport! because it actually works. This is AMD technology and Intel are cheating. I'm so fed up with Evil Corporate giants like Intel robbing the honest small companies that do all of the hard work! AMD are a caring company who puts their customers first and are technically ahead of Intel too!

Verdict: Intel are Evil!
December 25, 2007 7:04:29 PM

thunderman said:
The fact remains Intel tried to create a memory controller... but they failed! We can all try to create something...if it's not actually achieved it means very little.
Intel failed with their Memory controller and they want to steal Hypertransport! because it actually works. This is AMD technology and Intel are cheating. I'm so fed up with Evil Corporate giants like Intel robbing the honest small companies that do all of the hard work! AMD are a caring company who puts their customers first and are technically ahead of Intel too!

Verdict: Intel are Evil!


They did not "fail".
It worked properly.
However, the technology was ahead of its time.

How is AMD Caring when they knowing deceive their customers?
They knew about the TLB bug.
They knew they were releasing chips with a 1.8NB chip but gave the press chips to review with a 2.0NB chip w/o alerting anyone the retail chips would be different. The change was only discovered when retail chips were bought.

AMD, not Intel, is involved in scams.
December 25, 2007 7:06:44 PM

thunderman said:
The fact remains Intel tried to create a memory controller... but they failed! We can all try to create something...if it's not actually achieved it means very little.
Intel failed with their Memory controller and they want to steal Hypertransport! because it actually works. This is AMD technology and Intel are cheating. I'm so fed up with Evil Corporate giants like Intel robbing the honest small companies that do all of the hard work! AMD are a caring company who puts their customers first and are technically ahead of Intel too!

Verdict: Intel are Evil!

Well, they got all the time in the world. They can try again...and again...and again.

So what makes you say Amd is honest? Sure Intel is evil but Amd also plays dirty.
December 25, 2007 7:11:51 PM

Evilonigiri said:
Well, they got all the time in the world. They can try again...and again...and again.

So what makes you say Amd is honest? Sure Intel is evil but Amd also plays dirty.


AMD is very much the dirty player in today's x86 market. Intel, although frowned upon, is really the saving grace in today's market.
December 25, 2007 7:14:48 PM

justinmcg67 said:
AMD is very much the dirty player in today's x86 market. Intel, although frowned upon, is really the saving grace in today's market.

That's true, however I was referring to the past. :p 

Anyways, tomorrow is more important than yesterday.
December 25, 2007 7:25:17 PM

thunderman said:
... AMD are a caring company ... are technically ahead of Intel too! ...


Substitute "caring" and "ahead" with "underhanded" and "behind", and you will be correct my little troll.
December 25, 2007 7:26:24 PM

AMD offer more performance for the money...AMD processors are very cheap and affordable. Evil giant Intel overcharge for their CPU's. AMD brings powerful computing to less well off people or buyers with good sense who know that Intel are ripp off merchants...proof AMD care.

AMD want to deliver the market with the latest in CPU advances.. while Intel will sell anything for a quick buck like Double cheese burger quads...proof AMD care

The Phenom Bug was a problem...AMD held their hands out and admitted their mistakes. Intel on the other keep quiet while customers experience stability problems...proof AMD care.

AMD offer 45W desktop processors to help combat global warming and customers who want lower electric bills...Intel don't offer this kind of low consumption for the desktop market.. proof AMD cares

AMD4life!
December 25, 2007 7:30:21 PM

Im beginning to wonder if thunderman is DELETED... Ill let someone else totally tear his last message apart. It should be fun!
December 25, 2007 7:43:31 PM

Can't agree with you more skittle...the next successor to BM?

Now where's the fire extinguisher?
a b à CPUs
December 25, 2007 7:57:30 PM

Kaaliya said:
hello everyone,

i came across this at www.hothardware.com :

Intel has been performing nearly flawlessly of late, but a rumor has surfaced regarding their allegedly revised release schedule. At this time it is only a rumor, and shouldn't be taken as fact until we hear more. Allegedly Intel's 45 nm High-K isn't working too well with low-end chips....


Word from Intel is that they're holding back the release of 45nm midrange cores because they don't need them yet. They also mentioned current availability of x6xxx models. This leads to the following extrapolations:

1.) Intel hasn't switched much of its equipment to 45nm production yet.
2.) Intel doesn't think it needs to switch much of its production over yet.
3.) Intel thinks its 65nm processors are good enough to hold the market.
4.) Intel doesn't want to undercut 65nm prices by producing 45nm midrange models at the same time.
5.) The channel is full of 65nm parts.

With most of these extrapolations nearly undisputable, we can conclude:

6.) Intel thinks it's time to "milk the cow" on its old production process.

Remember that changing production processes is an expensive undertaking, so that the money Intel saves by not doing it now can make up for the fact that the 65nm produces fewer dies per wafer than the 45nm process.
a b à CPUs
December 25, 2007 8:43:53 PM

I love it when people get things crossed up. There are enthusiasts, which are most of us that post here and there are those that are the other 95% of society which is the mass market (1st time you heard that 1).

An E2160 is barely above an Intel 805 chip for 50.00 until your overclock it (most people cant do that, or wont). Even if you overclock it it doesnt blow past any AMD chip. Get real. There are CPU charts on THG that show the stock speeds that again, 95% of the market have access to. Show me some legitimate charts that support the E2160 being superrior over "ALL" AMD chips.

This was a simple and friendly post until (as it usually does) gets turned into a slanderfest. As I said before, I was an avid user of Intel all along when it was on the losing end so I don't qualify as a fanboy of AMD. AMD will get their act together and put out very competetive products and Intel better not "sit around" and take their time due to the fact we know where that can get you.

Keep your foot on the gas and your eye on the rear view mirror or you will be asking yourself what happened when you are losing again.
December 25, 2007 8:57:55 PM

monsterrocks said:
That would be awesome. I wanna use it as my desktop background if you don't mind.


I've loaded the before and after pics on this thread but since the original image was medium-sized I couldn't give you one large enough to use as a desktop bacground without it getting very grainy. Sorry!
December 25, 2007 10:08:31 PM

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/pentium-e2...

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64-x...
----------------------------------------------------------
The first set of benchmarks shows the E2160 easily beating the E6800.
The second set shows the X2-6000 trailing the E6800 by over 10%.

Even if you OC'd the X2-6400 to about 3.4 Ghz which is about the limit, and got a linear performance increase it would be have a tough time catching up. And expecting a linear increase when nothing near that was seen between other frequency increases between the various AMD chips.

The Phenom can't even come close to competing with the X2 chips due to its very low frequency. The IPC of the phenom also drops below that of the X2 once the TLB Bios patch is applied and drops even further when comparing a retail 1.8NB speed chip is used in place of an ES 2.0NB speed chip.

The OCing that was done with stock cooling and lower voltage for the E2160 than what was used for the X2-6000+ OC.

Similar E2160 results can be found on THG, AnandTech and numerous other sites.

Building a Custom Computer with the E2160 and not OCing is much like buying a Customize Ferrari and complaining that it does not go very fast in 1st gear :>

People hear will teach you how to configure and use your computer to safely utilize its potential.


a c 126 à CPUs
December 25, 2007 10:13:46 PM

thunderman said:
AMD offer more performance for the money...AMD processors are very cheap and affordable. Evil giant Intel overcharge for their CPU's. AMD brings powerful computing to less well off people or buyers with good sense who know that Intel are ripp off merchants...proof AMD care.

AMD want to deliver the market with the latest in CPU advances.. while Intel will sell anything for a quick buck like Double cheese burger quads...proof AMD care

The Phenom Bug was a problem...AMD held their hands out and admitted their mistakes. Intel on the other keep quiet while customers experience stability problems...proof AMD care.

AMD offer 45W desktop processors to help combat global warming and customers who want lower electric bills...Intel don't offer this kind of low consumption for the desktop market.. proof AMD cares

AMD4life!


To your first sentence, Intel has a 80 core "naitive CPU that works better than 130 CPUs. Also the "Naitive" desing didn't help Phenom from underperforming andy more.

Your second response, yes AMD finally admited it after going on and on ignoring it. Plus we don't even know for sure that AMD can fix or has fied the TLB bug. At least those in the Core 2 were not ones that cause your system to hang and require a restart. Very bad for the server space.

Um yes there are 45w chips from years old architecture and last time I checked a 2.3GHz 9500 Phenom uses more power than a 2.4GHz Q6600. So currently AMDs chips are not helping global warming any more. And don't forget that the 45nm Core 2's will be lead free thus being the ost enviromentally friendly chips. that and use even less power. And even a QX9650 at idle and load use less power than most Semprons(minus the extremley low end useless CPUs).

You have been voided thunderman. Stop talking about what you don't know. I would love to see AMD come back but right now its kinda hard when you cut your own legs off and can't run towards the goal.

Oh and of coure Intel will try to make money off of what they have left of the 65nm. You want to try to sell everything. Kinda like a car company sells the 07 models at discount until the end of december and then brings out the 08s at the normal price. Every company does this where they will try to sell every last one of the product and the release the new one. Apple does it with the iPods. But I doubt Intel will delay the Penryn much as I am sure they want to stay ahead of the game. But just enough to keep AMD alive and able to do something.
a b à CPUs
December 25, 2007 10:51:00 PM

The E2160 is no doubt a diamond in the ruff. My thing is that enthusiasts are <10% of the market so the fact the E2160 is "overclockable" is not a good selling point for the general public, which in turn is the driving force of the economy for the chip makers.

Pound for pound, at stock speeds AMD has what the general public wants and needs for the time being. The time on this is limited and its very important they redeem themselves with the Phenom and they will. When that is, is the question.

It's easy to say they wont, they are so far behind. Intel was too before the C2D chips...
!