AMD to Release Two New Hexacore Chips Next Quarter

[saint19]

All the focus right now is on Intel's upcoming Sandy Bridge architecture and AMD's Bulldozer cores, but hey, there's still some life left in today's architectures, too. Within the next couple of months or so, AMD will beef up its Phenom II X6 line with a couple of new additions.

On the six-core front, AMD plans to release the Phenom II X6 1100T and 1065T. The 1100T will rank as AMD's new flagship part with a clockspeed of 3.30GHz (Turbo Speed 3.70GHz), 9MB of cache, and a 125W TDP.

The 1065T, on the other hand, will sit about halfway down AMD's hexacore totem pole, but will be the fastest six-core part with a 95W TDP. It will come clocked at 2.90GHz (Turbo Speed 3.40GHz) and also contain 9MB of cache.

Both of these processors take aim at the high performance crowd, while a new flagship quad-core chip is also in the works.

Source

Could this be true?

 

[jimmysmitty]

I can see this being true. Much like when Nehalem was put out, AMD put out newer versions of the Phenom II. Its their only way of competing really.

But until BD hits, Sandy Bridge will probably keep the performance crown for Intel.

 

[saint19]

The interesting thing here is the 9MB L3 cache a new update from AMD since they only rise the frequency in the CPUs.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Its nice but still L# has its moments. It will help in some areas I would think. I know my old P4 EE that had 2MB of L3 was over 3x faster than my P4 non EE.

 

[saint19]

Check the other thread. Old news from AMD.

 

[notty22]

Its going to be the same Thubans, just different clocks. That 9mb cache is the whole cpu's cache. Not just l3
L2 Cache 6 x 512KB
L3 Cache 6MB
=
9 mb

 

[loneninja]

I can see this being true. Much like when Nehalem was put out, AMD put out newer versions of the Phenom II. Its their only way of competing really.

But until BD hits, Sandy Bridge will probably keep the performance crown for Intel.

I7 launched a couple months before Phenom II, I'm a bit confused by your statement.


And personally I don't care about this, same processors different clocks, when they announce a new stepping or product than I'll care.

 

[4Ryan6]

All the focus right now is on Intel's upcoming Sandy Bridge architecture and AMD's Bulldozer cores, but hey, there's still some life left in today's architectures, too. Within the next couple of months or so, AMD will beef up its Phenom II X6 line with a couple of new additions.

On the six-core front, AMD plans to release the Phenom II X6 1100T and 1065T. The 1100T will rank as AMD's new flagship part with a clockspeed of 3.30GHz (Turbo Speed 3.70GHz), 9MB of cache, and a 125W TDP.

The 1065T, on the other hand, will sit about halfway down AMD's hexacore totem pole, but will be the fastest six-core part with a 95W TDP. It will come clocked at 2.90GHz (Turbo Speed 3.40GHz) and also contain 9MB of cache.

Both of these processors take aim at the high performance crowd, while a new flagship quad-core chip is also in the works.

Source

Could this be true?

Personally I would love to see AMD quit sandbagging, and stop milking the AM2/AM2+ DDR2 cow and release a totally AM3/DDR3 dedicated 6 core black edition, performance optimized CPU, clocked around the 3.6ghz range before the Christmas holiday season.

But Utterly, :lol: That probably won't happen! :lol:

 

[blackpanther26]

You are such a Obnoxious Little Weed .Ok tell me why does it take a six core phenom to come close to quard core i7.If those so called six cores were really performing like a six core cpu then it would have destroyed any quard core i7.

But in real world performance six core phenom performs like a quard core i7 and in some case worse.

So what the point in adding cores when it would perform like a quard core cpu.Intel six core cpu are real hexacore cpu becoz it destroys any quard core or six core phenom.

Amd can make 10 core cpu but if it will perform like a quard core i7 then what the point in calling it hexacore.

So just SHUT THE *** OF.AND KEEP YOUR EDIOTIC COMMENTS TO UR GARBAGE MIND.

it's called what the software is able to handle. Not all of the software takes full advantage of a quad-core CPU or six-core CPU. some software only relies on Clock speed and a single threaded app.


just like in some instances a Quad Core CPU acts and performs like a Dual- Core CPU

 

[yannifb]

You are such a Obnoxious Little Weed .Ok tell me why does it take a six core phenom to come close to quard core i7.If those so called six cores were really performing like a six core cpu then it would have destroyed any quard core i7.

But in real world performance six core phenom performs like a quard core i7 and in some case worse.

So what the point in adding cores when it would perform like a quard core cpu.Intel six core cpu are real hexacore cpu becoz it destroys any quard core or six core phenom.

Amd can make 10 core cpu but if it will perform like a quard core i7 then what the point in calling it hexacore.

So just SHUT THE *** OF.AND KEEP YOUR EDIOTIC COMMENTS TO UR GARBAGE MIND.

Lol this comment mad me laugh a little. Just the grammar and spelling mistakes mixed with the caps (which im assuming in this case you used to resemble shouting) put a funny picture in my head :lol: .

First off, its QUAD core, not QUARD.

And the last sentence; i think you meant "shut the blank up" not off. lol.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

what the use of adding cores when extra cores perform similar to intel 4 core i7.These are all fake cores.

Every app is used differently by the cpu, or even gpu.
Some have many serial or single threads, which means, the info for this particular action can only use 1 thread to its end. Thats where IPC comes in, more on this later.
In heterogenous apps, for a particular action, it can use 2, 3 or more continuous threads at once, where a multi cored cpu will attach 1 core to each thread, and having more cores helps alot here, meanwhile, the cpu also has other background things it needs to do, which may also require a core or two.
Now, IPC, which is Instructions Per Clock simply means, how much work can the cpu do in 1 cycle, to make it easy to understand here.
The higher the IPC, the faster the cpu appears to be, and is why sometimes we see older cpus with higher clocks, but with lower IPC losing to newer cpus with lower clocks, but higher IPC
So, adding cores can have a nice return on apps that are more thread friendly, or very heterogenous

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

No, going back to the K8, the FX55 was faster than anything AMD made, but it was only a single core, so like I said, theres always background things going on, using cpu cycles, and the slower clocked dual cores ended up being faster.
Weve progressed some from those days, where we see better usage of quads, making them faster than duals.
We havnt progressed to the point of seeing alot of returns of having greater than 4 cores as yet, of course this all depends on workloads, but, some of the things you mention will eventually pass the abilities of quads as well, and thats where even the Nehalems of today will slowly start losing to these hex cores

 

[yannifb]

^Yeah those are good for theory.When it comes to real world performances eg.games i7 rules.Yes six core phenom sometimes beats quad core i7 in some benchmark and app which are heavily multithreaded.But we expect a hexacore cpu to beat quad core i7 in every department.But that is obiously not the case which proves Amd hexacore cpu are only hexacore in name but not in performance.

@yannifb Plz check my spelling and grammar.And correct every mistake so that i get 10 upon 10 in my upcoming spelling test.

Lol. Im hoping English is not your first language, for your sake :lol:

And why would a hexa core beat a quad core in every department? You realize that not all apps are multi threaded, meaning ipc and clockspeed are whats going to determine the performance in those cases.
Let me simplify it:

If a i7 980x is clocked at lets say 2.8Ghz, its not going to beat an I7 930 at the same clock speed in any app thats not threaded for more than 4 threads by much. Well considering the 980x is 32nm, it would probably still win by a small margin, but not by too much.

 

[saint19]

^I will take care of u since the English isn't my 1st language.

 

[jimmysmitty]

I7 launched a couple months before Phenom II, I'm a bit confused by your statement.


And personally I don't care about this, same processors different clocks, when they announce a new stepping or product than I'll care.

Still Phenom II is all they have had to compete with. They have nothing new to reallyp put out arch wise. Even Phenom II was just a tweaked, albiet much better, Phenom.

Personally I would love to see AMD quit sandbagging, and stop milking the AM2/AM2+ DDR2 cow and release a totally AM3/DDR3 dedicated 6 core black edition, performance optimized CPU, clocked around the 3.6ghz range before the Christmas holiday season.

But Utterly, :lol: That probably won't happen! :lol:

I do doubt it will happen. Maybe sometime next year when DDR2 becomes more expensive than DDR3. Even right now DDR3 is almost cheaper but not quite.

Wow, 6 cores at 3.3ghz and 9mb of cache at 125w TDP??

That shows how well AMD has tweaked 45nm. Intel could never even come close to those numbers at 125w.

Why does Intel need to tweak 45nm? They went to 32nm. AMD needs to tweak 45nm in every way and suck every possible improvement out of it they can since they do not have the resources to move to the next process so fast and easily.

In most cases, Intels process tech is already pretty ahead when its released. In fact there is one CPU you did forget about. Beckton. The 45nm 8 core CPU that has 4 QPI links and 24MB of L3 cache all in a 130W TDP envelope. Of course it tops out at 2.266GHz but still it has 2 more cores and almost 3x the cache.

Plus Intel TDP has always been set higher than normal while AMD tends to do a more realistic approach.

 

[4Ryan6]

Well that's enough of that guys!