Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

*HOT*: RIP Duron, 100W 90nm FX-55 & Product Names

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 19, 2004 2:04:04 AM

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=2056" target="_new">Click!</A>

------------
<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A>

<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig</A> & <A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/benchmark.html" target="_new">3DMark score</A>
May 19, 2004 2:20:26 AM

1 year ago Xbitlabs have gave a link to a presentation that was saying that 90NM Opteron A64 would have a TPD of 105 watt.The register have story that AMD 90 nm have slip again in very late Q4 and revenue shipement in Q105.Personaly i have allwayse keep the 1 year after intel idea.Duron dead no it just move to paris core.

i need to change useur name.
May 19, 2004 2:33:47 AM

duron is dead, it wont be called duron anymore and it wil be a totally new core, paris, now the segment it servers will be the same yes, but perfroamce will take a tick up id say.

as far as the 105W dissapation, i have a feeling this is the maximum boundary for the entire line. amd did this before wiht the ahtlon 64, fx, and opterons on 130nm at 89W. one number for all but for the most part the chips never reach that number. it could be the same situation here, but we will have to wait and see.
May 19, 2004 2:47:23 AM

Yes i got the same impression still TPD for AMD is also on the rise.

i need to change useur name.
May 19, 2004 9:41:51 AM

Not as hot as I'd hope it would be. Where's the news about PCI Express?

My system: AMD Athlon 64 3400+ / Corsair 2Gb DDR400 / MSI K8T Neo FIS2R / ASUS Radeon 9800XT / Antec TruePower 550W / Maxtor DiamondMax Plus9 120 Gb / Pioneer DVR-A07
May 19, 2004 10:34:51 AM

Have to agree with the others; considering AMD is on record several times saying their 90nm process substantially decreases power consumption over 130nm, and considering 90m A64's will have less transistors as their 130nm counterparts (smaller caches), so unlike Northwood->Prescott, I find it hard to believe this 100+W number is once again anything but a maximum for the entire product line, which must likely even includes dual core Athlon FX's.

The only somewhat dissapointing news from that article is their claim a FX57 (~2.8 GHz I presume) wouldnt be released until Q2'05. But then, it would probably take a theoretical 4.5-5 GHz Prescott or equivalent cpu to match its performance.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
May 19, 2004 10:54:07 AM

substantially decreases power consumption over 130nm


AT best few watt 7 or 10.

i need to change useur name.
May 19, 2004 11:20:08 AM

What is your source for that number ? Your arse ?

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
May 19, 2004 2:54:10 PM

None but i am realistic.We will see in 9 month who is right.

i need to change useur name.
May 19, 2004 3:08:52 PM

There is nothing realistic about it, you're just gambling.

All we know officially is that it is "significant". Anything else is a pure guess. Prescott can't be used as a comparison since there is no 130nm prescott or 90nm northwood, Dothan comes closer, but even there transistor count has more than doubled, while power consumption has either remained identical or even decreased at the same clock. How you can conclude A64 with less transistors would reduce its powerconsumption by 7% (per clock ?) is completely beyond me. And no, we will most likely not even know for sure in a couple of months either, since we don't even know what the actual power consumption of todays A64's is.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
May 19, 2004 3:27:33 PM

All we know officially is that it is "significant". Anything else is a pure guess. Prescott can't be used as a comparison since there is no 130nm prescott or 90nm northwood, Dothan comes closer, but even there transistor count has more than doubled, while power consumption has either remained identical or even decreased at the same clock. How you can conclude A64 with less transistors would reduce its powerconsumption by 7% (per clock ?) is completely beyond me. And no, we will most likely not even know for sure in a couple of months either, since we don't even know what the actual power consumption of todays A64's is.

I have never write '''watt per clock''
Why AMD fan have to compare again intel all the time.There are in the semi industry as a corporation.IBM transmeta TSMC all have say dielectrique leak at 90 NM.Let asssume a 2.4 ghz 512KB ''use'' 70 watt i expect to drop around 58 to 65.The advantage of 90NM for AMD is reduce interconnecteur delay leaving a possible increase in clock speed.At 45\65NM they will need Low k'eff' like the rest.As far as i know nothing in the roadmap suggest they have a advance in this field.

i need to change useur name.
May 20, 2004 10:28:23 AM

Quote:
The only somewhat dissapointing news from that article is their claim a FX57 (~2.8 GHz I presume) wouldnt be released until Q2'05. But then, it would probably take a theoretical 4.5-5 GHz Prescott or equivalent cpu to match its performance.

I find it hard to believe, but if you compare the A FX-51 (2.2GHz) with P4 3.4EE, you definitely see the A FX leading in most cases. If you take the ratio, you could compare the A FX-57(2.8GHz) with the P4 4.5EE~5.0EE.
!