Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD TAKING ON CHIPSETS WITH HAMMER ?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 9, 2001 8:53:15 AM

SEE MY POST REGARDING HAMMER AND CHIPSETS dated: 11/30/01 08:19 AM

<b>OLD NEWS:</b>
I have some information on AMD's Hammer / Clawhammer from AMD's Annual Analyst Meeting. Also let me know what you think of AMD's approach to integrating the Northbridge with Hammer.

I am basing my claims on the sources below:

<A HREF="http://www.jc-news.com/index.cgi" target="_new">http://www.jc-news.com/index.cgi&lt;/A>

<A HREF="http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-7823482.html" target="_new">http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-7823482.html&lt;/A>

<A HREF="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/22750.html" target="_new">AMD delays Sledgehammer to Q1 2003</A>
<A HREF="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/22747.html" target="_new">AMD plans to beat 4.4GHz desktops</A>
<A HREF="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/22745.html" target="_new">AMD to debut Mobile Hammer in 2003</A>

<b>Official AMD Slides - </b><A HREF="http://event.mediaondemand.com/amd/20011108/slides/" target="_new">http://event.mediaondemand.com/amd/20011108/slides/&lt;/A>

<i>Run down of presentation slides, just for your convienence :-)...

Slides 3-4: Sales / Predicted Capital.(Boring)

<b>Slides 7-18: AMD Philisophy and comments on efficency and small die size inc. Hammer (Slide 15). (Quite interesting).</b>

Slides 21-29: Flash market and mirrorbit technology.

<b>Slide 40: Simple mobile processor Roadmap 2001-2003.

Slides 32-41: Throughbred/Barton futures.

Slide 42: Server Roadmap 2001-2003.</b>

Slides 42-44 : Old Hammer info.

Slides 47-49 : Processor sales / marketing.

Slide 50: Die size advantage Athlon vs P4

<b>Slide 53 : LOL !! Check out Vans Hardware little comment.</b>

Slides 54-65 : Marketing crap and quotes from websites. (Nice pictures though!)
</i>

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by mr_gobbledegook on 11/30/01 08:28 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
November 9, 2001 9:02:18 AM

integrated onchip northbridge... ill drink to that.

OEMs selling "High End"PCs with integrated video will be forced into Q3tournaments using a TNT2M64!
Related resources
November 9, 2001 10:15:47 AM

So its fast as a T-Bird 3400mhz. WTF thats pretty slow. Dual P4 2.2ghz Xeon's w/ SMT could give it a good run. Well Dual Hammers wont be that bad. Well Intel Next IA64 chips looks good too around 1ghz and L2 6mb and 400mhz FSB!!!!!

Nice Nvidia and ATi users get a Cookie.... :smile: Yummy :smile:
November 9, 2001 10:21:53 AM

MY COMMENTS ON THE CNET ARTICAL:

Its seems that Hammer at around 2GHz+ will be equivilant to PR 3400 (I dont care about PR rating anymore, its here to stay and you just have to live with it). Wow that is quite impressive should it be true, and since this is only the first release it would seem Hammer could be a VERY powerful prcessor and should give Intel a run for thier money especially with a 64 square millimeters die size @ 0.9 microns. Intel are only planning to hit 3Ghz by Q402, this should give AMD the performance lead.

I loved Jerry Sanders comments about Intel (get those claws out..MeeOW !)

<font color=blue>"I think Intel is trapped. When they designed the Pentium 4, they didn't expect to have a real competitor in the marketplace with a meaningful alternative, they always underestimate us and being underestimated is a good thing."</font color=blue>

A word of warning Jerry, perhaps you shouldn't underestimate Intel after all they are the daddy of processor design / manufacturing.

<font color=blue>Itanium, meanwhile, will suffer because of the difficulty of producing software applications for the chip. Itanium uses a different architecture than other Intel chips. Hammer, meanwhile, is compatible with existing 32-bit applications.</font color=blue>

Itanium is still being refined and am sure it hasn't flexed its full capabilites yet. Intel will have a couple of tricks up its sleeve.

<font color=blue>"My biggest fear is that Intel will come out with a 32-bit processor with 64-bit extensions because it is the right thing to do," he said. "The Itanium it turns out is a niche product...We are going to have a role in the industry because we better fulfil Microsoft's needs."</font color=blue>

I am not too sure about this comment, I doubt Intel will bring out 32 and 64bit compatible processor that would be totally against Intel's philosophy...as Intels PR person describes Hammer as a 'Pinto with larger tyres' (<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/08110103.htm" target="_new">http://www.theinquirer.net/08110103.htm&lt;/A>). Itanium may be a niche product now but it will only get more popular as time goes by.

<font color=blue>"At the end of the day, we need to get a Compaq, Dell or HP, he said. "IBM is going to be tough."</font color=blue>

YES ! I am glad Jerry recognises this. No matter how good the architecture and speed AMD will lose if they don't get an industry backer. Lets look at the options..

HP/COMPAQ - No way ! They are one company now and have already committed themselves to Itainum, especially as HP co-developed the Itanium with Intel.

DELL - They haven't touched an AMD CPU and are stupidly loyal to Intel.

IBM - They already have thier precious Power4 processors are unlikley to give AMD a hand.

SUN - ...you got to be kidding that is out of AMD's league.

That only leaves small server manufacturers...perhaps Fujitsu might adopt Hammer. I can't think of any other major players in the server market, please tell me if I am wrong or have missed one out. Yep..even though I love AMD's products I think AMD Hammer in the server market will fail unless they find a loyal customer. However looking on the bright side Claw Hammer (desktop) will kick ass and leave P4 way behind.

Stay tuned more comments will arrive soon !....

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
November 9, 2001 10:57:14 AM

Well dont forget Itatium is tomorrows chips. Hammer is today when 64-bit starts to get mainstream INTEL has the edge. Currently its all 32-bit HAMMER gets the edge. Well then you got too remember the P4 2.2ghz Xeon's will have Jackson Technology that like SMP on chip giving it a huge proformace increase. I saw somewhere a single 2.0ghz Xeon's with Jackson technology beat Dual 1.2ghz Athlon MP's and Dual 1.7ghz Xeon's.

Nice Nvidia and ATi users get a Cookie.... :smile: Yummy :smile:
November 9, 2001 11:27:08 AM

Run down of presentation slides (<A HREF="http://event.mediaondemand.com/amd/20011108/slides/" target="_new">click!</A>, just for your convienence :-)...

Slides 3-4: Sales / Predicted Capital.(Boring)

<b>Slides 7-18: AMD Philisophy and comments on efficency and small die size inc. Hammer (Slide 15). (Quite interesting).</b>

Slides 21-29: Flash market and mirrorbit technology.

<b>Slide 40: Simple mobile processor Roadmap 2001-2003.

Slides 32-41: Throughbred/Barton futures.

Slide 42: Server Roadmap 2001-2003.</b>

Slides 42-44 : Old Hammer info.

Slides 47-49 : Processor sales / marketing.

Slide 50: Die size advantage Athlon vs P4

<b>Slide 53 : LOL !! Check out Vans Hardware little comment.</b>

Slides 54-65 : Marketing crap and quotes from websites. (Nice pictures though!)

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
November 9, 2001 11:33:23 AM

Question is how good is Hammer's 64 bit performance ??

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
November 9, 2001 11:43:21 AM

Well i believe AMD did state that the Itatium can run 64-bit easier then the HAMMER.

<A HREF="http://www.x86-64.org/faq/Architecture" target="_new">http://www.x86-64.org/faq/Architecture&lt;/A>

Quote:
IA-64 is an Explicitly Parallel Instruction Computer (EPIC) as opposed to the x86-64 which will be CISC (Complex Instruction Set Computer) what this means in short is that the IA-64 will generally execute code much more efficiently with less effort.


Quote:
Very likely the IA-64 will sit around as a Commerical grade processor for a while, since it's design is not directly suited towards general-use yet (new technology and all) While the x86-64 appears to be directly targetting the general consumer with it's direct compatibility with x86-32 code.


Quote:
IA-64 has 127 integer general purpose registers and x86-64 only 16
----
...AMD's Hammer has about 1/3 the registers as the Itanium has (registers cost $$).


Quote:
IA-64 is a new architecture, x86-64 an extension of IA-32


Nice Nvidia and ATi users get a Cookie.... :smile: Yummy :smile:
November 9, 2001 12:41:37 PM

With this in mind it looks like Hammer doesn't have a bright future.

A. Because of Jackson SMP (Although when this filters down to desktop is in question).

B. 64 Bit performance will be limited.

The only benifit is that you will be able to get 64 bit and 32 bit capatibility at a cheap price, other than that not much else. Will this be enough to keep Hammer going ? Worst case scenerio AMD will have to produce a IA-64 clone if Intel lets them.

Everything looks a little muddy to me....

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
November 9, 2001 12:46:12 PM

There going to in due time. Remember IA32 has life still left. Well IA64 is easier to set as a standard. Like AMD is still paying royalitys to intel to use the x86. IA64 would be no different. IA64 can hold a load of more memory over the HAMMER.

Nice Nvidia and ATi users get a Cookie.... :smile: Yummy :smile:
November 9, 2001 1:04:15 PM

i dont think that a 64 bit software move will take place in about 3 to 5 years(hiting mainstream), im sure AMD wont stop at HAMMER@32bit, just a closer step towards the 64 bit change, its like a mobo that supports both SDR and DDR memories, it can run both(while running the SDR faster)yet still supports the newer faster DDR.
while the HAMMER appear sometime next year (izzit?), should be targeted for servers first and maybe later for us home (ab)users.

AMD dont need a big market leader, companies unlike usual consumers know what they are buying, if they see that the price/performance/stability of the system is substantionally higher then compatative systems, they will know what to do, as they are not fooled with Mhz numbers.

Go AMD Go!:p 

<font color=green>
*******
*K.I.S.S*
*(k)eep (I)t (S)imple (S)tupid*
*******
</font color=green>
November 9, 2001 1:28:25 PM

The thing is Intel Design IA64 to last a very very long time taking 20+ years. AMD will goto IA64 in a couple of years when people are ready for 64-bit desktops. The thing

My views is that x86-64 is a quick fix till IA64 is more accepted in the workstation and Desktop market.

Nice Nvidia and ATi users get a Cookie.... :smile: Yummy :smile:
November 9, 2001 2:51:51 PM

Interesting but did AMD pay THG for the picture on slide 62?

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
November 9, 2001 2:52:48 PM

few years ago i programmed in asembly, thogh i dont remember much about the CPU and the 32bit platform,
here's my question, cant you built a part to trasnlate multi bit built programs? or am i missing somehting here?

<font color=green>
*******
*K.I.S.S*
*(k)eep (I)t (S)imple (S)tupid*
*******
</font color=green>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 9, 2001 3:52:34 PM

Does that matter? I mean if my logo suddenly appear on one of AMD's slides I'ed think wayhay free plug.

I wanna be a hippie and I wanna get stoned yeah.
November 9, 2001 3:53:07 PM

The idea for Hammer is the same when processors went from 16 to 32. Intel built processors to bridge the gap and that is what AMD is doing here. Intel is skipping this step. Who knows who will have it play in their direction.

So coming back to assembly language I have no idea of the implamentation but my quess is that it will be a repeat in history but at 32 to 64 instead of 16 to 32.

<b>All for one and one for all...and 3 for 5! - Curly - The Three Stooges</b> :lol: 
November 9, 2001 4:14:42 PM

Interesting to note that, while here on the forums we've speculated about the need for high memory bandwidth with the Hammer core, it seems that AMD is still banking on DDR. It'll be interesting to see how that plays out. So, I guess for right now, DDR is the accepted memory, as both chipmakers sanction it's use, whereas RDRAM is an Intel-only solution. WHat does this mean? Dunno. But all this sure makes for a good time to be a computer enthusiast.

-SammyBoy
November 9, 2001 4:51:49 PM

Check out the other thread on Bandwith here in the CPU section. That will bring you up to speed on that argument. SDRAM solutions vs. RDRAM. I don't think that needs to be brought up here on this thread too. Because bandwith is not the only issue with RAM; Latencies inherent in the memory type, speed in clocks, bits per clock, production technologies, etc. See that other page.

<b>All for one and one for all...and 3 for 5! - Curly - The Three Stooges</b> :lol: 
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 9, 2001 5:04:01 PM

If there is no ECC memory support this chip will never get the light of day in the real world of servers sorry people i read the anadtech article and understood very clearly as you all should too 16 bit never ran any faster on 32 bit cpus this will go the same again. Sanders underestimates Intels power over the industry as well how many top teir's will take this chip under there wing...i imagine not many.

-Spuddy

<font color=red>Being Evil Is Good. Cause I Can Be A Prick And Get Away With It.</font color=red> :lol: 
November 9, 2001 6:12:49 PM

what are you talking about?
there is ECC RDRAM and ECC DDR SDRAM.

Bum_JCRules: well my question was, can you create a chip that will only trasnlate between the 32 bit to 64 and visaversa?
do we really need the processor to handle that or we can present an vesitile iterface for both methods?

<font color=green>
*******
*K.I.S.S*
*(k)eep (I)t (S)imple (S)tupid*
*******
</font color=green>
November 9, 2001 7:11:31 PM

Where have you been? DDR memory has had ECC support since at least March (when I got my memory) and probably even earlier.

Kelledin
<A HREF="http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/" target="_new">LFS</A>: "You don't eat or sleep or mow the lawn; you just hack your distro all day long."
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 9, 2001 9:10:53 PM

Well Intel Next IA64 chips looks good too around 1ghz and L2 6mb and 400mhz FSB!!!!!


You forget that say 128 bit FSB
November 9, 2001 9:45:48 PM

Rcf, read my thread on epic and itanium, it seems that EPIC has more problems than the very language it was trying to replace, and that it is not so well suited for the future after all.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~
November 9, 2001 9:48:02 PM

Yeah running at 200W and putting off enough heat to warm most of alaska.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~
November 10, 2001 2:32:43 AM

Actually, that's what I was basing my statement of the previous discussions about the Hammer and bandwidth. If I remember correctly, there was a point raised about pairing RDRAM with the Athlon, but then there was raised the issue of the Athlon actually having the architechre (I know, my spelling sucks) to take in all that info that RDRAM could push through. Then, when the possibility of the Hammer having a 400MHz FSB was brought up, again, the idea of pairing it with RDRAM came up, the thinking that with such a large FSB, it must be able to handle copious amounts of data. So, since there is no seeming placement of RDRAM on the next year's roadmap, does that mean that the Hammer isn't going to need those large amounts of bandwidth to function at full potential? Or does it mean that AMD sees no future for RDRAM? Or is there another reason? And, if Raystonn and others in the RDRAM business are to be believed, the latency will decrease as the MHz of the memory is increased. Just like the P4, it seems that RDRAM wasn't really meant for low speeds, and is suffering because of it.

-SammyBoy
November 10, 2001 9:13:23 AM

I'd rather not talk about memory bandwidth..you can go and visit Raystonn's post for that. Remember Hammer will have an integrated on chip memory controller and therefore memory latencies will be drastically reduced even at low clock speeds.
I would like to include this extract from Anandtech...

<font color=blue>AMD could theoretically produce a Hammer with DDR SDRAM support and another with RDRAM support just by changing the DCT, but to end all speculation now, RDRAM would make very little sense on the Hammer. Remember that one of the downsides of RDRAM is increased latency in many situations; one way of hiding this latency is by pairing RDRAM with deeply pipelined CPUs such as the Pentium 4. It's obvious by now that the Hammer isn't as deeply pipelined of a CPU and won't have the clock speed to offset RDRAM latencies as well as the Pentium 4. This also makes AMD's decision to continue to support DDR SDRAM very sensible.</font color=blue>
<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1546&p=6" target="_new">Source</A>

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
November 10, 2001 9:22:30 AM

So what do you think the actual clock speed of the PR 3400 Hammer is ?? The CNET artical says that my simply subtracting 300-400 off the PR value like the Athlon won't reveal the clockspeed, in fact he says the diffrence is greater.
I think the Hammer PR 3400 might be running at around 2.5Ghz.

P.S A PR 3400 Hammer might more likley be equvilant to a P4 3.6GHz if AMD contiune to be modest in thier ratings.

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
November 10, 2001 9:31:23 AM

Even with Jackson SMP P4 might have a hard time with Hammer. Am I right in thinking Jackson offers a 30% increase in performance therefore a Jackson enabled P4 @ 3Ghz will be equivalent to a normal P4 @ 3.3-3.4Ghz ???

With a PR 3400 this would Hammer in the lead if not on par with P4 Jackson @ 3Ghz which is what Intel are planning in 3Q02.

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
November 10, 2001 9:39:12 AM

current PR system in not based on the current P4 core, it is compared to the upcomming P4 core.

<font color=green>
*******
*K.I.S.S*
*(k)eep (I)t (S)imple (S)tupid*
*******
</font color=green>
November 10, 2001 9:50:19 AM

That would still make Hammer on par with P4 Jackson, assuming the PR values aren't modest.

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
November 10, 2001 10:13:25 AM

Pr ratings are NOT compared to the p4, they are comparisions to the TBIRD, amd has said so in the past!

see my thread a bit back now, about pr ratings!

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~
November 10, 2001 11:00:18 AM

i was just thinking (yes i do think from time to time)....
64mm squared die size...
thats 8mm x 8mm...

thats one friggin tiny chip!

they will be able to fit a crapload onto a 200 or 300 mm wafer!


OEMs selling "High End"PCs with integrated video will be forced into Q3tournaments using a TNT2M64!
November 10, 2001 12:36:53 PM

Yes the athlon die is very small, the p4 die is very large(in comparison)

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~
November 10, 2001 1:26:51 PM

I don't think IA64 will ever come to the desktop. IA64 is a failure. During the last decade Intel has been defending its CISC x86 against several other RISC challengers (PPC, Alpha...) with a lot of FUD. When it was time to extend the ISA to 64 bits, Intel had two options. Extend x86 to 64 bits or create a new 64-bit RISC ISA. One was technically challenging and the other was very embarrassing.

Quote from RWT:

"HP came along and offered a third alternative. HP told Intel a great story about how it had cured VLIW of its inherent problems by adding new architectural features, which also preserved its basic simplicity of control logic. This was kind of like getting "all the great taste of OOO execution superscalar performance but without the control logic calories". Since the term VLIW was beginning to have a bad odour associated with it Intel and HP had to come up with a new term to replace it. Thus EPIC was born."

And another one...

"But face it, the native performance of the first two generations of IA64 processors show hardly any performance differentiation over native x6 processors. Intel and HP chose an obscure, niche oriented architecture style - VLIW. The only redeeming quality of VLIW is it allows parallel instruction execution with minimal control logic. But there is no free lunch however and the downside of VLIW is that it performs rather poorly when running code not dominated by processing vector type data within loops. Unsurprisingly, the only success that VLIW has found is in the field of DSPs. The first VLIW machines were mid-range machines for technical computing but VLIW's drawbacks were so severe that it couldn't survive in even this narrow niche."
November 10, 2001 1:34:42 PM

Jackson SMT will only give a maximum of 30% higher performance and only if the application is written for multiprocessing. In most cases Jackson SMT will NOT give any advantage at all.

Then there is also another black cloud called AMD. Amd’s dual core hammer will give a higher performance increase, compared to Jackson SMT, since the AMD approach also doubles the execution units.
November 10, 2001 2:11:47 PM

True..all those 32bit apps will have to be recompiled to take advantage of Jackson.

I think the most important thing to remember is that AMD are bringing 64 bit computing to the DESKTOP and LAPTOP i.e the common user. This is quite an achievement. Whether common users need this is another question.

Sure its 64 bit performance my not be as fast as Itainum but I am sure it is 'reasonable'. This is better than nothing. We will just have to wait till the benchmarks for Hammer vs Itainum come out.

If there is a large difference in 64 bit performance it would mean Hammer will not be suited to the 64 bit server market.

However companies may be willing to a compromise performance if the price of Hammer is considerablly lower, which is probably what will happen.

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
November 10, 2001 2:26:03 PM

Yes PR ratings are based on the T-bird but surely you can use this rating to compare it to a Northwood or is this too simplistic ? Let me explain.

Athlon XP1800 = 2Ghz P4....a P4 NorthWood @ 2Ghz will out perform AXP1800/1900 therefore I assume:

Athlon XP 2000 = 2Ghz Northwood P4

(I know this is based on assumptions. I hope you understand my logic, correct me if I am wrong).


<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
November 10, 2001 2:30:38 PM

What happens if Northwood has Jackson and run SMP apps.

Nice Nvidia and ATi users get a Cookie.... :smile: Yummy :smile:
November 10, 2001 2:33:56 PM

Out of curiosty how big is IA64 ? Are there any websites that have a picture of it and technical specs e.g core voltage etc. ?

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
November 10, 2001 2:39:36 PM

Not only recompiled. Rewritten for multi-threading as well... ;o)
November 10, 2001 2:42:06 PM

Hmmm...now that would be interesting ! I would like to see some benchmarks for that ! However maybe the two technologies are mutually exclusive either you have SMP optimised or Jackson optimised not both. Anyone confirm this ?

That would really push the P4/Xeon Jackson...most likely it would overheat. Sorry I meant cause the system to shut down (forgot about P4's amazing throttling capability).

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
November 10, 2001 2:46:01 PM

Quote:
forgot about P4's amazing throttling capability

That only works if the CPU fan stop or you take your heatsink off. Well lets not go into the Athlon XP issue with it so stop going into this flaming crap.

Nice Nvidia and ATi users get a Cookie.... :smile: Yummy :smile:
November 10, 2001 2:48:41 PM

..."flaming crap". Hee Hee :)  excuse the pun.

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
November 10, 2001 2:50:20 PM

hehe

Nice Nvidia and ATi users get a Cookie.... :smile: Yummy :smile:
November 10, 2001 2:56:26 PM

The same code will run for SMT & SMP just as it does for Dual CPU's today.

/* The more you know, the more you realize how little you know */
November 10, 2001 7:21:04 PM

What if teh Hammer's PR rating is based on the latest Athlon then. Imagine if the Thoroughbred is based on Pally for PR, and is 33% faster, and then the Hammer. Cool. Of course I'm probably wrong, and just looking for something to drool over:) 

If it's working...overclock it!
November 11, 2001 12:55:14 AM

Nope, its still based of the T-Bird. Not bad for a 3400mhz Tbird. Well if it come at 2ghz not bad would you stay.

Nice Nvidia and ATi users get a Cookie.... :smile: Yummy :smile:
November 11, 2001 8:57:16 AM

Seems like AMD are going to agressively increase performance with the Hammer. Do you think AMD will do a straight jump from 3400 to 4000 or produce smaller increments like 3500..3600.
Either way with a 4400 in 2H/03 it looks like Hammer has a lot of potential performance wise. If AMD keep with this schedule and PR rating it would mean Intel will have to increase the clock rate of the P4 by 1.5Ghz a year just to keep up.

<font color=blue>The Hammer 3400 will be followed by the Hammer 4000 during the first half of 2003 and the 4400 in the latter part the year, when the Hammer family is shrunk using as 0.09 micron (though some AMD documentation says "0.10 micron") production process. Hammer will debut at 0.13 micron.
</font color=blue>

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
!