Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

ClawHammer: Everything Goes As Scheduled

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 13, 2002 5:48:38 AM

<A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/story.html?id=1013575024" target="_new">LINK</A>

well all indections so far are good.
it seems we'll have a ClawHammer around years end
first samples already out to "close partners"
thats good...

I think we might see a litle Hammer Show-Down at CeBIT
thats good - as I have some AMD stocks (:
I bet they will fly!

I'm excited!



This post is best viewed with common sense enabled<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by iib on 02/13/02 09:53 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

More about : clawhammer scheduled

February 13, 2002 6:29:28 AM

"...that mass Hammer processors will be provided with an HIS metal lid improving the heat dissipation from the processor die and protecting it against mechanical damages."

Interesting quote from xbits. Older AMD CPUs were accused of having brittle cores. I just hope to God some mobo manufacturer implements use of the thermal diode. That diode has been there since Athlon, but the mobo folks havnt installed any way to use it.

Benchmarks are like sex, everybody loves doing it, everybody thinks they are good at it.
February 13, 2002 8:23:25 AM

I know the ASUS KT333 Mobo and the A7M266-D already use the thermal diode...

This post is best viewed with common sense enabled
Related resources
February 13, 2002 8:45:53 AM

No kidding, color me shocked. I thought everyone was still using the dumb temp. probe on the bottom of the socket. I will look into that, thanks for the correction

Benchmarks are like sex, everybody loves doing it, everybody thinks they are good at it.
February 13, 2002 11:03:12 AM

Does my Epox 8KHA+'s temp warning and auto-shut off at certain temp count?

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
February 13, 2002 2:33:15 PM

The other interesting quote from it is that the ClawHammer will be 30% faster than the equivolently clocked AthlonXP. So, following that idea, and if the PR ratings are based off the equivolently clocked XP, as opposed to T-Bird, a 3400+ Claw will be clocked at 2.333, or there abouts. Now, this is just based on simple math (and not politician math). Assuming, that since it has PC2700 support, the FSB will be 166 (333DDR), the multi will be 14. If all this speculation is true, the Claw will, in all areas, destroy a P4 NW. Granted, a 30% increase across the board would be spectacular, but a 15% across would be great, and make the clock for clock difference a non-factor. God, I love competition. If everything pans out, it looks like the Claw will be the CPU of choice when it's time for my next upgrade.

-SammyBoy
February 13, 2002 2:52:09 PM

nah, that uses a mobo sensor (I got a 8KHA+ as well) rather than the diode

---If at first you dont succeed... get a bigger hammer... that'll teach it !!!---
February 13, 2002 7:08:50 PM

So where's the diff?
Aren't I somewhat "protected" from any disasters like Intel's way but that it shuts off? And does it work if the fan does fail?

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
February 13, 2002 7:20:30 PM

the thermal diode is far more aqurite
the sensor could be 10c +/- wrong...

This post is best viewed with common sense enabled
February 13, 2002 7:36:09 PM

So where should I set the auto-shut off temp at?
70ish? I dunno what is the temp that an AXP handles before it goes in smoke...


--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
February 13, 2002 7:41:14 PM

It can do 90C for about a minute before it smokes...

id say 70ish is about right...


This post is best viewed with common sense enabled
February 14, 2002 12:37:34 AM

K thanks!
I think I will put that as enabled option, you can never be too careful! At least I'll prove to my pro-Intel stubborn friends AMDs won't fry when overheated or without fan.
BTW we're talking degrees Celsius huh!

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
February 14, 2002 4:57:42 AM

Quote:
"...that mass Hammer processors will be provided with an HIS metal lid improving the heat dissipation from the processor die and protecting it against mechanical damages."

Does that mean that the Hammer will have the same kind of metal heat spreader that the Pentium 4 does? Or is this new "HIS metal lid" look different and perform different funcitons?

The holder of <i>this</i> pass is <b>exempt</b> from all forms of <font color=red>flaming</font color=red>.
February 14, 2002 5:07:37 AM

Antipop. Some others have posted it is similar to what Intel put on theirs. Im sure there will be some minor differences. But at least the "brittle core" crowd will stfu. Hopefully with SOI and the lid, supposed thermal issues wont exist any longer.

Benchmarks are like sex, everybody loves doing it, everybody thinks they are good at it.
February 14, 2002 5:36:33 AM

I am hoping that the combo of .13 micron, SOI, and now some type of head spreader will allow AMD to deliver on its promising that water cooling will be a thing of the past even for the power user. Sounds really <b><i>cool</b>/</i>. hehe, get it?

The holder of <i>this</i> pass is <b>exempt</b> from all forms of <font color=red>flaming</font color=red>.
February 14, 2002 5:48:27 PM

It's supposed to be IHS, not HIS. Integrated Heat Spreader. Just a typo, apparently. This is the same as on the P4.

SOI won't show up until Barton, I believe.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
February 14, 2002 6:14:50 PM

SOI will be on Hammer chips from the outset, but Barton will be the first Athlon family chip with SOI.

Mark-

When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
February 14, 2002 7:50:29 PM

Does SOI give performance boost or better heat spreading?
What performance jump can we expect?

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
February 14, 2002 8:46:09 PM

I thought SOI simply reduced the amount of heat produced and lowers the voltage required for the chip to run. SOI does not directly improve performace however it does allow the potential of higher clocked chips to be produced due to the reduced heat output.

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
February 14, 2002 10:08:59 PM

SOI allows trasistors to switch faster. Higher clock speeds and lower voltages are a benefit of this.

"Ignorance is bliss, but I tend to get screwed over."
February 14, 2002 11:48:23 PM

Yet another powerful tool AMD will need so that pipeline overincrease won't be necessary. This proves again that Intel did not put enough research on their P4, in order to make high speeds with high performance and instead chose a dumb low IPC high MHZ route. Hammer will be nothing but the best CPU jump ever yet. I can imagine clock per clock comparisons, CPU twice above! And then imagine Duron-Hammers! My god I will laugh if the Duron Hammer spanks the NW. It would be so ridiculous of a value product...
Although I am hoping they would integrate the Thermal Protection like Intel, just so shut those little cowards out there...

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
February 15, 2002 6:11:57 AM

Kinda Funney how a "badly engineered CPU" is the preformance king right now... ha eden?

The Hammer Will be Good very Good.
but stop saying P4 is badky engineerd...

when you will face that:

High IPC low Clockspeed
&
High ClockSpeed low IPC

are just as good if they blance out
and right now - the P4 is the fastest...
so if you say P4 is badly engineerd accept Athlon is badly enginnerd aswell..

now I love AMD (as stated before) but i can overlook that.

This post is best viewed with common sense enabled
February 15, 2002 10:46:27 AM

Not the same thing actually, it seems that even pushing to 0.13 for Intel, and going on pushins MHZ, the AXP still is able to compete. The Willy was the worst competitor for the Athlons, no doubt about it, but even at 2GHZ, the Tbird was still competing, then the XP 1.4GHZ is winning! Fact is, it is not as well engineered, because even reaching high speeds will not compensate a low FPU. So they may run at 2.5GHZ but the FPU apps will still be running faster on AXPs.
And besides if Tbred does reach high speeds, we can overlook the "badly" engineered Athlon huh? Tbred+Hammer: Reclaiming the "High speeds=High Performance", which we do want, because we're right now stuck with processors at low speeds just barely itching to get to higher ones by 66MHZ! But you have to admit that from the TB 1.4, to the Xp 1.66GHZ, there's 266MHZ but a damn big one!! From a 1.4GHZ P4 to 1.7GHZ, there's nary a thing to be impressed about.

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
February 15, 2002 11:18:58 AM

Quote:

Not the same thing actually, it seems that even pushing to 0.13 for Intel, and going on pushins MHZ, the AXP still is able to compete.

of course its able to compete - are you excpecting not to compete? yeah... it CAN COMPETE did I said other-wise but as you put it : the Athlon XP is ONLY able to compete with a so called "badly engineerd CPU" without even get a lead at preformance... I guess BY YOUR STANDARD IT MUST BE ALSO "BADLY ENGINEERED".
Quote:

The Willy was the worst competitor for the Athlons, no doubt about it, but even at 2GHZ, the Tbird was still competing,

YEAH! MY POINT EXACTLY - WHY YOU SEEM TO THINK IT SHOULDNT COMPETE AT "ONLY" 1.4GHZ FOR T-BIRD TO GET "ONLY" 1.4GHZ TOOK ALOT! IT WAS <b>ALL</b> TBIRD CAN DO - AND IT WAS HOT AS HELL! ITS NOT LIKE IT CAN JUMP OVER 1.4GHZ!
IT TOOK A MUCH DELAYED TOTALY NEW CORE FOR TBRID TO SURPESS 1.4GHZ IT TOOK ALMOST A HOLE DAMN YEAR FOR ATHLON TO JUMP FROM 1.4GHZ to 1.667GHZ! in which time intel was able to ramp up production and intreduce a 2.2GHz northwood - still competeing with AMD - and even leading.

am I the only one who see that your still thinking in terms of MHz without taking into acount that P4 does scale better - hence Athlon SHOULD COMPETE at much lower clock-speesds...

am I the only one who sees this?



This post is best viewed with common sense enabled
February 15, 2002 2:40:33 PM

Damn, I hate it when my caps lock gets stuck like that.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
February 15, 2002 2:45:23 PM

IIB let's take a few things into consideration

1) Athlon has been out for over 2 years. In that time it has tripled clock speed with no die shrinks.

2) Willamette, otoh, increased clockspeed from 1.7ghz to 2ghz and started choking (this on a low IPC large piipeline CPU.

With the .13 shrink P4 has finally started to show some real legs. But note it took a die shrink to do it. AND, even with the .13 shrink, P4 is barely able to outperform Athlon (still at .18)

So, while I see your point, I can also see Eden's point. The bottom line being that you don't need to *slam* the competition to make your preferred product look good. Focus on the positives of your platform/product of choice instead.

Whether T-bred once again regains the performance crown is a matter of speculation ONLY until such time as we see real world benchmarks/previews. So, while it's fun to consider the possibilities, people really don't need to slam the competition while speculating.

Just my....cents.

Mark-

When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
February 15, 2002 4:00:52 PM

Sorry about that...
Im an AMD fan it really hurts to argue with my own kind (-:

sorry about the caps - shouldnt have done it.
sorry



This post is best viewed with common sense enabled
February 15, 2002 4:06:21 PM

the athlon did go through a die shrink - 0.25->0.18

and there is one other point - the P4 was desined to scale better at 0.13 and 0.09 micron... so thats another edge it has.

though Hopfuly AMDs "Intel-Killer 3400+" (now officly my name for ClawHammer) would deal with that.


This post is best viewed with common sense enabled
February 15, 2002 4:40:34 PM

1) Say what? Slot (Classic) Athlon started at...can't remember. Tbird started at...750? So that's not quite double.

2) You mean it went from 1.3 to 2.0, with people overclocking it to 3GHz or so. When did it start choking?

Also, remember that the Northwood is at the very beginning of the die shrink. Not really fair to say the die shrink didn't help much, since that doesn't improve performance in and of itself.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
February 15, 2002 6:24:33 PM

I just got one question (reworded three diffrent ways):

What will happen to the Duron when Hammer is released ?

Are AMD going to ditch the Duron in 2003 ?

Has AMD got enough capacity to produce three lines of procesor ? (i.e Duron, Athlon XP and Hammer)

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
February 15, 2002 8:31:10 PM

Dang, I almost hate to post anymore…so many disagreeable posts and posters anymore, ya know…?
And even now I only lurk occasionally. But I have to ask…, since you wrote,

"1.4GHZ...WAS ALL TBIRD CAN DO-AND IT WAS HOT AS HELL!"

I was wondering if you consider 45C (absolute max load condition) hot as hell?

Of course, that's with a Copper HSF @ 4600RPM. We both know 65-70w of thermal
heat would make it toast in 3 sec without a HSF. But that's not what you meant, right?

However:
I've built about 6 socket athlons now and used the same HSF types and noticed that,
each piece of silicon does seem to have it's own characteristics and heat signatures.
So I suppose your 1400 could be much hotter than mine, especially if you got to 1400
by overclocking.

I'm just curious what other ppl are getting as far as temps and what they consider, "HOT AS HELL".
February 15, 2002 9:51:59 PM

heres a little link to shut eden up, he keeps posting about how bad intel is and how great AMD is and it seems to me he tries to start flame wars, anyways, heres a taste of the badly engineered P4 architecture straight from anandtech
http://anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1172&p=2

"One of the biggest features of the Willamette is its ability to run the Integer ALU (Arithmetic Logic Unit) at twice the clock speed of the CPU. This means that on a 1.5GHz Willamette, the Integer ALU is actually running at 3.0GHz. For games this won’t increase performance by a large amount due to their largely floating point oriented performance dependency however in business applications and other applications that are primarily integer performance dependent the Willamette will truly excel."

the architecture is far from being a failure, it will scale really good in the future, plus u can bet intel will optimise the architecture as time goes on

btw, i know thats an old link, but im just using it to make a point
February 15, 2002 10:22:09 PM

I would imagine Duron will die out shortly after Clawhammer is determined to be a success (assuming it is, of course). Athlon will follow a little later.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
February 15, 2002 10:57:59 PM

Um man, don't you see it?
Even with such impressive ALU, the entire architecture is bogging down the real stuff!
Look at SSE2, apps that optimize for it are still run better on AXP. Man it's great to create a new technology, but why take off the supporters! Like the prediction engine, if it predicts so much and fails, the long pipeline gives you a long delay!
The short L1 cache which has a powerful technology, is also bogged down, I mean who uses 8K L1 only anyway!
There was a site that described all the faults, and that is purely Intel's fault for making a potentially powerful CPU go down the drain because of the market's demands...
Oh and by the way don't you ever come up assuming I bash Intel. I'll have you know I have been using their products since a long time ago and their P2 is IMO the best CPU ever. It still does sometimes stuff faster than my AXP does! I was hoping a lot from Intel, but they were driven by the market and their greed and made a lot disappointed, not to mention the Rambus deal.

IIB I agree with you on that the P4 needed the 0.13 or 0.09, because that's when they would be able to implement the missing components....at least I HOPE!!! If they switch to more micron purely for speed purposes, I swear I am gonna ditch them off my processor list. They are given the opportunity to create a powerhouse, but they refuse to exploit the technology their labs research. If that's how it goes, 10GHZ won't be so amazing...


--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
February 16, 2002 3:02:19 AM

1) Say what? Slot (Classic) Athlon started at...can't remember. Tbird started at...750? So that's not quite double.

Thanks for the elaboration of my point there. 500 mhz or thereabouts for early Athlons to the current 1.67ghz AXP's with significantly improved IPC over there earlier Athlons is a nice boost indeed...more than triple.


2) You mean it went from 1.3 to 2.0, with people overclocking it to 3GHz or so. When did it start choking?

I didn't read much about Willamette overclocking much beyond 2ghz. I hear about Northwood overclocking to 2.8 or 3ghz though. Still, overclocking aside, P4 has increased clockspeed by 80% in it's lifetime of 14-16 months. Athlon has increased it's clockspeed by 200% in it's 30 months? life. It's all relative.

Mark-

When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
February 16, 2002 3:05:21 AM

Yes, I agree Eden on the ALU point. What in theory should have given a MASSIVE increase in performance failed in practice. I suspect that, as folks have noticed with Northwood, P4 is finally starting to come into its own. Time will tell whether it will manage to improve enough to remain competitive against Thoroughbred now, and Hammer in 9-12 months.

Mark-

When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
February 16, 2002 11:55:27 AM

Quote:
1) Athlon has been out for over 2 years. In that time it has tripled clock speed with no die shrinks.


The origional core was .25

The tbird was .18 IIRC.


Die shrink!

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
February 16, 2002 11:57:25 AM

Quote:
"One of the biggest features of the Willamette is its ability to run the Integer ALU (Arithmetic Logic Unit) at twice the clock speed of the CPU. This means that on a 1.5GHz Willamette, the Integer ALU is actually running at 3.0GHz. For games this won’t increase performance by a large amount due to their largely floating point oriented performance dependency however in business applications and other applications that are primarily integer performance dependent the Willamette will truly excel."



Arent buisness apps where amd excels lol?



"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
February 16, 2002 12:32:46 PM

Someone else also corrected my error. Interestingly enough the fact Athlon underwent 1 die shrink already bodes well. Pre T-Bird hardly exceeded 1ghz if that. T-Bird added nearly 50% onto that and XP is adding another 25-30% onto that. Perhaps T-Bred will add another 20-30% onto that yet again. Of course, that's all just speculation. P4 seems to be tracking similarly with Northwood able to comfortably add on 50% more performance over Willamette.

Mark-

When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
February 16, 2002 12:39:55 PM

Indeed the P4's ALU has been, in the past, crippled by it's limited cache, but the extra L2 has improved ALU performance.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
February 16, 2002 2:01:17 PM

Whatever % the willamette gained from the shift to .13 micron, will be the same % gained for the tbred.(clockspeed not performance mind you).

It is the same gain from the shift. The number of stages has nothing to do with it, because that is already a factor, a size shift is a simple refinement of the process.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
February 16, 2002 2:28:37 PM

na...
Diffrente processors gain Scaling diffrently (in %) on the processs shrink. that I know. but it dosent have to do with the number of stages directly... it does have to do with thier circetry design and distrebution along the processor and its stages...

This post is best viewed with common sense enabled
February 16, 2002 2:33:42 PM

Umm, no they dont.

The scalability gained from a process shift is the same regardless of the core type. The % clockspeed gain will be the same due simply to the faster transistors and smaller feature size.

THe design of the core, while impacting total mhz/performance, will not have an effect on the gain from process shrinks.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
February 16, 2002 2:38:33 PM

oops, i forget this <i>little</i> thing :) 


if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.
February 16, 2002 2:40:14 PM

I dont think so

are you sure???

This post is best viewed with common sense enabled
February 16, 2002 2:41:51 PM

oops, ALU performances increase for Business apps ? ...


if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.
February 16, 2002 2:44:43 PM

Yes, if you have 2 chips at .18 micron.

(assuming the quality of the .18 micron processes are the same((copper etc etc))

And chip A: Tops out at 1.5ghz
While chip B Tops out at 3Ghz.

If you Drop them both to .13(again same process) and chip B Now tops out at 6ghz
Chip A WILL top out at 3Ghz.


Obviously chip B has a longer pipeline, allowing for higher clock speeds, but the process shrink is a physical thing, changing both chips structure the same.




"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
February 16, 2002 2:51:39 PM

Business Apps don't care about ALU, SSE & SSE2 :) 

they just use <i>basic</i> instructions & <i>basic</i> processes.

maybe this explains why AMD is better than Intel in Winstone.

if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.
February 16, 2002 2:53:50 PM

Business apps use integers significantly and therefore they do "care" about the ALU!

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
February 16, 2002 2:53:56 PM

you don't use it if you don't need it ... :) 


if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.
!