Last message on previous page:
What an argument. All reasoning. No facts. No certainty.

I can infer a lot of things from what I didn't learn from not reading to.

Uh.. the "right?"s were indications that those were questions to you. 8O

First "right" = Has anyone from AMD officially confirmed bulldozer plans?

Second "right" = Well, not much meaning here, just argument.

Third "right" = You seem to be an expert on bulldozer. It was a question to you: Isn't it just a mobile architecture?

And another thing: Your link that says K8L is for mid-2007 is a news report, quoting someone from Technology Analyst Day. Dated June 1.

My link was to an interview with the top person at AMD. Dated June 5.

And, Ruiz talked about "the architecture we're going to introduce next".

I am not saying I am absolutely sure K8L will come only in 2008. I hope it comes earlier.

Yes, I arrived at similar numbers, roughly.
If this image from www.chip-architect.com is any worth, the relative sizes would appear like this:



(See my previous post, on this matter).
Even with halved L2 cache per core (despite a higher logic area) and a [supposed] shrink node and the added on-die 2MB L3, this seems quite a small die for a quad-core (compared to a 65nm, dual-core 4MB L2 Conroe/Woodcrest).

I agree on your yield/defect remark, although the increase in logic area between the two node cores would amount to roughly 17% (significant, still), although such a [supposed] small area would also be less prone to external origin causes, like cosmic-rays, for instance.

Still, I wouldn't wonder away from a speculative mockup or CAD simulation preview. My opinion.


Cheers!

Try not to get too emotionally attached to AMD. I realize you are only 20, but have no doubt read about how AMD has been a dissapointment to investors for many years.

Try to keep an open mind about intels future prospects and who knows, you could end up making a ton on intel on the long side as well.

Keeping an open mind about any person, place or thing is good advice - even Intel! I may take that advice and buy another Antec PS some day. Like after Alzheimers kicks in and I can't remember that the POS cooked my mobo and barbequed my CPU.

Zzzz...

What were we talking about?

I'd like to counterpoint this post... This is why I don't think things are looking to rosy for AMD, and that Intel is actually a good investment right now. And I felt I wanted to touch on some previous comments that were made.

To reiterate, at least some motherboard manufacturers are already unhappy about the lack of the supply of AM2s. Secondly AMD themselves stated the 65nm Brisbane processors would be in short supply until somewhere around the first half of '07. This info is from Dailytech's own articles on Brisbane and Computex.

AMD's own "4x4" response to Conroe was a spur of the moment thing to steal back some publicity, and what was funny was none of the mainboard manufacturers had any prior knowledge of "4x4" before AMD's announcement of it. This is why I think Brisbane itself is the surprise hinted at the end in the Anandtech article. Specifically, I believe (And it's confirmed) AMD simply pushed up the dates on it.

Furthermore, I would expect AMD to have working 65nm engineering samples floating around... as Intel already has working samples of quad-core Kentsfields distributed to those motherboard manufacturers, who themselves stated they have Kentsfield samples already up and running in 965/975 chipset motherboards.

As for Brisbane: I am sure AMD knows they cannot simply ramp up the clock speed to match "Core"s performance, because once they do, Intel can reciprocate and AMD will be back to square 1, while Intel gets more publicity out of it for how powerful their new uArch is. Intel deciding to hold back on the 3.2ghz EE processor seems to support this theory, when considering that B0 stepping Core's can reach 3.8ghz on either stock voltage OR air cooling.

More evidence for my point of view is from Anandtech's recent technical article on server processors http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2772, which I quoted a snippet from the concluding page below:

Anand frequently made extrapolations throughout the article about how well a ramped up Opteron would perform to the 3ghz Woodcrest, and it was not pretty. If I followed that correctly, exchanging the higher latency FB-DIMMS for DDR2 DIMMs should only help the performance numbers with Core 2 Duo.



So, when does the K8L arrive that they mention? Well, which flavor of K8L... dual-core or quad-core?

I got tired of hunting articles for mentions to dates, so I used articles dated from May/June to compile this chart from, also all from Dailytech with the exception of a Dec '05 dated Intel Roadmap update on THG. Any suggested updates, fixes to errors, or things to add to this chart are welcome, or if you know of a better one somewhere else that's fine too, just give me a linky please! Links to support this data will be given upon request (Assuming I can find them again!). AMD shoving half of their long-term plans forward half a year for some preventive damage control didn't help though.





Also, I found an old article on THG that I can't quite believe, can anyone corroborate this?

If Intel really is still planning to ramp to 45nm while AMD is just finishing their 65nm ramp in '07, it isn't going to be pretty... It already appears that Intel will be touting 8-core chips when AMD releases their quad-core designs and much looked forward to quad-K8L...

Okay, since I got into processors I guess I have to throw this one in too. One thing I (amazingly) have not mentioned in this huge post is Intel's Nehalem, which I had never previously heard about until I became attracted like a moth towards a 300watt light bulb to the stickied Conroe information thread. The only legitimate article I found on Nahelem is http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,105951,00.asp. In this article they also go on to mention

so it would seem to be Nehalem has already come and gone under a different name.

To use a less than reliable source: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=31316

So there is no Nehalem, at least outside of some kind of process technology, not a CPU uArch/design....

Edited to add in the sources to the first two quotes that I should have done in the first place and a typo or three.


Wow, so that's what not having a life is like. Wow.

Wow, so thats what pointless posts look like, wow. STFU.

It's been said that ZRAM would have to be at least 8MB in size for the performance to offset the latency penalty. I wonder if AMD could ever manufacture something similar to Xenos's "smart cache" linked up with the HTT bus? They stated that K8L will be a modular design and all the HTT links would surely make the technology viable. What do you think Jack?

Who said ZRam Has latency issues? I heard it was as fast as SRAm but half the size.

Second that.

Ummmm, aren't you extinct? I was just amazed that he wrote all of that considering that I doubt Intel is paying him anything. Most of you just sound like butt boys of Otellini. I like both companies but AMD was ALWAYS more affordable and JUST AS FAST. In some cases faster.

You're just mad cause you can't play that "OWNED" crap with me.

It's been said that ZRAM would have to be at least 8MB in size for the performance to offset the latency penalty. I wonder if AMD could ever manufacture something similar to Xenos's "smart cache" linked up with the HTT bus? They stated that K8L will be a modular design and all the HTT links would surely make the technology viable. What do you think Jack?

Who said ZRam Has latency issues? I heard it was as fast as SRAm but half the size.


And before the p-nut gallery speaks here's a link.
Non-Missing Link

They won't for much longer.

Sure fanboy.

Man that was funny seeing you get owned on anandtech.

Word.