AMD's 'Shanghai' CPU Enters Production
The last year has not been kind to AMD. Its 65nm Barcelona processors arrived several months late, and were already obsolete in many ways when compared to the Intel offerings at the time. To make matters worse, the Barcelona chips were also buggy, making the tardy offering even less desirable to consumers and PC manufacturers. All of this built up to AMD’s $1.2 Billion loss in Q2 of 2008, the same quarter Intel saw record-breaking gains.
Now, in an effort to right itself in the CPU market, AMD has begun manufacturing its next generation of processors. Shanghai, a 45nm quad core processor, will be available by the end of 2008, beating original expectations. As per its usual strategy, Shanghai will be available in server processors first, followed shortly by desktop varieties.
In order to gain ground on Intel in performance, these new Shanghai based chips will have three times more cache (6MB total) than previous processors, as well as the third iteration of HyperTransport. AMD claims these additions will boost performance by as much as 20 percent while lowering power consumption. Following the release of the Shanghai processors, the 45nm Deneb desktops processors will hit store shelves in early 2009, followed by Istanbul server processors (six-cores) later in the year.
This could be the boost AMD needs to stay competitive with the house that Moore built, but how will these new offerings compare to the six-core Xeon processors already shipping from Intel as well as the Core i7 chips expected later this year? Only time will tell.
Check out AMD’s full plan for most of 2009 right here in an earlier report.
AMD can not compete in performance with intel...probably they will have to compete in price. Here is why
1. Nehalem has 8MB L3 cache (25%) If AMD claims more cache will give shanghai more performance, intel is ahead of them.
2. Nehalem will have multithreading (8 logical cores) with automatic turbo mode (overclocking).
3. Intel's 45 nm process is based on metal gates. Extremely power efficient and extremely fast. AMD's 45nm is just a shrink of 65nm old technology.
I've heard the 20% performance increase over claim 1,000 times before from all cpu manufacturers.
However even a 10% boost in practical multithreaded server applications would be astounding and welcomed
The important thing you forgot to mention while comparing Intel's cache and AMD's cpu cache is that AMD's chips even since the Athlon line were optimized to run well (and sickeningly fast) with very little cache. Comparing an Intel chip with gobs of L2 cache to an AMD chip with the same amount of cache wont do anything, its how efficiently the cpu's use the cache that matters. Intel using throwing gobs of memory onto its Netburst line was a crutch and temporary fix which seems to have stuck around. AMD's got its own problems too.
Provide a link showing that these CPU's are using metal gates please.
Aaaah an anomoly in the time stream! The recent estimate of Q1 2009 has switched places with the original estimate in place of Q2 2008.
It appears that AMD has played us all for fools, making us think they're falling behind, when they actually built a time machine and are using it against us. We have to stop them before they go too far, for such anomolies could create a time paradox, the results of which could start a chain reaction that would unravel the very fabric of the space time continuum, and destroy the entire universe! Granted, that's a worst case scenario. The destruction might in fact be very localized, limited to our own galaxy.
I wonder if people are confusing this perceived "pull-in" with the Q1'09 DESKTOP schedule.... these are server chips. Desktop is still Q1'09.
So Tom's, and specifically Devin, when you say "beating expectations" you really should provide a link where it shows 2009 was the expectation for Shanghai. Since apparently you are too lazy for this... let me provide you some recent roadmaps which show.... Q4'08 (or even earlier) as the plan! (stunning!)
From May08:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080507-aray-of-sunshine-amd-talks-shanghai-performance-roadmap.html
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-10054038-64.html
http://www.eetasia.com/ART_8800521709_499495_NP_493b9bc3.HTM
From Jul07 (which actually had 45nm even earlier then end'08)
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3050&p=2
http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/07/amd_promises_ag.html
From Aug08:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20080818171952_AMD_to_Start_Shipping_Shanghai_Processors_in_Q4.html
Can we stop the cheerleading? If you are going to make claims like ahead of schedule - you should provide the schedule it was (theoretically) ahead of.
Apparently onearmedscissorb is the only person who isn't easily duped.
And when they meet the roadmap, it beats the expectations, lol.
Anyway, it's a good news, despite financial problems, if they make it on time, thumbs up!
I wonder how the problems in US's economy could affect sales. I guess AMD's lower pricing could win more customers, in that environment.
:raise arms and makes angry face:
ABOUT FUCKING TIME AMD
Ahem... uhhh.. .how do I say this... ok ok ok GOBS GOBS WTF GOBS of L2 !! thats what u thuink Intel has.. AND if IF AMD is ""Better"" optimized them why wouldnt AMD stomp Intel with an FX chip once every 2 years with "GOBS" of L2!!LOL yea right.. I love AMD but they cant touch C2D "efficiently" with its GOBS AND GOBS of L2!! you kill me kid/..
Ahem... uhhh.. .how do I say this... ok ok ok GOBS GOBS WTF GOBS of L2 !! thats what u thuink Intel has.. AND if IF AMD is ""Better"" optimized them why wouldnt AMD stomp Intel with an FX chip once every 2 years with "GOBS" of L2!!LOL yea right.. I love AMD but they cant touch C2D "efficiently" with its GOBS AND GOBS of L2!! you kill me kid/..
I'll bet that almost everyone reading this article is using a program that can use as many cores as your throw at it. Its called Microsoft Windows.
Lets also not forget that HT isnt adding a core ffs. HT trys to do what ddr does and use both sides of the clock cycle. It trys to use the refresh cycle of the cpu to process a small bit of information it isnt a logical core otherwise it would be a 8 core not a 4 core. Not to mention of course HT didnt really do a whole hell of alot before i doubt it will be different now.
To a point however more cores will release the system from lagging programs running. Games might not use 4 cores unless they are multi threaded but windows and load balance pretty well
If amd doesnt do something on thier next release that makes me wana buy a new AMD i might go back to using intel which i switched from back in the K6-2 - 300 days when buying a cpu and mobo from amd was $80 and a p-2 was $400 for just a cpu. Sorry AMD but get your chips inline or you lost another customer