Wednesday, January 24th 2007

Details on AMD’s Barcelona

Although AMD’s next generation of server processing hasn’t been a complete secret, here are some of the latest details about it. Codenamed “Barcelona”, the processor is likely to go head-to-head with Intel’s Xeon 5300, both being quad-core processors. However, one key feature of the Barcelona core is that (unlike the 5300) it will natively be a quad-core CPU, not two dual-cores built into one unit. The chip will continue the advance into 64-bit computing, and like the rest of AMD’s 64-bit processors it has a memory controller build into it, another difference between this and the Xeon 5300. Despite much higher performance than older models, the processor will still only use 95 watts or 68 watts of power depending on the different designs, which apparently gives a 60% performance increase per-watt over the older generation Opterons. It can also support up to 256TB of memory, now that the memory controller supports full 48-bit addressing. AMD’s benchmarks suggest that it performs much better than the Xeon 5300 due to fewer bottlenecks, but this could obviously be biased against Intel.Source: internetnews.com
Add your own comment

24 Comments on Details on AMD’s Barcelona

#2
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
Interesting, but something tells me Intel won't just sit back on their hands.
Posted on Reply
#3
bruins004
Whens the Barcelona and K8Ls due out?
Posted on Reply
#4
bornfree
Intel's internal BUS restriction won't allow them to compete on the four plus multi-core front until mid '08 or later when they try to implement an on-die memory controller design similar to what AMD has been using for years.

Barcelona is scheduled for Q2 around june.
Posted on Reply
#5
EviLZeD
pretty good for amd but intel would probably come out with something
Posted on Reply
#6
bruins004
by: EviLZeD
pretty good for amd but intel would probably come out with something
I know Intel is going to have nice price drops on their C2D lines by Q2 and they are releasing new C2Ds that use 1333 FSB speeds.
Posted on Reply
#7
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: bornfree
Intel's internal BUS restriction won't allow them to compete on the four plus multi-core front until mid '08 or later when they try to implement an on-die memory controller design similar to what AMD has been using for years.

Barcelona is scheduled for Q2 around june.
I guess you just missed their 8 core server systems that have been running for some time now...The limitations of their FSB system have yet to be reached with 8 cores, so I don't see it being a problem for some time.
Posted on Reply
#8
randomperson21
interesting............ i'd like to see some benchies. maybe amd can gain some lead on intel finally.

but as others have already stated, intel isn't just gonna sit there.
Posted on Reply
#9
bornfree
Well I'll let the benches prove what limitations Intel has. Then people can reach their own conclusions.
Posted on Reply
#10
OneCool
by: randomperson21


but as others have already stated, intel isn't just gonna sit there.
Intel sat on their ass for almost 3 years while the AMD 64 owned them :rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
#11
PVTCaboose1337
Graphical Hacker
FTW! AMD, has really not been that far behind have they?
Posted on Reply
#12
Zubasa
I think Intel is ready to take their "Core 2 Duo D" up their ass.
Posted on Reply
#13
pt
not a suicide-bomber
i just wan't to see the c2d put their tails between the legs and run :nutkick:
Posted on Reply
#14
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
So this is the server processor (like opterons) then. Id like to see a good answer to the C2D front. I assume its gonna be a beautiful thing that will allow them to perhaps, perhaps!, take the performance crown back.


P.S. Didnt AMD already have a codenamed proc called "Barcelona"?
Posted on Reply
#15
pt
not a suicide-bomber
by: WarEagleAU

P.S. Didnt AMD already have a codenamed proc called "Barcelona"?
nop, it's this one i'm hoping the lisbon (if it ever exists) one, will be the one that will kick the connies for good :nutkick:
Posted on Reply
#16
largon
QC K8L will be e x p e n s i v e.

The die (~290mm^2) should be about a quarter larger than Windsor Rev.F and almost 1.5 times the size of Toledo Rev.E DCs. Unfortunately the manufacturing cost will be more than just a quarter higher compared to Rev.F DCs...

Time say good bye to cheap AMD chips.

It maybe expen$ive, but it sure is pretty:
Posted on Reply
#17
largon
Based on this picture of a K8L on LGA1207 the physical dimensions of the die are about 173.1mm x 172.9mm yielding a area of 299.3 square millimeters.

That's 2.4x fold the area of a 65nm Brisbane DC.
Posted on Reply
#18
pt
not a suicide-bomber
by: largon
QC K8L will be e x p e n s i v e.

The die (~290mm^2) should be about a quarter larger than Windsor Rev.F and almost 1.5 times the size of Toledo Rev.E DCs. Unfortunately the manufacturing cost will be more than just a quarter higher compared to Rev.F DCs...

Time say good bye to cheap AMD chips.

It maybe expen$ive, but it sure is pretty:
it is pretty
and i want one :D
Posted on Reply
#19
Dippyskoodlez
by: newtekie1
I guess you just missed their 8 core server systems that have been running for some time now...The limitations of their FSB system have yet to be reached with 8 cores, so I don't see it being a problem for some time.
This is not necessarily true...

HTT provides the I/O necessary to scale much more effectivly.

Perhaps a dual quad core Xeon will be very very competative, but when it comes to actual individual CPU's, the xeon is toast at this point in time.

Core != CPU count.

This is a very blurry line these days.. and everyone has to be careful in statements :o
Posted on Reply
#20
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
Yes, 8 cores, 4 sockets, which is what he was talking about. 4 sockets have yet to max out the FSB provided by Intel.
Posted on Reply
#21
Dippyskoodlez
by: largon
Based on this picture of a K8L on LGA1207 the physical dimensions of the die are about 173.1mm x 172.9mm yielding a area of 299.3 square millimeters.

That's 2.4x fold the area of a 65nm Brisbane DC.
LGA isnt the same PCB size as a 939, so I'm curious how you came up with these obscene numbers.

2.4x die size... if thats true, the K8L is gonna be a beast.

by: newtekie1
Yes, 8 cores, 4 sockets, which is what he was talking about. 4 sockets have yet to max out the FSB provided by Intel.
It is important to note the xeons get a nifty dual dual fsb trick with FBDIMMS I believe, which greatly helps intel.

Its no longer a normal classic FSB. Whereas an A64 is still utilizing a the same dual channel FSB base.(Although each CPU does get its own)

This is where intels scaling fails... if you have an overwhelming amount of processors, CPU->memory is able to be handled, but what if processor #320 needs to talk to processor #102, get 400 of the CPU's in a cluster doing this, Intel's fsb is going to fall flat on its face.

then again, this is completely useless from a consumers standpoint. Unless ofcourse, you have 300 keyboards to transfer keystrokes.
Posted on Reply
#22
largon
by: Dippyskoodlez
LGA isnt the same PCB size as a 939, so I'm curious how you came up with these obscene numbers.
My calculations are based on information I received from a very respected member dedicated to AMD hardware and a "sort of a" XIP (Xtremely Important Person) on xtremesystems forums, he also has several LGA1207 CPUs at his posession.
In addition, he's somehow affiliated with AMD because he has access to ES CPUs and other inside material which as you know, are quite rarely seen outside AMD's official companions.

And I'm willing to wager a cookie he will be one of the first on the net to ever benchmark a K8L...

I'll let the pictures speak before you get bored ;) with my rambling:
Posted on Reply
#23
Dippyskoodlez
by: largon
My calculations are based on information I received from a very respected member dedicated to AMD hardware and a "sort of a" XIP (Xtremely Important Person) on xtremesystems forums, he also has several LGA1207 CPUs at his posession.
In addition, he's somehow affiliated with AMD because he has access to ES CPUs and other inside material which as you know, are quite rarely seen outside AMD's official companions.

And I'm willing to wager a cookie he will be one of the first on the net to ever benchmark a K8L...

I'll let the pictures speak before you get bored ;) with my rambling:
WHile this is very un-AMD like, I guess its feasable.

But, theres no reason to see huge price hikes, because the clawhammer die was gigantic too.

Intel loves charging out the wazoo (see. EE)

AMD has relied on being a price competitor, and if thats a dual core, thats got.......... a lot of cache.

Otherwise, quad cores having a die size similar that is TBE, and is not news.


Yeah, working and all I dont remember the codenames atm :P

edit: lol helps to RTFA.

Its quad core. Big news? did you expect it to get smaller or something? 2.4x seems to be accurate, because of the inclusion of extra xbar circuitry and memory controllers logic to accomodate the extra core(s).
Posted on Reply
#24
largon
Sorry, just figured some people would be interested in the real world die size along with the other details on Barcelona.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment