Saturday, December 8th 2007

AMD's processor plans for 2008

The lackluster launch of Barcelona earlier this year left us with ambivalent feeling before the launch of Phenom. Up before the launch, numerous rumors of various problems were circulating, and when the launch finally happened and we only had two models to play with, we couldn't help feeling a bit let down. The performance was good and lived up to what AMD had promised, more or less, but since the frequencies were so low and IPC was more or less the same as Core 2, it was still being outperformed by Intel's processors. With the recent unveiling of the TLB bug, the crippling BIOS fix and the seized shipments of quad-core processors, the plans for the future has had to be revised. The earlier announced tri-core series is set for arrival in February 2008, and should be available in decent numbers the following month. Two models are currently planned for launch, Phenom 8700 and Phenom 8600 running at 2.4 and 2.3 Ghz respectively. These are disabled quad-core with 512KB L2 cache per core and a shared 2MB L3 cache, not suffering from the TLB errata (B3 stepping).

The new B3 stepping Phenoms are expected to arrive in large numbers in March as well. With the "new" Phenom 9700 model, there will also be a respin of the Phenom 9600 and 9500 models, called 9650 and 9550. Frequencies will remains the same, just less errata. There will also be a Phenom 9900 model in Q2, which together with the 9700 model will use the full HyperTransport 3.0 bandwidth of 4 GHz. Later in 2008, AMD will announce more Phenoms.

Phenom 9600 Black Edition is expected before the end of the year. It runs at the same 2.3 GHz as the regular Phenom 9600, but comes with an unlocked multiplier. The Phenom FX processors have been put on hold, but are not canceled per se, we just won't see them until AMD get their regular stuff working right.

With so few new processors based on the K10 architecture, AMD has had to turn to its K8 architecture once again to fill the large void that has appeared. AMD will sequentially move all of its current 90nm models to the 65nm manufacturing process, and refine frequencies somewhat. An extra 100 MHz will be added to some models, but at the same time cache will be cut in half. Since AMD isn't able to make enough 65nm Brisbane capable of +3.0GHz frequencies, the 6000+ and 6400+ models will be phased out.

AMD will once again revise its Energy Efficient lineup, including the name. Athlon 4850e (2.5GHz), Athlon 4450e (2.3Ghz), and Athlon 4050e (2.1GHz) are expected to replace the current BE-2xxx models in Q1 2008.

Late, very late, 2008 we might see the first 45nm processors from AMD. These will basically be quad-core Phenoms with a lower TDP, slightly higher frequencies and hopefully bug-free design.Source: Nordic Hardware
Add your own comment

25 Comments on AMD's processor plans for 2008

#1
jpierce55
I bet massive amounts of tri-cores will be available if they can use the bad Phenom's. Why would anybody want one, it will use more power with less performance than a good x2. AMD is sinking fast! I hope they get things straight. I don't have much hope even for the black edition.
Posted on Reply
#2
kwchang007
Aw man are you kidding me, no more 6000+ and 6400+, they were pretty good overclockers...I think anyways (for amd)
Posted on Reply
#3
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
Hopefully this will help them right the ship and get back on track. You can only float in the ocean for so long before a shark comes and eats you
Posted on Reply
#4
jpierce55
Obviously they have to make the Brisbanes slower than the Phenoms, that is the only reason I can see for the "refine".
Posted on Reply
#6
b1lk1
by: Widjaja
AMDEAD :ohwell:
That awful looking model in your avatar looks nearly dead. Someone needs to give that poor girl some food. THey must be feeding her with AMD's profits, LOL!
Posted on Reply
#7
[I.R.A]_FBi
by: b1lk1
That awful looking model in your avatar looks nearly dead. Someone needs to give that poor girl some food.....


?
Posted on Reply
#8
hat
Maximum Overclocker
by: b1lk1
That awful looking model in your avatar looks nearly dead. Someone needs to give that poor girl some food. THey must be feeding her with AMD's profits, LOL!
You're not the only one who thinks so...
in fact it's affected my eyesight so much so I can't tell yellow from green anymore
Posted on Reply
#9
Polaris573
Senior Moderator
On topic please. This is not general nonsense.
Posted on Reply
#10
eidairaman1
What i think AMD needs to do is go to the MCM setup, use 2 K8 X2s and combine them for the First Gen quad Cores, Then later release the Phenom X2,X3, and X4 (K8) after all problems are fixed, I also believe instead of Jumping on the 45nmbandwagon they need to experiment with the inbetween die shrinks (55nm, etc)
Posted on Reply
#12
Basard
AMD's chips all pretty much suck under 3Ghz. Memory speeds seem to fly when they get past 2.8Ghz. Intel's High-K thingies seem to make them really fast--AMD needs some of that, but they have to wait like 5 more years for patents to run out, right? Intel's Latencies are double that of the slowest Athlons, I'm assuming thats why Intel's come with 4mb of cache or more. AMD has a lot of really cool technologies, but they only seem to work on paper--or at clock speeds above 3Ghz. Once AMD gets all these technologies running at 3.0Ghz, they will have a good chance against Intel. But the only problem is actually getting them to run at high frequencies.

Everything AMD has been putting on their CPU's, and planning to put on their CPU's, Intel does the same thing, like a year or two down the road. But then AMD does the same thing. They wait for intel to get DDR3 perfected before they make the switch. But Intel did the same thing (with their RAMBUS idea) when AMD went to DDR and crushed them. Now Intel's memory Bandwidths are getting high--surpassing AMD's--thanks to their 1333/1600Mhz bus speeds (I think).

The tables always turn, they turned when the Pentium III started putting L2 Cache on chip, then came the thunderbird Athlon, with on chip cache, and AMD was king again (kinda). Then came AthlonXP, Intel shit their pants and cranked cpu speed up about 50% faster than humanly possible (they made a deal with the devil I think). When will the tables turn again, Intel can't be on top ALWAYS (most of the time, yes, but not always.)

AMD has a somewhat good idea marketing the whole platform (what else can they really do?) The average person doesnt even have a clue what Core2Quad means, or Phenom X4, they just know that 9700 is higher than Q6770. They also look in the paper and say "AMD, who the F*** is that? I'll stick with Intel."

The whole situation sucks for AMD fans, but Intel fans gotta admit that without AMD, we'd still be plain games on a Pentium III at 1.3Ghz, because why would intel need to crank out such godly chips? If cyrix was still their main source of competition they would have no worries, and they wouldnt be pushing the envelope nearly as much. And AMD fans gotta admit that the numbers for the new chips are darn right pitiful and make their stomachs turn.

Remember when AMD beat Intel to a Ghz, Intel "released" their Ghz chips 3 days later, and nobody could find one. So long as AMD keeps at Intels throat, then Intel will continue to focus on "making" a better chip (that nobody can buy, of course, but they still "have a better chip"). The Q6600 Is pretty much available, and is way better than AMD's chips, but any of Intel's extreme chips are hard to find, and WAY to expensive for about 98% of the world.

Why AMD doesn't just stick MORE cache on their chips is beyond me, maybe they really don't need it that bad, but it would help none the less. There's gotta be something they can do. The only problem for AMD is they all have to go home and break out their piggy banks and search their couches for change to get anything done.
Posted on Reply
#14
Basard
I was considering even getting this other 775 mobo with a cheap Intel chip. Which one was it, the MSI Neo-2 or something... its the scaled down version of the platinum one, but its not cheap enough yet.
Posted on Reply
#15
Andy_007
Why cant AMD make Brisbanes more than 3ghz. My brothers 4800+ can do 3.1ghz with stock Vcore and my other brothers 4000+ can do 3ghz Stock Vcore
Posted on Reply
#17
suraswami
by: Andy_007
Why cant AMD make Brisbanes more than 3ghz. My brothers 4800+ can do 3.1ghz with stock Vcore and my other brothers 4000+ can do 3ghz Stock Vcore
The thing is you overclock and that reduces the life of the cpu. When AMD produces something in that speed range it is gauranteed to work for its life without degradion or early death. Only few pass their internal test. That is why they don't release such higher freq chips.

Only thing they need to work of Phenoms is to someway add more 2 times more instructions and go into 256 bit wide path. Come on they are pioneers in bringing 64 bit technology. Even tho 64 OS is the max we have, the 256 bit width can be used for feeding more info.

That is how I feel. No point in increasing the clock freq. Intel realised that from their shitty prescotts. Don't know why would AMD go with the MHZ path.

Just revisit ur design. Intel took their PIII, reworked on it and born was Pentium M and Core 2 class.

K8 is already good. Increase the instructions and AMD will be back in business.
Posted on Reply
#18
phanbuey
by: eidairaman1
What i think AMD needs to do is go to the MCM setup, use 2 K8 X2s and combine them for the First Gen quad Cores, Then later release the Phenom X2,X3, and X4 (K8) after all problems are fixed, I also believe instead of Jumping on the 45nmbandwagon they need to experiment with the inbetween die shrinks (55nm, etc)
What a great idea... i totally agree... and they are doing that with their R700 graphics chips
Posted on Reply
#19
tkpenalty
by: eidairaman1
What i think AMD needs to do is go to the MCM setup, use 2 K8 X2s and combine them for the First Gen quad Cores, Then later release the Phenom X2,X3, and X4 (K8) after all problems are fixed, I also believe instead of Jumping on the 45nmbandwagon they need to experiment with the inbetween die shrinks (55nm, etc)
Totally true, that is what intel did, and look wehre it got them!
Posted on Reply
#20
eidairaman1
by: tkpenalty
Totally true, that is what intel did, and look wehre it got them!
This would be a Temporary Fix until the Phenoms Are official, then they combine the X3 and X4 Phenoms for the X8s etc etc
Posted on Reply
#21
snuif09
i think the tri core idea is great they also use a tri core in a xbox 360:rockout::rockout:
Posted on Reply
#22
Basard
I don't see why they don't just "unify" the 4 cores somehow, so the computer looks at it as one core, and the processor just splits it up once it gets inside to process it with the different cores. Or why don't they just double everything thats already in a single core. Thats what I always thought they were talking about with Native quad core. Why does it have to be Dual core, its ONE chip, so just make the computer see it that way too, and not have to multi-thread every application.
Posted on Reply
#23
xvi
by: Basard
I don't see why they don't just "unify" the 4 cores somehow, so the computer looks at it as one core, and the processor just splits it up once it gets inside to process it with the different cores. Or why don't they just double everything thats already in a single core. Thats what I always thought they were talking about with Native quad core. Why does it have to be Dual core, its ONE chip, so just make the computer see it that way too, and not have to multi-thread every application.
It would be like giving you four calculators (or as many as you wanted) and asking you to compute 1+1. You just can't split that up.

HyperThreading sort of did the opposite. They took one core and made two "Virtual" cores. If I understand that right, they just separated the ALUs.

by: Andy_007
Why cant AMD make Brisbanes more than 3ghz. My brothers 4800+ can do 3.1ghz with stock Vcore and my other brothers 4000+ can do 3ghz Stock Vcore
It's a different architecture running on a different manufacturing process at a different core size. It's like saying "The Ford GT has 500HP, why can't my Ford Escort?"
Posted on Reply
#24
Basard
Why can't the escort? You can paint it neon green and put stickers on it, that will give it 500HP for sure.
Posted on Reply
#25
xvi
by: Basard
Why can't the escort? You can paint it neon green and put stickers on it, that will give it 500HP for sure.
I drive a Ford Escort. I've tried. :laugh:
It would take a lot of intake pressure to bring 88HP up to 500HP. The cold winter air gives it a little kick in the mid-RPM range though. :D (In other news, I want an 2nd Gen RS Cosworth. :P)
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment