techPowerUp! Forums

Go Back   techPowerUp! Forums > www.techpowerup.com > News

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old Dec 14, 2007, 10:41 AM   #1
malware
Eligible for custom title
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Bulgaria
Posts: 5,413 (1.74/day)
Thanks: 78
Thanked 986 Times in 497 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to malware Send a message via MSN to malware Send a message via Skype™ to malware

System Specs

AMD Eight-core CPUs Planned for 2009

After we reported that AMD is starting to produce 45nm chips in 2008, the company is also looking to refresh its line-up with a new generation eight-core CPUs, to be released in distant future. Following the 2008 release of its first 45nm CPUs - Shanghai - AMD will be preparing to introduce octo-core parts. The 8-headed server processors are codenamed "Montreal" and will feature HyperTransport 3 and include 1MB of L2 cache per core and a shared L3 cache between 6 and 12MB. The Montreal line-up will consist of both eight- and quad-core CPUs and will be paired up with boards powered by new chipsets like the AMD RD890S and RD870S. The ETA for the eight-core AMD processors is the first half of 2009.



Source: TechConnect Magazine
malware is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 10:48 AM   #2
regan1985
1000 Posts
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coventry UNI England
Posts: 1,416 (0.56/day)
Thanks: 22
Thanked 23 Times in 23 Posts
Send a message via MSN to regan1985

System Specs

if they can get this out b4 intel does they might start to get a good marget share again!!and atm each core they make doesnt compete with intel, so i like the idea of just making more,shame they can do it in 2008 because im sure 8cores would beat intels 4!!
regan1985 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 11:05 AM   #3
craigwhiteside
500 Posts
 
craigwhiteside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK, Liverpool
Posts: 926 (0.46/day)
Thanks: 10
Thanked 104 Times in 80 Posts
Send a message via MSN to craigwhiteside

System Specs

8 cores lol that would pack some serious grunt

if they do bring it out before intel then this happens to intel

__________________
WoOp WoOp!

Overclocked Gamers
craigwhiteside is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 11:38 AM   #4
pt
not a suicide-bomber
 
pt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Portugal
Posts: 5,877 (2.24/day)
Thanks: 106
Thanked 219 Times in 193 Posts
Send a message via MSN to pt

System Specs

socket f for shangai, and socket g3 for montreal
has anyone tryed 2xquad cores on a dual socket f mobo?
pt is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 11:39 AM   #5
craigwhiteside
500 Posts
 
craigwhiteside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK, Liverpool
Posts: 926 (0.46/day)
Thanks: 10
Thanked 104 Times in 80 Posts
Send a message via MSN to craigwhiteside

System Specs

i dont remember anyone saying they have one pt,
__________________
WoOp WoOp!

Overclocked Gamers
craigwhiteside is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 12:14 PM   #6
lemonadesoda
Eligible for custom title
 
lemonadesoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,337 (2.17/day)
Thanks: 749
Thanked 960 Times in 710 Posts

System Specs

I'm not so excited about this news. It's not a new design, just a "refresh". It's like saying, our 4 cyclinder engines have poor performance compared to our rivals, so rather than fix our engines, we'll put a 8 cylinder in there.

Unless AMD is going to improve its PER CORE PERFORMANCE, either power efficiency, or computational power, or both, its just throwing more bad tools at the problem.

It will be another smack-down for Intel if they release an 8-core, or if you stick 2x Xeon Quads on a board, unless AMD makes some SERIOUS changes.
lemonadesoda is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 12:19 PM   #7
strick94u
1000 Posts
 
strick94u's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,308 (0.51/day)
Thanks: 80
Thanked 71 Times in 64 Posts

System Specs

AMD can't get their quad core to work yet they are talking about their 8 core already.
strick94u is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 02:00 PM   #8
Davidelmo
200 Posts
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 322 (0.16/day)
Thanks: 28
Thanked 23 Times in 14 Posts

System Specs

hahahahaha

I'll start to care when i see the benchmark results

If this is like their "true quad core" flop then I'm not interested, lololol
Davidelmo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 03:13 PM   #9
FatForester
500 Posts
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 937 (0.41/day)
Thanks: 94
Thanked 155 Times in 139 Posts

System Specs

I agree with ya lemonade. If AMD can't increase the per-core performance, what's the point in all this? With their skeptical power usage and poor performance, they really just need to start from scratch.
FatForester is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 03:20 PM   #10
WhiteLotus
3500 Posts
 
WhiteLotus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Plymouth, UK
Posts: 4,808 (2.27/day)
Thanks: 529
Thanked 856 Times in 682 Posts

System Specs

the point is to gain a niche market before intel does
__________________
http://tpucdn.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic41435_1.gif

“Sorry but I cannot respond now, I am running a full virus scan on the internet.” -brandonwh64
WhiteLotus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 04:01 PM   #11
FreedomEclipse
Crazy Dogmatic Bullsh!t!
 
FreedomEclipse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: (British Born Chinese) London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,526 (3.38/day)
Thanks: 824
Thanked 1,606 Times in 1,285 Posts

System Specs

or they could keep trying to make everything hunky dorey buy making everything under gods blue sky 'energy efficient' or more energy efficient then hitting the mass server market by storm. but meh the threat of intel will still be there as bright as the devils bollocks dipped in strawberry jam & garnished with a decent healthy dose of flash bang pospherous grenades.....

if they deceided to go in that directioni wouldnt be suprised. for instance look at Matrox graphics cards. their 'industry only' & thats the way theyve always been & they still alive & strong today maybe just not in the enthusiast market.

its gonna be a hard fight for the server market but if they got what it takes to go toe to toe then go for it
__________________

“I used to be a serial upgrader like you, then i took a downgrade to the knee” -FreedomEclipse
FreedomEclipse is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 05:06 PM   #12
suraswami
Eligible for custom title
 
suraswami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 5,142 (1.73/day)
Thanks: 849
Thanked 601 Times in 532 Posts

System Specs

blah blah blah...Lets hope AMD doesn't close their shop
__________________
2 Servers Multiple VMs including WHS on VM, capacity 3.5 TB HDD
Family Machine - W7 Ultimate 64bit, ECS 780G, Phenom II X3 720BE @ 3.1Ghz- 1.38V, 4GB DDR2 800 ram, Sapphire 4670 512MB, 600W Ultra X pro, Xigmatek HDT-S1283

"Oh please, the only thing more resilient than an Indian is a cockroach. Not even nukes can stop their immune systems" - TheMailMan78
suraswami is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 05:19 PM   #13
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
 
WarEagleAU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gurley, AL
Posts: 9,994 (3.98/day)
Thanks: 3,810
Thanked 557 Times in 521 Posts
Send a message via AIM to WarEagleAU Send a message via Yahoo to WarEagleAU

System Specs

Oh, its for Servers. Well its something.

Oh and for the moron who said their quad cores dont work, that is totally untrue. They do work and perform quite well. As has been stated in the past, they werent meant to take the performance crown, they were meant to be an upgrade for current AM2 users and give something else of choice as opposed to Intel.

I do agree with what Newtekie1 said in a previous thread, AMD rested on its laurels instead of continuing to drive innovation. For that they paid and are paying dearly still.
__________________
=-TheEagle-=



http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=62454
“You crazy? Surfing any website without an antivirus is like freaking with a dirty woman without protection” -OzzmanFloyd120
- Edited for content and clarity
WarEagleAU is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 05:29 PM   #14
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
 
btarunr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hyderabad, India
Posts: 14,982 (7.30/day)
Thanks: 788
Thanked 12,899 Times in 5,650 Posts
Send a message via AIM to btarunr Send a message via MSN to btarunr

System Specs

Wait a minute, is it 8 core as in 8 cores on one chip or two quad core chips in DSDC?

Either ways, I'm not taking this seriously. I've been backstabbed by AMD long enough, like betting with my brother that the Barcelona would thrash Kentsfied and if it didn't, I'd buy him an OEM part of Barcelona and vice-versa.

I got pwned.


"Terrorists win"
__________________

Gadgets, Phones, Tablets, Cameras, TVs, HiFi...NextPowerUp
btarunr is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 05:33 PM   #15
Jizzler
2000 Posts
 
Jizzler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Geneva, FL, USA
Posts: 3,010 (1.43/day)
Thanks: 567
Thanked 606 Times in 487 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
Originally Posted by FreedomEclipse View Post
if they deceided to go in that directioni wouldnt be suprised. for instance look at Matrox graphics cards. their 'industry only' & thats the way theyve always been & they still alive & strong today maybe just not in the enthusiast market.
Maybe you're not old enough to remember when Matrox had "the card" to have?

Big enthusiast system way back in the day had a Matrox (2D/3D), Voodoo(3D), and a second 3D-only card for the few games that supported it's proprietary API, the name escapes me at the moment. Virge? Rendition? Time to find the box with my old boot mags.

But yeah, for the last ~9 years Matrox's bread and butter has been video cards geared for medical and business use, thin clients, video walls, and video editing solutions.
Jizzler is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 05:43 PM   #16
Dangle
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Reno
Posts: 411 (0.21/day)
Thanks: 129
Thanked 17 Times in 17 Posts

System Specs

2009.... AMD, you're always a year behind. hurry the F up! (Not you ATI, you're cool)
Dangle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2007, 06:02 AM   #17
strick94u
1000 Posts
 
strick94u's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,308 (0.51/day)
Thanks: 80
Thanked 71 Times in 64 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
Originally Posted by WarEagleAU View Post
Oh, its for Servers. Well its something.

Oh and for the moron who said their quad cores dont work, that is totally untrue. They do work and perform quite well. As has been stated in the past, they werent meant to take the performance crown, they were meant to be an upgrade for current AM2 users and give something else of choice as opposed to Intel.

I do agree with what Newtekie1 said in a previous thread, AMD rested on its laurels instead of continuing to drive innovation. For that they paid and are paying dearly still.
Oh yes the processor bug in the 9500 and 9600 has only driven the 9800 production back till 2008, months behind. And of coarse its meant as an upgrade to the x2 amd users that will only need to change their mother boards (7xx)to run the chips at its best performance which acorrding to Tomshardware.com is only 8% slower than a 6400 x2 and 13% slower than intel's slowest quad core at around the same price as both of those chips. http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/11/...web/index.html

I suppose us morons should not post our foolish thoughts

But i am glad they are working on the x8 processor
strick94u is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2007, 10:46 AM   #18
phanbuey
Eligible for custom title
 
phanbuey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Miami
Posts: 5,010 (2.48/day)
Thanks: 1,484
Thanked 959 Times in 812 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
Originally Posted by WarEagleAU View Post
Oh, its for Servers. Well its something.

...As has been stated in the past, they werent meant to take the performance crown, they were meant to be an upgrade for current AM2 users and give something else of choice as opposed to Intel...
"weren't meant to take the performance crown?"... well ur right, haha right they decided that before the release date, when it was blatantly obvious that they weren't going to... but before that they had the "hypothetical" benchmarks that showed them "40% faster than a core 2 xeon in floating point." Who are you kidding? They F'd up TWICE, in two different industries.

This is hype... good ol'-fashioned, boilerplate, "please don't dump any more of our stock as we are at 8 dollars per share" hype. I mean, looking back at Barcelona and the R600 announcements, there is a pattern emerging here.
phanbuey is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Build Thread bruins004 System Builder's Advice 159 Mar 5, 2013 10:53 AM
AMD drives next generation of energy-efficient computing with 65nm technology transition DanTheBanjoman News 6 Dec 6, 2006 12:33 PM
AMD Announces Quad FX Platform malware News 19 Dec 1, 2006 03:09 PM
AMD Introduces New LIVE! PCs malware News 0 Oct 11, 2006 12:24 PM
AMD Athlon 64 3800+ Venice 90nm W1zzard Reviews 12 Feb 5, 2006 09:00 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
no new posts