Wednesday, October 24th 2007

AMD Tri-core Processors Details Revealed

Codenames and features of the tri-core CPUs AMD is planning to launch next year and in 2009 have been revealed. Codenamed Toliman the first tri-core CPUs will adopt a 65nm process, support socket AM2+ motherboards and HyperTransport 3.0. The CPUs will have 2MB L3 cache and will be launched by the end of March 2008. The next-generation, 45nm-based CPUs will adopt socket AM3, support HyperTransport 3.0 and DDR2/DDR3 memory, and will launch in first half of 2009.
Source: DigiTimes
Add your own comment

31 Comments on AMD Tri-core Processors Details Revealed

#26
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
that cpu is made by IBM too. Its almost a CELL PRocessor, but not...hard to explain. Anywho, Id be interested in a tri core cpu <G>
Posted on Reply
#27
MadCow
DrunkenMafiaMarch 2009!!!!! I was expecting octo cores from intel by then.....

I thought amds' quads were coming out in november or some shit... Are the tri cores a more advanced technology than quad cores or something??
:confused: <--- thats me right there
Well they need time to build stockpiles of defective chips. They'll wait until they have enough to comfortably sell without running out. Whereas they can just sell quad cores because there will be more of them.
Posted on Reply
#28
mandelore
im still wanting to know for certain are they really defective quads or not. if defective with just 3 cores active but access to a quads worth of cache, that would be nice and decent, with headroom for overclocking. but id like to also see some native tri cores just for the hellov it
Posted on Reply
#29
TheGuruStud
WarEagleAUthat cpu is made by IBM too. Its almost a CELL PRocessor, but not...hard to explain. Anywho, Id be interested in a tri core cpu <G>
Are you taking about the xbox 360 cpu? It's just a slow triple core PPC like what was used in Macs (except not fast like the G4s).
And I mean those things are slow. The transistor count is so low that each of them only performs twice as fast (realistically) as the xbox 1's 700 mhz PIII.
I think they should have went for a dual-core x86. Would've solved their backward compatibility issues and been faster, too. They just wanted to sound cool. "Oh, look! We have a triple core 3.2 ghz cpu. It's so fast!!!". Douches. That's all M$ are.
Posted on Reply
#30
PVTCaboose1337
Graphical Hacker
I like the idea of tri core... that does not mean we are going to have 5, 6, 7 cores! But here is the thing, for us getting these CPUs, they will make a difference BUT when you have the L3 cache so all the cores to communicate, then tri core is not really worth it, and quad is.
Posted on Reply
#31
TheGuruStud
PVTCaboose1337I like the idea of tri core... that does not mean we are going to have 5, 6, 7 cores! But here is the thing, for us getting these CPUs, they will make a difference BUT when you have the L3 cache so all the cores to communicate, then tri core is not really worth it, and quad is.
Yeah, that post didn't make any sense. :confused:

Tri-core = same as quad except that one core disabled.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
May 15th, 2024 05:03 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts