Athlon 64 Discussion

[JayisunJ]

AMD has a lot riding on this processor. They have literally poured any and all profits into the research and development for this architecture. The Athlon 64 must succeed for AMD to remain competitive in the desktop processor market. With features like an integrated memory controller, HyperTransport, and support for 64-bit code, it is hard to imagine Athlon 64 not succeeding, but there are many obstacles that AMD must first overcome. First, AMD must release it ON TIME with no more SOI delays (IBM partnership should help) and at a decent clock speed (over 2GHz). The second obstacle, and possibly the largest for AMD, is gaining OS, application, and driver support for the 64-bit aspect of the Athlon 64. AMD is going to have to gain a lot of support for the AMD64 ISA (x86-64) instruction set. They will need support not only from Microsoft (64-bit Windows), but also application (productivity/games) and driver (graphics/sound) support. Lastly, to make things even worse for AMD, Intel's new and improved "Prescott" Pentium 4 is to be released around the same time touting significantly greater performance than “Northwood.” Is it just me, or is anyone else scared for AMD, but excited for the release of Athlon 64 at the same time? I truly hope the Athlon 64 is everything AMD says it is, for their sake. Anyway, discuss Athlon 64 features and/or current news here! Go AMD. :wave:

[pointreyes]

I have already posted some of my concerns here:
http://www.bleedinedge.com/forum/showthread.php3?postid=2389#post2389

[JayisunJ]

I have already posted some of my concerns here: http://www.bleedinedge.com/forum/sh...d=2389#post2389 Hey pointreyes, you bring up some pretty good issues in your post. The ole' 32-bit PCI bus is wearing pretty thin. PCI Express could play a major part in determining the success (or failure) of the Athlon 64. Guess we will see! ;)

[compudog]

Industry leaders will have to support AMD's new architecture and AMD will have to port for new architectures. I am not scared for AMD's future as desktop processors are not thier only bread & butter. I would not like to see them exit the desktop market though as I love everything they have put out ('cept maybe the K5......)

[JayisunJ]

I would not like to see them exit the desktop market though as I love everything they have put out ('cept maybe the K5......) I don't think anyone wants Intel left as the sole provider of high-end desktop processors. Imagine the prices ^. :(

[Jeff7181]

I think it's ignorant to automatically assume the Athlon-64 will be a success. AMD is putting their reputation, not to mention their future on the line by intoducing such a different technology than what exists right now. Any time you create new hardware that requires you to use new software, or visa versa, you're really sticking your neck out. Not only are you asking the customer to try your new product, you're asking them to try another company's new product as well. AMD has kinda covered their arse in that respect by making the Athlon-64 backward compatible with 32 bit applications. I think the fact that there's already a bunch of Linux distributions that are x86-64 compiled is a big help for AMD. They've already got that support in the server market. Now they need MS to step up and create an OS that's not junk. Hopefully nVidia gets their stuff together with an nForce3 chipset that's powerful and has lots of features, as well as room for them to ad future technology like PCI Express without much trouble.

[JayisunJ]

AMD has kinda covered their arse in that respect by making the Athlon-64 backward compatible with 32 bit applications. Good point Jeff :wave:. Even if 64-bit computing doesn't catch on right away, they can always fall back on the 32-bit compatibility and solid performance. And if it is a flop in the 32-bit market, they have the new and expanding 64-bit market to fall back on. Being based on the Athlon XP architecure (roughly) how bad can the 32-bit performance be? Especially with the on die memory controller and 1MB of level 2 cache? AMD has thouroly prepared themselves for this product launch.

[Jeff7181]

I found this article intersting and informative...

http://www.tech-report.com/etc/2003q2/athlon64/index.x?pg=1

[Jeff7181]

Yet another very informative, very interesting article.

http://www.midrangeserver.com/mid/mid042303-story01.html

[DivideBYZero]

AFAIK PCI Express will be very much a part of the A64 World. The NF3 chipset should have it on the 'Pro' version and I would expect VIA and SIS to follow suit.

ATI's next gen video cards are to be PCIX with an AGP Bridge for the AGP version, so it is absolutely imperitive.

/0

[JayisunJ]

AFAIK PCI Express will be very much a part of the A64 World. The NF3 chipset should have it on the 'Pro' version and I would expect VIA and SIS to follow suit. You have any idea when the NF3 Pro with PCI Express will launch? Maybe PCI Express (3GIO?) is going to be a reality sooner than I thought. I have been hearing about it coming now for at least a year or two. :confused:

[pointreyes]

I have been told that PCI-X and PCI Express are two different things. Even my AMD76x board supports PCI-X cards. AFAIK PCI-X means the cards are 64-bit/66Mhz cards. My 3Ware controller is only a 64-bit/33Mhz card. It is due to using this dually machine that makes me so mad at Intel for not providing a 64-bit/66Mhz bus on the Canterwoods. I paid the same price for my Gigabyte 8knxp as I did for my IWill MPX2 - but which one can handle U320 SCSI better? It isn't the Canterwood. Fortunately 3Ware should be coming out with PCI-X SATA RAID controllers shortly. If I could afford to switch to that controller and convert my WD SE drives, it would be interesting to test the throughput of the bus on the old AMD chipset against the 'top-of-the-line' Canterwood chipset. PCI Express is a whole new technology different from PCI-X that probably will not see the light of day till at least 2005. :(

Here's an interesting thread about PCI Express: http://www.abxzone.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=47702

[DivideBYZero]

OK, hair splitting aside, PCI-EX, as I will now call PCI Express, WILL be seen V soon. No waiting till 2005.

NF3 Pro will have it, and so will the VIA K8T890 Chipset, due Q4 2003.


The due date of NF3P is not known at this time, but NF3 is sampling now AFAIK and the discreet chipset version (as opposed to single chip) is out now, but without PCI-EX.

[JayisunJ]

So with PCI Express, will we be sticking our graphics cards and our other peripherals (sound/ethernet) into the same slots? All this buzz about Athlon 64 in the news, I can't take it anymore. I want one. :D

[Duvie]

Good thread here guys.....

The one big concern is the fact that so much does depend on other yet to be released hardware and software developments from other parties...yes the thing can work without them but what could hurt AMD more so in the short term is if they come out at 2ghz or slightly above and then not have these features to give amd the boost it needs to be beter then just par with Intel....Anything equal or less then INtels greatest I think many agree will be seen as a failure. AMD regulars will stay put but AMD needs to gain marketshare especially with the type of R&D it dropped on this one. It also needs to start charging more of a premium for its chips and it is easier to do that when the chip is hands down the best. One then can see having it more then intel's greatest which will likely be in the 600+ range. this is the type of revenue AMD needs to build up the R&D coffers for the future....

AMD's other big product is flash memory and whereas that market has been bad to sickening the last 2 years it is rumored to be rebounding....AMD can live with an OK here but it doesn't help image, future development, etc.....Things can change fast and one wrong turn and it cost you. Intel has more of a fund to bungle a few Itaniums over!!!

[DAPUNISHER]

The partnerships AMD has formed in the flash market AMD/Fujitsu (http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/21155.html) and in the microprocessor divison AMD/IBM (http://www-916.ibm.com/press/prnews.nsf/jan/5AAB894EDD3ABEE485256CA800649373) allows them to dramatically increase their R&D without the huge amounts of capital outlay going it alone would require ;)

I also respectfully disagree that the Opteron has to smash Intel's performance as that's precisely the mindset AMD has made clear they are abandoning for some time now and the following quote from the Fujitsu blurb continues to reiterate that
Gordon said the new company will be better suited to take on Intel if it sheds some of the baggage AMD has carried in the past. "AMD has suffered ... in the past being kind of focused on competing with Intel, so perhaps this memory company will be less like that and [b]more market-focused instead of single- competitor focused." Since the DOTBOMB era corporations have radically altered their perception of their IT departments place in the company and now expect them to be an asset and not a liability to the company's bottom line. The terrible mistake of pumping money into the IT dept. just to have it drain essential financial resources while not yielding the projected return on investment is a lesson well learned by many corps. I've read many articles from the financial sector dealing with technologies that point to the contemporary philosophy being return on investment from IT dept.'s

It's my belief that all AMD has to be able to deliver is a platform that is cost effective while meeting the present and near future needs of company and thus providing a positive return on investment that exceeds what another company's platform would yield. Desktop microprocessors aren't where the fate of AMD hinges right now, it's the high end workstation/server market and their ability to, in their own words "excecute" on marketing in order to significantly penetrate in those areas.

[JayisunJ]

I also respectfully disagree that the Opteron has to smash Intel's performance as that's precisely the mindset AMD has made clear they are abandoning for some time now. . . I take it that you probably meant Athlon 64 and not Opteron as Opteron has already "smashed" Intel's competing product into oblivion.
Desktop microprocessors aren't where the fate of AMD hinges right now. . . Desktop microprocessors may very well be where the fate of AMD hinges right now. If AMD stops remaining competitive in the desktop market, Intel will not have to spend near as much money on desktop microprocessor R&D as consumers will have no choice, but to buy Intel. They would also be able to raise prices for thier processors to unhindered heights. And where would all of this extra revenue go? Straight into making a high end workstation/server chip that can equal or beat Opteron. AMD NEEDS the revenue they generate from the desktop microprocessor market to remain competitive in ANY market. :)

[compudog]

Originally posted by JayisunJ
Desktop microprocessors may very well be where the fate of AMD hinges right now. If AMD stops remaining competitive in the desktop market, Intel will not have to spend near as much money on desktop microprocessor R&D as consumers will have no choice, but to buy Intel. They would also be able to raise prices for thier processors to unhindered heights. And where would all of this extra revenue go? Straight into making a high end workstation/server chip that can equal or beat Opteron. AMD NEEDS the revenue they generate from the desktop microprocessor market to remain competitive in ANY market. :)

I tend to agree with this line of thought. Competition is good for the consumer, whether that consumer is the high-end server or performance/value desktop. Though AMD's price/performance edge has blurred somewhat in recent months, I still would like to see AMD succeed. I believe they have what it takes.

[pointreyes]

Originally posted by compudog
I tend to agree with this line of thought. Competition is good for the consumer, whether that consumer is the high-end server or performance/value desktop. Though AMD's price/performance edge has blurred somewhat in recent months, I still would like to see AMD succeed. I believe they have what it takes.

They certainly have what it takes. Even with all the hoopla over the Canterwood chipset with the 800fsb HT procs, I'm only slightly impressed with the P4 line. It took a P4 2.8C to finally match an XP2100 with an Enterprise package like Oracle. Not being a gamer, I have found over and over how dismal the P4 is for the business world. AMD definitely delievers a better product for production than Intel and $ for $ that should mean something to the accountants but the IT is blinded by Intel marketing. Note that I'm a former Accountant that is now in the IT department doing Oracle development. It's amazing how blinded the IT department is with the P4. I still have a PIII machine and unless I get a P4 HT or an AMD system, I will keep this PIII.

BTW: Here's a very interesting link: http://www.ukgamer.com/article.php4?id=239&page=21


SNIP...Make no mistake, without the 875P and 800MHz FSB P4 'C' CPUs, Intel would be a clear looser here in this article, but thanks to both of those the XP 3200+ is roughly on par with the P4 'C' range of processors. In most of our tests the XP 3200+ comes ahead of the 3.06GHz (533MHz FSB) chip and trades blows with the P4 3.0Ghz (800MHz FSB) throughout our benchmarking suite, overall the honours are pretty even. ...SNIP

[JayisunJ]

AMD definitely delievers a better product for production than Intel and $ for $ that should mean something to the accountants but the IT is blinded by Intel marketing. I agree with you 100% pointreyes. If AMD had half the $ for marketing/advertising as Intel, I think that some of those that have been blinded by Intel could see clearly that AMD offers a much better price/performance value. That is another factor that could affect Athlon 64 being accepted into mainstream (Gateway/HP/Dell). If AMD gets it's name out to the mainstream buyer - not just us enthusiasts, they could probably sell alot more processors. Most of the people that I build computers for (friends/family) do not even KNOW THAT THERE IS an alternative to Intel's Pentium! If Athlon 64 performs as well as I believe it will, AMD could change that with a strong advertising campaign (not cheap) touting the Athlon 64's future-proof 64-bit compatible architecture. I really hope that AMD can make Athlon 64 a household name. It won't be easy, or cheap, but again, I believe AMD can do it. ;)

[Duvie]

I only state the comment about athlon64 performance being critical since they laid the framework early on this would be a big deal that would take the crown in the desktop market and be years ahead in technology. Intel has always stated there wasn't a need for 64bit in the desktop world as of yet due to some of the hardware and software advances that need to be in place to facilitate that.....

Also maybe it needs to be to save face for some of the raving amd fans at anandtech who got their panties wet with early previews and marketing hype that is inevitable for both companies....


I think AMD needs to get these oem manufacturers back to making amd systems...I recently looked for oem desktop and laptop systems and I was surprised I could barely find amd built systems with laptops being very sparse.....

[JayisunJ]

Intel has always stated there wasn't a need for 64bit in the desktop world as of yet due to some of the hardware and software advances that need to be in place to facilitate that..... I agree with Intel in that there are hardware and software advances that need to be in place for 64-bit in the desktop market. That is why the Athlon 64 is backward compatible with 32-bit code- even highly optimized for it. But, when those hardware/software advances are made, who will be ready for it? AMD with thier 2nd or even 3rd generation highly optimized Athlon 64, or Intel with thier 1st generation untested/unoptimized version of a 64-bit desktop processor? I think the answer is obvious.
I think AMD needs to get these oem manufacturers back to making amd systems...I recently looked for oem desktop and laptop systems and I was surprised I could barely find amd built systems with laptops being very sparse..... Very true. Hopefully the Athlon 64 can help rejuvenate AMD's precense in this section of the computing market.

[pointreyes]

Originally posted by Duvie
I think AMD needs to get these oem manufacturers back to making amd systems...I recently looked for oem desktop and laptop systems and I was surprised I could barely find amd built systems with laptops being very sparse.....

Part of the reason for that is due to Intel playing the game like MS and other companies with large cash coffers can do. Gateway and I think Dell were starting to sell more AMD than Intel systems and then Intel came along and made a 'deal' with the manufacturers. Intel reduced the cost of their processors so low to make it possible for these resellers to sell Intel systems for a lot less than other Intel resellers and for less than an AMD system. I had a hard time using an Intel system for some time after that happened. :(

[DAPUNISHER]

I wasn't aware Dell ever sold AMD based systems to the general public :confused: I do keep reading that they will sell Opteron though and it just further cements in my mind the fact that the server/workstation market is where AMD's ability to thrive in the microprocessor arena lays. They still haven't ever manged more than approx. 20% market share despite holding the performance crown for some time and that market share hit a 4 year low last October. That clearly demonstrates that one upping Intel in the desktop market isn't going to keep the boat floating. They are in a forced restructuring and targeting their hopes on the much more lucrative server market from what I've read and the desktop market is secondary.

Someone commented that they need the revenue from the desktop sales but that's just stating the obvious since all companies rely on revenue from all their product lines and if they aren't producing are quickly eliminated or that company's life cycle is drastically shortened ;) Intel's brand recognition alone dooms AMD to being 2nd best in the desktop market regardless of the performance of their processors, but penetrate the corporate enviroment with Opteron and get Dell, the industry giant, to use their product and the prestige gained will be as great or greater in importance to AMD's survival than the revenue itself.

[Jeff7181]

I think the reason Intel doesn't want AMD to be sold in Dell and other pre-built computers for the general public is because they'd cost so much less, and you still get the good Dell support that is usually why the price is as high as it is.

[Duvie]

I am well aware of the marketing support (commmercial cost) that intel gives to oem makers. I think it is unfair and should be looked into as anti-trust...NOw if Dell wants to sell AMD cause the head of Dell has some warped image that amd's are unstable then he has the right to....However gateway was a seller and if Intel forces the hand of these oem makers to exclusively carry them and excluding them then it is illegal IMO......



I want choice, even if it means I still go with Intel....This is something INtel and AMD users can agree upon as true fans of computers and hardware....

[JayisunJ]

I want choice, even if it means I still go with Intel....This is something Intel and AMD users can agree upon as true fans of computers and hardware.... Dead on man. I don't care who is the current king of the desktop CPU market. The only thing that matters is that there is always a strong underdog (AMD) or two nipping at the heals of the king (Intel) to keep them from having a legal or illegal monopoly on the market. Same goes for any market whether it be computer related or not. I want the choice to buy the stale, under-flavored Shurfresh mac and cheese in the bargain bin at Walmart- even if I never buy it. I am just glad it is there to keep Kraft from selling Easy Mac for $20 a box (I would starve to death). I truly hope that AMD comes out swinging with Athlon 64 and scares the hell out of Intel. If nothing else, it would force Intel to work harder to make better products for less money which is all I could ask for as a consumer. :)

[Jeff7181]

I've seen statements that claim the SOI manufacturing process that AMD is using for the Athlon-64 is physically good up to 5-6 Ghz. Can you imagine if Intel gets stuck at about 4 Ghz and AMD is able to match them Mhz for Mhz? Intel processors "win" at tests that compare the processors based on AMD's PR scale. But if you look at the clock speeds, there's one, maybe two things the P4 is fast at than the Athlon XP.
I'm very excited about the Athlon-64, because they've once again reduced the clock speed while maintaining the same level of performance, which is exactly what you need to do when you're approaching the physical limits of current technology.

[pointreyes]

Originally posted by Jeff7181
Can you imagine if Intel gets stuck at about 4 Ghz and AMD is able to match them Mhz for Mhz?

I've seen the new Intel D1D fab-they won't get stuck at 4 Ghz. Hehe, I even have the cool P4 m&m's. :p

[JayisunJ]

I've seen statements that claim the SOI manufacturing process that AMD is using for the Athlon-64 is physically good up to 5-6 Ghz. Do you have any links to any articles or anything, I would love to read up on that. That would be AWESOME for AMD. I couldn't even imagine the performance of a 3GHz Athlon 64 let alone a 4-5GHz one. If this is true, I don't see how Athlon 64 won't obliterate everything else once they start ramping up the clock speeds! :eyepop:

[Jeff7181]

This (http://sysopt.earthweb.com/articles/soi/index.html) is a pretty good article.

[compudog]

Originally posted by Jeff7181
This (http://sysopt.earthweb.com/articles/soi/index.html) is a pretty good article.

Excellent. Thanks Jeff!

[JayisunJ]

This SOI technology sounds pretty promising for Athlon 64. Did the Opteron use SOI also?

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by JayisunJ
This SOI technology sounds pretty promising for Athlon 64. Did the Opteron use SOI also?
Yes it does. (http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8796_8805,00.html)

[Duvie]

remember that AMD in quest for this new chip I believe lengthen the pipeline like the p4 and thus the fpu performance will not be what it once was....I see more of a world where the cpu makers will get closer in speed and the performance will still pretty close....If amd went to 5ghz but may only come out with 2 to 2.2ghz with the A64, can you imagine how long it could be for them to ramp to 5-6ghz???

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by Duvie
remember that AMD in quest for this new chip I believe lengthen the pipeline like the p4 and thus the fpu performance will not be what it once was....I see more of a world where the cpu makers will get closer in speed and the performance will still pretty close....If amd went to 5ghz but may only come out with 2 to 2.2ghz with the A64, can you imagine how long it could be for them to ramp to 5-6ghz???
They added 2 stages to the pipeline, as stated in my previous link. It also says there that the Opteron operates on 1.2 volts... pretty significan voltage drop from the current generation of Athlon XP's.

[Duvie]

Yes that is...I imagine that the p4 may be that level when they migrate to the .09 micron process....

the SOI process may go to those levels but I am sure we will likely change the architectur again by then..

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by Duvie
Yes that is...I imagine that the p4 may be that level when they migrate to the .09 micron process....

the SOI process may go to those levels but I am sure we will likely change the architectur again by then.. I don't know, I think they might change to a .065 or .05 or maybe even .04 before the SOI technology is replaced.

I would expect voltage drops with each step down... which may increase the necessity for high quality power supplies that can regulate voltage better... as well as motherboards since the motherboard is what regulates the voltage to the CPU. A .01 volt variance isn't much right now... only 6% but as we approach CPU's that operate under 1 volt, 10+% voltage variances are pretty significant.

[Duvie]

Exciting but based on amd current technology and speed when do you think they reach that level....2years...3years???

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by Duvie
Exciting but based on amd current technology and speed when do you think they reach that level....2years...3years???
I think it mostly depends on what Intel does... if the Prescott isn't a huge breakthrough, and we don't see overclockers hitting 4 Ghz with it in the next year, I don't think that puts much pressure on AMD to ramp clock speeds on the Athlon-64. The Opteronis already available at 1.8 Ghz in the .13 micron SOI flavor... I would expect the Athlon-64 to debut at 1.8 or 2.0 Ghz on the .13 micron process, with speeds available up to maybe 2.4 Ghz within a couple months of it's launch.
Besides, AMD isn't the only one working on SOI... they have a really good partnership with IBM it seems, and IBM seems to be making as many breakthrough with it as AMD is.

So given stiff competition from Intel, and a continued partnership with IBM, I wouldn't be surprised to see 5 Ghz .065 micron SOI processors in 2-3 years.

[Duvie]

I agree!!! I think we will just see INtel get to 4ghz by the end of next year. The 3.4ghz will likely be out end of the year just after the athlon64...remember the intel 3.06ghz was out at beginning of year so that means a whoppin 340mhz increase in a year....

[compudog]

The more I read about SOI on various forums and white papers, the more I think that Big Blue and AMD are about to form a partnership. I read somewhere that IBM will not discuss rumors, but it seems that IBM and AMD are ready to consumate a relationship. This would be great, IMO, for both companies and be stiff competition to Intel.

[Jeff7181]

AMD would much rather increase the efficiency of the processor than it's clock speed... because right now Intel is nearing the physical limits of current technology. AMD doesn't have that problem... I'm sure if AMD absolutely HAD to increase the clock speed by a lot to keep pace with Intel, they could do it, however, they haven't been forced to, and they've most recently been pooling their resources for the Athlon-64. I think once the Athlon-64 gets going, and SOI is well underway, and yields are better, you'll start seeing SOI Athlon XP's in their value line. You might get a .09 micron SOI XP3200 that can overclock to say, 2.8 Ghz on 1.2 volts... how nice would that be? =) That could be our future XP1700 T-Bred B =)

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by compudog
The more I read about SOI on various forums and white papers, the more I think that Big Blue and AMD are about to form a partnership. I read somewhere that IBM will not discuss rumors, but it seems that IBM and AMD are ready to consumate a relationship. This would be great, IMO, for both companies and be stiff competition to Intel. They already have, I'll find you a link...

[Jeff7181]

AMD Athlon 64 formula has been revealed by, x86-secret. (CPU freq x 3 / 2) + 400 = rating. Thus: (1600 x 3 / 2) + 400 = 2800+ and so on. Lets just hope that the rating value is not too fanciful. What's the point. (http://www.a1-electronics.net/)

[Duvie]

I'd be there!!! I just hope the pr rating isn't as whacked as the +3200 and doesn't have benefits in some apps to get killed in cpu dependent apps that like the total mhz....I have to admit that is the only thing that sometimes keeps me from lookint at AMD...That ofcourse can all change. AMD will have SSE2 and I need to see how it is implemented. With the right chipset that board could be a winner. Ilike it when the companies are close and the title goes back and forth like a good tennis volley....

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by Jeff7181
They already have, I'll find you a link... The Link I promised (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/news/2003/0108_amd.html)

[JayisunJ]

The more I read about SOI on various forums and white papers, the more I think that Big Blue and AMD are about to form a partnership. I read somewhere that IBM will not discuss rumors, but it seems that IBM and AMD are ready to consumate a relationship. This would be great, IMO, for both companies and be stiff competition to Intel. I am pretty sure that they already have a partnership. I think that a company merger or buyout of one or the other would be an awesome business decision though. With IBM's $money$ and AMD's engineers, they could definately become a much better competitor to Intel. That is one thing I have always wanted to see. Someone that has the $money$ to stand up to Intel. Money to advertise and get thier name out. I can dream can't I? :)

[Jeff7181]

On a side note... Sun Microsystems has also expressed interest in using Opteron processors in their servers. Looks like AMD's 32/64 bit hybrid is catching on. That's the one thing Intel failed to do with the Itanium, make it backward compatible with x86 instructions.

[Duvie]

Originally posted by JayisunJ
I am pretty sure that they already have a partnership. I think that a company merger or buyout of one or the other would be an awesome business decision though. With IBM's $money$ and AMD's engineers, they could definately become a much better competitor to Intel. That is one thing I have always wanted to see. Someone that has the $money$ to stand up to Intel. Money to advertise and get thier name out. I can dream can't I? :)

It would be nice to shock the world of joe blows and let them now there is something besides the vanilla Intel chips!!!!

I have always said I will build amd systems for ppl, but sometimes it is easier becasue of brand name familiarity for the customer to go with Intel. Sometimes they feel they are gambling no matter how much you tell them in the real world these chips are quite similar in performance and reliabilty!!!

[compudog]

Thanks for the links. I think it would make sense if there was some sort of merger/solid partnership between the two. Back in the day, when Cyrix was an innovator, IBM fabbed the chips. They weren't bad performance for the price. Ahh the day of running a Cyrix/IBM 6x86 P150+ CPU (120MHz).... :eek2:

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by compudog
Thanks for the links. I think it would make sense if there was some sort of merger/solid partnership between the two. Back in the day, when Cyrix was an innovator, IBM fabbed the chips. They weren't bad performance for the price. Ahh the day of running a Cyrix/IBM 6x86 P150+ CPU (120MHz).... :eek2: I have a Cyrix 486 DX2 66 Mhz =)

[JayisunJ]

On a side note... Sun Microsystems has also expressed interest in using Opteron processors in their servers. Yea, this has been brewing for awhile now. At first, Sun was going to be onboard as one of the unofficial "launch partners" for Opteron, but then backed out when they realized that the Opteron greatly outperformed thier own ultraSPARC chips relative to price/performance. I read an article somewhere (Here (http://news.com.com/2100-1010-996060.html) I think) that said Sun couldn't sell an ultraSPARC system to customers because they couldn't answer customers when they asked questions like "Why does the Opteron perform so much better relative to it's price than the ultraSPARC?" LOL. That tells you Opteron is something special. :wave:

[compudog]

Originally posted by Jeff7181
I have a Cyrix 486 DX2 66 Mhz =)

Are you still running it? My first 386 machine was an AMD cpu and my first 486 was a TI cpu and then it was all Intel until last November. (At least on my main rig)...


Sorry, nostalgia got me off topic.

[Jeff7181]

No, I'm not... it hasn't run in years... I tried to put it together a while back and it didn't work for some reason... but now my 2nd computer is an XP1700, and I have another Pentium 233 that's not complete.

[pointreyes]

Originally posted by JayisunJ
Yea, this has been brewing for awhile now. At first, Sun was going to be onboard as one of the unofficial "launch partners" for Opteron, but then backed out when they realized that the Opteron greatly outperformed thier own ultraSPARC chips relative to price/performance. I read an article somewhere (Here (http://news.com.com/2100-1010-996060.html) I think) that said Sun couldn't sell an ultraSPARC system to customers because they couldn't answer customers when they asked questions like "Why does the Opteron perform so much better relative to it's price than the ultraSPARC?" LOL. That tells you Opteron is something special. :wave:

:lol: I remember reading that also. It's so funny that the Opteron is that powerful. Poor Sun, their proc is not powerful enough and then they have a problem selling Linux OS on their platform because there are certain aspects of Linux that is better than Solaris. I wonder if they will ever admit to the taste of humble pie. :rolleyes: I like Solaris and Sun workstations are rather insteresting when you consider that long before the x86 platform started to provide firewire and USB ports that Sun already had them. I still would like to have an 8-way ultraSPARC to test against an 8-way Opteron. Forget the desktops, I want servers. [pr is now drooling, he must now exit from BE for a brief period of trying to regain sanity].

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by JayisunJ
Yea, this has been brewing for awhile now. At first, Sun was going to be onboard as one of the unofficial "launch partners" for Opteron, but then backed out when they realized that the Opteron greatly outperformed thier own ultraSPARC chips relative to price/performance. I read an article somewhere (Here (http://news.com.com/2100-1010-996060.html) I think) that said Sun couldn't sell an ultraSPARC system to customers because they couldn't answer customers when they asked questions like "Why does the Opteron perform so much better relative to it's price than the ultraSPARC?" LOL. That tells you Opteron is something special. :wave: That's exactly right, so poor Sun is trapped between a rock and a hard palce where they are forced to continue to deal with Intel their hated rival instead of AMD whom they have no animosity towards because Opteron would clobber their own platforms sales.

[Jeff7181]

Maybe Sun could make chipsets for Opterons???

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by Jeff7181
[B]I don't know, I think they might change to a .065 or .05 or maybe even .04 before the SOI technology is replaced. I hope you're wrong about that as strained silicon shows much more promise from what I've read than SOI and Intel will almost certainly run away in the performance race using the strained silicon approach architectural differences not withstanding.

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by DAPUNISHER
I hope you're wrong about that as strained silicon shows much more promise from what I've read than SOI and Intel will almost certainly run away in the performance race using the strained silicon approach architectural differences not withstanding. Do you have any links to a site that explains that process? I haven't heard much about that, especially details about how it will improve the speed of the transistors.

[Duvie]

Here is one.....About Intel adopting the process for its .09 Prescott chip....NOt to technical....

http://www.eetimes.com/semi/news/OEG20020813S0012

couple more...

http://www.siliconstrategies.com/story/OEG20020813S0001

http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20020816S0048

[JayisunJ]

Anybody know where AMD is fabbing the Athlon 64's or where they are going to fab thier .09 micron parts next year? I thought I heard IBM, but I don't know what Dresden (Fab 30) would be manufacturing if IBM was doing thier top-of-the-line parts? Thanks. :)

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by JayisunJ
Anybody know where AMD is fabbing the Athlon 64's or where they are going to fab thier .09 micron parts next year? I thought I heard IBM, but I don't know what Dresden (Fab 30) would be manufacturing if IBM was doing thier top-of-the-line parts? Thanks. :) As far as I know, all SOI parts will be manufactured at Fab 30... including a Barton based SOI core, which is supposed to go into production the 2nd half of this year. I would imagine it will be held off until after the launch of the Athlon-64 though.

[JayisunJ]

As far as I know, all SOI parts will be manufactured at Fab 30... including a Barton based SOI core, which is supposed to go into production the 2nd half of this year. I would imagine it will be held off until after the launch of the Athlon-64 though. Hey thanks, I didn't think that AMD would let IBM have all the fun. Barton based SOI core huh? Mabye they are going to resurrect the XP line as a "Budget" processor of sorts at higher clock speeds? AMD is just full of surprises. :wave:

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by JayisunJ
Hey thanks, I didn't think that AMD would let IBM have all the fun. Barton based SOI core huh? Mabye they are going to resurrect the XP line as a "Budget" processor of sorts at higher clock speeds? AMD is just full of surprises. :wave: They certainly are! I really believe that AMD's leadership is very solid and that they are steering a good course for the future :beer: :beer:

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by Jeff7181
Do you have any links to a site that explains that process? I haven't heard much about that, especially details about how it will improve the speed of the transistors. Anand did a write up on Intel's .09 process Here is the part about strained silicon (http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1677&p=3) though I know you'll read the whole thing anyways ;)

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by JayisunJ
Hey thanks, I didn't think that AMD would let IBM have all the fun. Barton based SOI core huh? Mabye they are going to resurrect the XP line as a "Budget" processor of sorts at higher clock speeds? AMD is just full of surprises. :wave: Yes, AMD has made it known that the Athlon XP will be demoted to their "value line" ... and also will be VERY good for notebooks when they switch the XP line to SOI... as SOI cores are running on 1.2 volts.

[JayisunJ]

as SOI cores are running on 1.2 volts. Holy cow! That is some seriously low voltage. These things should run pretty cool then I assume. Since Athlon 64 will be using SOI, I would suppose it too will use only 1.2 volts?

[JayisunJ]

I personally don't like to read or link to this site as it very Intel biased, but I had to pass along the news that AMD had an up-and-running desktop Athlon 64 and mobile Athlon 64 at the Million Man LAN 2 event and even let a few gamers try out the 64-bit version of Unreal Tournament 2003. It also discusses the fact that ATI is already in the late development stages for thier 64-bit graphics driver. Good stuff. Link HERE (http://www.tomshardware.com/game/200306281/millionman-04.html).

[Jeff7181]

Good, glad to see working parts... paper launches suck.

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by JayisunJ
I personally don't like to read or link to this site as it very Intel biased, but I had to pass along the news that AMD had an up-and-running desktop Athlon 64 and mobile Athlon 64 at the Million Man LAN 2 event and even let a few gamers try out the 64-bit version of Unreal Tournament 2003. It also discusses the fact that ATI is already in the late development stages for thier 64-bit graphics driver. Good stuff. Link HERE (http://www.tomshardware.com/game/200306281/millionman-04.html). Wow! That whole affair has turned into the latest Techies' soap opera eh? :rolleyes:

[JayisunJ]

Wow! That whole affair has turned into the latest Techies' soap opera eh? Oh man you know it. What a joke. I've visited AMDMB.com for awhile now and Ryan has never posted fraudulent material to my knowledge. Nor has he ever purposely defamed anyones character. What he says, in my book, is the truth. I also read THG for quite awhile, but stopped about a year ago. They always seem to be the center of some feud or scandal. And now they are trying to bring Ryan into the middle of it. He did nothing but report the facts as he experienced them. I would much rather hear about Athlon 64 from a trusted AMD fansite like AMDMB than from a site that has a known Intel bias anyway. THG is a disgrace to the hardware community and I for one will not be visiting thier site anymore. :mad: (steps off soapbox :))

[JayisunJ]

Good, glad to see working parts... paper launches suck. LOL. Paper launches do suck. I think Athlon 64 will be released on time and in bulk. AMD has too much riding on this to screw up the September launch. Plus that leaked document (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1130735,00.asp) from HP shows that they will have some Athlon 64 systems built already in August- although they won't necessarily be available in August. I am really excited that a brand name company is using the Athlon 64. I hope it catches on.

[JayisunJ]

Looks like maybe AMD is TOO ready for the launch. According to the Inquirer (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10304), AMD has bumped up the release date to one week earlier! :wave:

[XJ.]

Originally posted by Jeff7181
Yes, AMD has made it known that the Athlon XP will be demoted to their "value line" ... and also will be VERY good for notebooks when they switch the XP line to SOI... as SOI cores are running on 1.2 volts.

Yeah, Holy Cow! Do you know if the current NF2 400 Ultra chipset supports (or can support w/bios update) the 1.2v bartons??? If so, there would still be a decent upgrade path for Socket A users!

TY,
XJ

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by XJ.
Yeah, Holy Cow! Do you know if the current NF2 400 Ultra chipset supports (or can support w/bios update) the 1.2v bartons??? If so, there would still be a decent upgrade path for Socket A users!

TY,
XJ
I would assume with a BIOS upgrade it should support it... no NF2 motherboards that I know of right now are able to go all the way down to 1.2 volts, but I don't see why they wouldn't be able to with simple software modification.

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by Duvie
Here is one.....About Intel adopting the process for its .09 Prescott chip....NOt to technical....

http://www.eetimes.com/semi/news/OEG20020813S0012

couple more...

http://www.siliconstrategies.com/story/OEG20020813S0001

http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20020816S0048 From what I've read on those sites, strained silicon doesn't sound to me like it's any better, if even as good as SOI... from what I gather, they're basically using the same method as before, just doing a better job of "staying inside the lines" I guess you could say. I don't see how SS solves the problem of transistors only being able to switch on and off so fast.
To me, it seems like Intel might an advantage of not trying a completely new manufacturing process... but AMD might have a more "futureproof" approach once they get bugs worked out and tweak things a little.

[JayisunJ]

Two interesting news pieces about Athlon 64: HERE (http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-1023436.html?tag=fd_top) and HERE (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10353). The first article states that AMD has finally set a solid date for the launch of Athlon 64 desktop and mobile chips. September 22 - mark your calenders! The second article discusses the possibility that AMD may move the Athlon 64 to the same 940 pin package as the Opteron to support (or at least have support for in the future) dual channel memory. Good stuff. :wave:

[XJ.]

Well, the Inq. article seems to indicate that AMD can't yet pump out decent Athlon64s (probably because with less cache and single channel memory, they'd have to be much higher clocked to compete with Intel). So, they are just using Opterons instead. The idea of a mainstream Proc not using dual channel memory is pretty much a bonehead idea right now anyway (maybe it'd be ok for an x86-64 "duron" cpu).

Thanks for the links!

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by Jeff7181
From what I've read on those sites, strained silicon doesn't sound to me like it's any better, if even as good as SOI... from what I gather, they're basically using the same method as before, just doing a better job of "staying inside the lines" I guess you could say. I don't see how SS solves the problem of transistors only being able to switch on and off so fast.
To me, it seems like Intel might an advantage of not trying a completely new manufacturing process... but AMD might have a more "futureproof" approach once they get bugs worked out and tweak things a little. I'm not certain I agree with your conclusions here, do yourself a favor and post your concerns/questions about strained silicon for pm over at AT's highly technical section and he'll school you on the subject. You could do a search too since he and Wingz have covered it's potential vs SOI, particularly from a manufacturing process standpoint. They made some very compelling arguments for why it's superior due to it's not having any real downside the way SOI does.

I'm certainly not qualified to explain it and I'm too lazy to do the search myself, but you seem very eager to absorb any info you can on processor packaging technology so have a look or queary pm it's well worth it!

[SupDawg]

Originally posted by Jeff7181
I think the reason Intel doesn't want AMD to be sold in Dell and other pre-built computers for the general public is because they'd cost so much less, and you still get the good Dell support that is usually why the price is as high as it is.

Actually, AMD cpus would cost Dell more money than Intel's. This I know for a fact. Dell obviously goes through more Intel chips than anyone in the world. So they get nice kickbacks for that.

As far as Athlon 64 stripping market share away from Intella's, they would have to take the performance crown and keep it for several years because there is such a lag in consumer "know how". The average "Joe" probably still thinks that AMD is a second rate company. Dell is looking at the Opteron, but I think it's highly unlikely that they will bite.

Dell is not stupid, they will probably go with them if they continue to dominate. Amd must make a irrefutable argument to get Dell's attention. And make that statement they must for the long haul. I do agree with Dapunisher that getting into these teir one companies to tout their shiny hardware is the key to market share increases.

Me personally, I am looking forward to seeing what AMD has got. I hope for the industry in whole they succeed.

[Chuck232]

But we have to remember here... Intel's a huge company, huge market cap, revenues, R&D, assets and anything basically you can name. They're not gonna sit there and ask AMD to beat the living crap out of them. They're not gonna just say, Oh look, A64, well, it's too good, I guess I'll just roll over dead.

I can't see AMD ever gaining a dominant position in the CPU market as long as nothing short of catastrophic happens to Intel.

Also, it was reported that AMD couldn't support getting Dell enough processors to put in all their systems. I'm sure Intel would instantly cut their deal with Dell if they started using AMD CPUs in their desktops. And without enough AMD chips to fill all the comps, and with Intel cutting their deal, Dell would stand to lose more than gain.

Just my speculation.:wave:

EDIT: I slpel gud

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by Chuck232
But we have to remember here... Intel's a huge company, huge market cap, revenues, R&D, assets and anything basically you can name. They're not gonna sit there and ask AMD to beat the living crap out of them. They're not gonna just say, Oh look, A64, well, it's too good, I guess I'll just roll over dead.

I can't see AMD ever gaining a dominant position in the CPU market as long as nothing short of catastrophic happens to Intel.

Also, it was reported that AMD couldn't support getting Dell enough processors to put in all their systems. I'm sure Intel would instantly cut their deal with Dell if they started using AMD CPUs in their desktops. And without enough AMD chips to fill all the comps, and with Intel cutting their deal, Dell would stand to lose more than gain.

Just my speculation.:wave:

EDIT: I slpel gud Maybe if some politicians ask Intel for a monitary donation, and Intel refuses, they'll slap them with a monopoly lawsuit just like MS =)

[Duvie]

Originally posted by SupDawg
Actually, AMD cpus would cost Dell more money than Intel's. This I know for a fact. Dell obviously goes through more Intel chips than anyone in the world. So they get nice kickbacks for that.

As far as Athlon 64 stripping market share away from Intella's, they would have to take the performance crown and keep it for several years because there is such a lag in consumer "know how". The average "Joe" probably still thinks that AMD is a second rate company. Dell is looking at the Opteron, but I think it's highly unlikely that they will bite.

Dell is not stupid, they will probably go with them if they continue to dominate. Amd must make a irrefutable argument to get Dell's attention. And make that statement they must for the long haul. I do agree with Dapunisher that getting into these teir one companies to tout their shiny hardware is the key to market share increases.


Me personally, I am looking forward to seeing what AMD has got. I hope for the industry in whole they succeed.

I agree.....I think opteron and server market should be a major focus for amd as the low end desktop market won tget them the status to compete with intel....

[DAPUNISHER]

OK, the most important question is, who's going to be the first to buy a 64 and a supporting board? ;)

[JayisunJ]

From [H]ardOCP

Hammer Rumor Mill:
A collection of what is being said around the silicon campfires this weekend.

1. Athlon64 will launch in two main types of CPU: Clawhammer, with 1MB L2, and Paris, with 256KB L2. Here’s another addition though and a biggie. The Clawhammer model will have two types as well. One model will have single memory channel support, and one with dual memory channel support. The latter to be aimed at gamers and enthusiasts. Workstations will also be a target market. (Not sure if this is true dual channel or simply a bus width doubled.)

2. Athlon64 will launch with a socket compatible to Opteron, in order to take immediate advantage of mainboards already in the marketplace, such as the Asus SK8N, and a few others. HOWEVER, further iterations of the chip will have pin(s) added so you will not be able to use them in Opteron boards.

3. 750,000 Athlon64s banked for the September launch in order to facilitate wide availability on launch date or shortly after.

4. 64-bit Compatible version of Windows Server 2003 at launch with 64-bit WinXP to follow.


Just more rumors, but it sure does get me excited about Athlon 64 :) BTW, DAPUNISHER, great question, someone here needs to get an Athlon 64 rig right at launch (if available) so we can know first hand how it performs :) Anyone here got the kind of $$$ to do something crazy like that? lol

[XJ.]

Heh, thought I already posted this, but it's not here...

Originally, the Athlon64s were to have fewer pins than Opteron (1 vs 3 HT links, less cache). Since they are going to have the same pin count for at least the moment - this gives more credibility to the argument that the first Ath64s will actually be rebadged Opterons. Hmph :scratch:

In any case, I'm waiting till I see how the 90nm Ath64s perform. I also want to see how mature WinXP64 is and what kind of peformance boosts can be had.

In actually, I hope that the rumor about 90nm Bartons is correct. If so, I could see a 20-25% boost for just a processor upgrade - that would be adequate for me next year :cool:

The next 12 months will be much more interesting, on the processor front, than the past 12 months have been :beer:

[Chuck232]

Well, hopefully it'll be exciting with 2 whole new desktop CPUs coming to market... heh.

Too bad I'm poor and can't get an Athlon64 to test for you guys...:p

[JayisunJ]

Well, hopefully it'll be exciting with 2 whole new desktop CPUs coming to market. Heh, no doubt it will be exciting. The last year has been pretty boring for the desktop CPU market. Athlon 64 is definately going to bring long overdue change and innovation to the market. Anyone else notice that there isn't a whole lot of Athlon 64 news out there? Maybe just because it has been "coming soon" for so long and everyone just wants it to be here NOW. Like me! :D

[Chuck232]

Well... it has been delayed and delayed and delayed.. I can see many people losing interest after the initial "suspense period."

[JayisunJ]

Well, I just put my foot in my mouth. Two new articles today from a very reliable source - ABCnews.com. Well maybe not ABCnews.com, but one (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10461) is from the semi-but-not-quite trustworthy site The Inquirer while the other (http://www.e04hardware.com/k8a64/k8a64.htm) is from a website I've never heard of before. The Athlon 64 benches on the second site are especially interesting. :D Not sure I trust em, but interesting.

[Chuck232]

Hmmm... looking at the benches that 3400+ seems a little overrated perhaps....

Oh, some benches here with an Opteron (yeah, I know) and an ASUS SK8N (nForce3 chipset). It's an early board, so I think you could expect more out of the retail version.

Here (http://www.tbreak.com/reviews/article.php?id=223)