Overclock.net banner
1 - 20 of 47 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,422 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Quote:


AMD bets on low-power, low-clock processors for its next generation debut

AMD announced today what analysts have been dreading for months: the company will launch its next-generation architecture this August, at top-out frequencies of 2.0 GHz. This next-generation CPU will become the successor of the existing K8 AMD Opteron lineup.

AMD's press release claims, "With planned availability at launch in a range of frequencies up to 2.0 Ghz, AMD expects its native quad-core processors to scale to higher frequencies in Q407 in both standard and SE (Special Edition) versions."

AMD Barcelona roadmaps from February 2007 indicated the company would launch at a top-out frequency of 2.3 GHz, with an eventual ramp to 2.6 GHz on the way.

Just this past June the company also announced it could demonstrate Barcelona on working systems immediately. The part the company left out from its announcement was that the demonstration CPUs ran at 1.6 GHz -- still 400 MHz under the estimated launch speed and 700 MHz under the roadmapped top-out frequency.

To add insult to injury, when DailyTech benchmarked the pre-production 1.6 GHz Barcelona, the CPU did not match Intel's 65nm quad-core offering clock-for-clock. AMD engineers stress to DailyTech that this benchmark was premature, and that final silicon and software will allow for SSE optimizations and better performance.

AMD's press release claims the Barcelona Opteron will provide a 70% performance increase in certain database applications; and a 40% increase on certain floating point applications. The company has maintained this conclusion for nearly six months, though the only benchmarks it has provided to back its case up are simulated SPECint and SPECfp benchmarks released in April 2007.

The 2.0 GHz K10 Opteron announcement comes with another twist; the company will launch its energy-efficient models alongside its performance models at launch. Originally, these low-power Barcelona derivatives were scheduled for a late 2007, possibly early 2008 launch.

“AMD has prioritized production of our low power and standard power products because our customers and ecosystem demand it, and we firmly believe that the introduction of our native Quad-Core AMD Opteron processor will deliver on the promise of the highest levels of performance-per-watt the industry has ever seen,†added Randy Allen, corporate vice president of AMD's Server and Workstation division.

The upcoming Barcelona processors are drop-in compatible with current-generation Opteron motherboards.

http://www.dailytech.com/AMD+to+Laun...rticle7890.htm
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,202 Posts
They releasing in August instead of September? =]

Quote:
it could run at 100MHZ for all i care it had better beat intel,i plane on getting a Phenom x4 when they come out and it had better beat the hell out of anything intel.
It had better or AMD will be in the hole.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,422 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by jonny1989 View Post
it could run at 100MHZ for all i care it had better beat intel,i plane on getting a Phenom x4 when they come out and it had better beat the hell out of anything intel.
And if the Core 2 Quad is faster (and cheaper), will you still get the Phenom?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
986 Posts
I should have bought a AM2 system instead of the one in my spec but this thing flys so I cant really imagine goin faster. If the Intels really do pwn the AM2 and AM2 pwns 939 then I have no idea what to buy. If i can go faster that would be sweet but i seem to be all about buying the most stable for the price. Maybe thats why i went 939 but with my budget I could have gone C2D. Technology needs to peak sometime. The only major differences are the architecture the clock speed means almost nothing. They have stayed under the 4Ghz mark and I don't see them going higher just smaller with more cores. IMO
 

·
Filthy Casual
Joined
·
8,653 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by liermam View Post
Thats the idea behind fanboyism. He'll just be an angry fanboy.
Ya, like Paul isn't a fanboy...

Anyway, we all know that 3 GHz K8s killed 3 GHz, and even 4 GHz, Intels. Why care about clock speed now? If the speeds are comparable to K8 vs P4 (and I'm not saying they are) then new AMDs being under 2 GHz makes sense, seeing as Intel's fastest at stock is 2.66 GHz.

And don't pull out that same tired benchmark you always do, because it's really getting old.

You always say they aren't going to scale well because they're launching the low end at like 1.6 GHz and the High end is 2.0, and was originally planned to be 2.3 GHz... Well, when C2D came out, their slowest was 1.8 GHz, and their fastest was what, 2.66 GHz? And that chip was well over $1000.

Wait until the chip is out, real, reputable benchmarks are presented, and then we will know whether this 2.0 GHz Barcelona is a flop, or if AMD has done a great job with low clock speeds (comparatively) just like with K8...
 

·
Excel Guru
Joined
·
12,121 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by IcedEarth View Post
But we still don't know how they perform at these frequencies.

People seem to be forgetting that AMD was never about clock speed in the first place.
The point is that they can't get out of the chips what they thought they could at this point. Even if it performs on par with the lower-end C2Ds and overclocks only mildly then I'll be happy because it means that competition continues.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,422 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by pow3rtr1p View Post
Ya, like Paul isn't a fanboy...
Show me one place where I have demonstrated "fanboy" qualities.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pow3rtr1p View Post
You always say they aren't going to scale well because they're launching the low end at like 1.6 GHz and the High end is 2.0, and was originally planned to be 2.3 GHz... Well, when C2D came out, their slowest was 1.8 GHz, and their fastest was what, 2.66 GHz? And that chip was well over $1000.

Wait until the chip is out, real, reputable benchmarks are presented, and then we will know whether this 2.0 GHz Barcelona is a flop, or if AMD has done a great job with low clock speeds (comparatively) just like with K8...
Core 2 Duo launched from 1.86Ghz to 2.66Ghz because that is all it needed to be the clear performance leader. Everyone knows the Core 2 Duo scales well. On July 26th we will have Core 2 Duo up to 3.0Ghz (1333Mhz FSB) and soon we will have the quad core at 3.0Ghz as well (Core 2 Extreme QX6850) The chip was $1000 because it was the fastest processor in the world. Remember when the FX60 cost $1000?

You do realize that K10 would have to be 50% faster clock for clock thant the Core 2 Quad to match its performance? (2.0Ghz vs 3.0Ghz)

Do you really see that happening when the pre-production benchmarks show it slower than Core 2 Quad clock for clock.
 

·
Excel Guru
Joined
·
12,121 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by pow3rtr1p
View Post

Well, when C2D came out, their slowest was 1.8 GHz, and their fastest was what, 2.66 GHz? And that chip was well over $1000.

If you want to accuse people of being fanboys then at least get your facts straight first. The $1000 processor was the C2D X6800 which ran at 2.93 GHz and had multipliers unlocked in both directions. Show me where the E6700 cost $1000.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,465 Posts
just think about this. the opty was clocked at a base speed of 1.8 GHz and can be overclocked to 3+ GHz....

maybe, just maaaaaybe you can take your 2 ghz phenom and put some juice to it.......and just maaaaybe you'll be able to hit 3 GHz. never know until they're release. but a man can dream can't he?
 

·
Filthy Casual
Joined
·
8,653 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by stargate125645
View Post

If you want to accuse people of being fanboys then at least get your facts straight first. The $1000 processor was the C2D X6800 which ran at 2.93 GHz and had multipliers unlocked in both directions. Show me where the E6700 cost $1000.

Which is why I stated the top clock speed in the form of a question, because I wasn't positive.

And Paul, you have been an "AMD FTL!" type since about the day C2D came out and benchmarks showed it beat K8.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,208 Posts
Quote:


Core 2 Duo launched from 1.86Ghz to 2.66Ghz because that is all it needed to be the clear performance leader. Everyone knows the Core 2 Duo scales well. On July 26th we will have Core 2 Duo up to 3.0Ghz (1333Mhz FSB) and soon we will have the quad core at 3.0Ghz as well (Core 2 Extreme QX6850) The chip was $1000 because it was the fastest processor in the world. Remember when the FX60 cost $1000?

You do realize that K10 would have to be 50% faster clock for clock thant the Core 2 Quad to match its performance? (2.0Ghz vs 3.0Ghz)

Do you really see that happening when the pre-production benchmarks show it slower than Core 2 Quad clock for clock.

preach on brother Core 2 rocks.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,947 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by Devon
View Post

preach on brother Core 2 rocks.

Grammar plz.

(grammar Nazi, HEIL!)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,781 Posts
well at least it will be released around my B-day!
that's what I'm gonna ask for!
A barcelona from my grandma, and an 8800GTX from my Parents!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,422 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Quote:


Originally Posted by mudd
View Post

just think about this. the opty was clocked at a base speed of 1.8 GHz and can be overclocked to 3+ GHz....

maybe, just maaaaaybe you can take your 2 ghz phenom and put some juice to it.......and just maaaaybe you'll be able to hit 3 GHz. never know until they're release. but a man can dream can't he?

Unfortunately, I don't think you are going to see that kind of scaling. If AMD cannot get it to launch at what they originally hoped for, I doubt it scales very well.
 
1 - 20 of 47 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top