Intel 45nm Quad Core launch in 2007

[Aberforth]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: Aberforth
Lets hear what you've got to say

You're trolling, and you need to cut your sig down by about 8 lines.

http://www.anandtech.com/myanandtech.aspx + Login + System Rigs page

- M4H

Thanks for the advice, I know girls like you have such a jealous nature so please don't mind if i don't take you seriously (I'd rather put my rig in the sig than a link to girl problems in a tech forum). What I really wanted to know was where AMD stands at this stage? There are no 65nm AMD CPUS (forget 45nm) , Quad etc and they are delaying the R600 launch. This means lack of intelligent people in AMD or lack of funds to continue research, either way AMD is too bad in marketing. Its not only the question of enthusiasts but enterprise users- very few enterprise users prefer AMD and many choose Intel chips for it's reliability.

 

[BlingBlingArsch]

o damnit...he was right, u are trolling.

 

[Acanthus]

He cant even form a coherant sentence.

A good troll is well read at the very least, so you can pretend that you actually believe your own garbage.

 

[jgigz]

Originally posted by: Aberforth

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: Aberforth
Lets hear what you've got to say

You're trolling, and you need to cut your sig down by about 8 lines.

http://www.anandtech.com/myanandtech.aspx + Login + System Rigs page

- M4H

Thanks for the advice, I know girls like you have such a jealous nature so please don't mind if i don't take you seriously (I'd rather put my rig in the sig than a link to girl problems in a tech forum). What I really wanted to know was where AMD stands at this stage? There are no 65nm AMD CPUS (forget 45nm) , Quad etc and they are delaying the R600 launch. This means lack of intelligent people in AMD or lack of funds to continue research, either way AMD is too bad in marketing. Its not only the question of enthusiasts but enterprise users- very few enterprise users prefer AMD and many choose Intel chips for it's reliability.

Hmmm you might wanna do some more research before you go and say silly things like there are no 65nm AMD.

Proof: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi...e&Submit=ENE&N=0&Ntk=all&Go.x=0&Go.y=0
Take your pick.

 

[Aberforth]

Hmmm you might wanna do some more research before you go and say silly things like there are no 65nm AMD.

Proof: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi...e&Submit=ENE&N=0&Ntk=all&Go.x=0&Go.y=0
Take your pick.

oops i meant 64nm quad core sorry .

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Aberforth


Thanks for the advice, I know girls like you have such a jealous nature so please don't mind if i don't take you seriously (I'd rather put my rig in the sig than a link to girl problems in a tech forum). What I really wanted to know was where AMD stands at this stage? There are no 65nm AMD CPUS (forget 45nm) , Quad etc and they are delaying the R600 launch. This means lack of intelligent people in AMD or lack of funds to continue research, either way AMD is too bad in marketing. Its not only the question of enthusiasts but enterprise users- very few enterprise users prefer AMD and many choose Intel chips for it's reliability.

Sigh...in the hopes that you can evolve here, how about some corrections.

1. AMD 65nm has been out since November.
2. AMD will be 100% 65nm by August
3. Saying that AMD has a "lack of intelligent people" is especially silly since a good portion of both company's employees go back and forth between the 2.
4. "AMD is too bad in marketing" is just a lack of knowledge...AMD has been gaining marketshare every quarter but one for years now, and the most recent quarter was the highest marketshare in their history. They sell everything they can make!
5. "very few enterprise users prefer AMD" - That's also a complete lack of knowledge...they have gone from .005% to >20% marketshare in enterprise over just the last few years, and they are the ONLY sensible game in town for 4P or greater x86 systems (enterprise only). The enterprise market for AMD is still growing very fast. Frankly, they are the platform of choice for x86 enterprise (though Intel is superior for the smaller servers).

 

[Bob151]

After my disappointing experience with the K6-2 (no math co-processor IIRC and lame game performance) compared to the P2, I thought I would never go AMD again. But they released the A64+ and beat the current line-up at that time from Intel in relation to performance, price, and temperature. I am on the same A64+ now for nearly 3 years and plan to go C2D soon.

However, I am sure that AMD will eventually trump Intel again. There is no harm in them doing so, the competition is good for all of us.

 

[nyker96]

i think intel wants to head off the K8L launch with the 45nm quads. heard somewhere they expecting higher clocks than AMD's 65nm process which isn't surprising for me. But question is how much higher than AMD's 65nm quad and what's the IPC from K8L will be like.

As to brand name loyalty I must say I'd go AMD if they equal in price/performance I don't even need the highest performing thing. However, C2D really trumps AMD on all fronts, so no reason to go AMD when you got C2D as an upgrade path.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: nyker96
i think intel wants to head off the K8L launch with the 45nm quads. heard somewhere they expecting higher clocks than AMD's 65nm process which isn't surprising for me. But question is how much higher than AMD's 65nm quad and what's the IPC from K8L will be like.

As to brand name loyalty I must say I'd go AMD if they equal in price/performance I don't even need the highest performing thing. However, C2D really trumps AMD on all fronts, so no reason to go AMD when you got C2D as an upgrade path.

Well firstly, there is no K8L...it's the K10.
I don't see how they can expect a higher clock when nobody knows what the K10 will clock to. It has many new features (including a new power management system that controls each of the cores individually).

As to C2D trumping K8, with the exception of the Enterprise sector I'd agree...

 

[jpeyton]

:music::music::music:
You say yes, I say no
You say stop and I say go, go, go
Oh, no
You say goodbye and I say hello
Hello, hello
I don't know why you say goodbye
I say hello
Hello, hello
I don't know why you say goodbye
I say hello

I say high, you say low
You say why, and I say I don't know
Oh, no
You say goodbye and I say hello
Hello, hello
I don't know why you say goodbye
I say hello
Hello, hello
I don't know why you say goodbye
I say hello

Why, why, why, why, why, why
Do you say good bye
Goodbye, bye, bye, bye, bye

Oh, no
You say goodbye and I say hello
Hello, hello
I don't know why you say goodbye
I say hello
Hello, hello
I don't know why you say goodbye
I say hello
hello, hello
I don't know why you say goodbye I say hello
Hello

Hela, heba helloa
Hela, heba helloa
:music::music::music:

 

[Viditor]

I would be careful JP...you never know when the RIAA will show up and bust you for copyright infringement!

 

[zephyrprime]

So, anyone know if the penryns will work in current socket 775 boards? I guess there could be some VRM issues or something.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: zephyrprime
So, anyone know if the penryns will work in current socket 775 boards? I guess there could be some VRM issues or something.

Since 775 Penryns won't be out for a year, I wouldn't plan the motherboard just yet...
Besides, they will be pushing all new chipsets for it at the higher FSB anyway.

 

[SexyK]

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: zephyrprime
So, anyone know if the penryns will work in current socket 775 boards? I guess there could be some VRM issues or something.

Since 775 Penryns won't be out for a year, I wouldn't plan the motherboard just yet...
Besides, they will be pushing all new chipsets for it at the higher FSB anyway.

Intel's latest desktop guidance claims 45nm desktop SKUs will also launch in late 2007, with volume shipments occurring in 2008. As it stands right now, only the mobile 45nm SKUs are expected to launch in 2008.

link

Sounds like less than a year until Penryn launch.

Penryn will launch on Socket 775 -- meaning existing motherboards can physically harbor the new CPU, but electrically might not. "Motherboard developers will have to make some minor changes to support [Penryn]. We can't guarantee that a person could just plug the chip into every motherboard on the market today." However, Smith also claimed the Penryn boot test that grabbed so many headlines last week occurred on unmodified hardware that included a notebook, several desktop motherboards and several server motherboards.

link

No new chipsets required for Penryn, it seems that it's just going to be a matter of delivering the proper voltage as the OP suggested. There will most likely be boards using current chipsets that have Penryn support out of the box, especially considering that they were booting it on current, unmodified hardware.

 

[BlingBlingArsch]

every time someone says "penryn" Intel`s earnin a dollar....or AMD is shooting a puppy? not sure..

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: SexyK

Sounds like less than a year until Penryn launch.

The only early part are the Xeons, and they aren't socket 775...

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: Aberforth

Hmmm you might wanna do some more research before you go and say silly things like there are no 65nm AMD.

Proof: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi...e&Submit=ENE&N=0&Ntk=all&Go.x=0&Go.y=0
Take your pick.

oops i meant 64nm quad core sorry .

I'm not aware that they have 64nm parts..... (I'm just messing with ya)

 

[zsdersw]

Originally posted by: Viditor
The only early part are the Xeons, and they aren't socket 775...

"Only" the Xeons? I'm sorry, but where does that come from? You can't tout the importance of the server market when you refer to AMD's products.. and then downplay it when referring to Intel's products.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: SexyK

Sounds like less than a year until Penryn launch.

The only early part are the Xeons, and they aren't socket 775...

They aren't?

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: zsdersw

Originally posted by: Viditor
The only early part are the Xeons, and they aren't socket 775...

"Only" the Xeons? I'm sorry, but where does that come from? You can't tout the importance of the server market when you refer to AMD's products.. and then downplay it when referring to Intel's products.

Read the thread Z...I wasn't downplaying them, I was responding to zephyr's question "So, anyone know if the penryns will work in current socket 775 boards?".

Lonyo, the 3000's are rebadged C2Ds, not Woodcrest Xeons...do you really think that's what Intel meant???

 

[SexyK]

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: SexyK

Sounds like less than a year until Penryn launch.

The only early part are the Xeons, and they aren't socket 775...

You apparently didn't even read the text I quote or the article I linked. According to the latest roadmaps, the Intel 45nm desktop chip launch has been pulled into Q4 07, not only server chips. Widespread availability will be early 08, but there will be socket 775 chips available at 45nm in 07 according to the article.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: SexyK

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: SexyK

Sounds like less than a year until Penryn launch.

The only early part are the Xeons, and they aren't socket 775...

You apparently didn't even read the text I quote or the article I linked. According to the latest roadmaps, the Intel 45nm desktop chip launch has been pulled into Q4 07, not only server chips. Widespread availability will be early 08, but there will be socket 775 chips available at 45nm in 07 according to the article.

I did, and I've read it before...it says:
"Intel's latest desktop guidance claims 45nm desktop SKUs will also launch in late 2007, with volume shipments occurring in 2008."
The volume shipments are when you can actually buy them, not the "launch"...

Edit: Quite often, they have a volume shipment that coincides with the launch, but it doesn't appear to be the case here...

 

[zsdersw]

Originally posted by: Viditor
Read the thread Z...I wasn't downplaying them, I was responding to zephyr's question "So, anyone know if the penryns will work in current socket 775 boards?".

No, you were responding to SexyK. If you were responding to zephyr, you should've quoted his/her question instead of a statement by SexyK.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: zsdersw

Originally posted by: Viditor
Read the thread Z...I wasn't downplaying them, I was responding to zephyr's question "So, anyone know if the penryns will work in current socket 775 boards?".

No, you were responding to SexyK. If you were responding to zephyr, you should've quoted his/her question instead of a statement by SexyK.

Good God man, I was responding to both! Just read the thread and relax the sphincter!

 

[zsdersw]

I already did read the thread. Your response that I originally quoted was a response to SexyK, not zephyr.. who asked if Penryns will work in current 775 boards. Your response was about Xeons and how they're not 775. It said nothing to answer zephyr's question.