When are 90nm A64's coming?

[Stoneburner]

I've heard that some sites of gotten previews of them, does that mean they'll be out by the end of the year or so?

 

[dennisjai215]

they should be out in a month or two i would think -_-
i think the 90nms will be winchester core so you'll know

 

[ToyYoda]

October

http://www.c627627.com/AMD/Athlon64/

 

[Gamingphreek]

what will 90nm gain AMD?

-Kevin

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
what will 90nm gain AMD?

-Kevin

Well it makes the chips cheaper to make, BUT they will also be upgarding the cores with SSE3, better prefetch, and soem other goodies.

The chip will be about 5-10% faster at the same speed of current A64's, let alone offer more head room for more Mhz.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
what will 90nm gain AMD?

-Kevin

Well it makes the chips cheaper to make, BUT they will also be upgarding the cores with SSE3, better prefetch, and soem other goodies.

The chip will be about 5-10% faster at the same speed of current A64's, let alone offer more head room for more Mhz.

So far intel has 200mhz out of .09, it doesnt add much headroom as heat and leakage become very serious problems on .09

Hopefully SOI will make a larger difference than i think it will, or we wont see anything higher than 4000+ AMD and 3800mhz Intel.

 

[Mik3y]

if i remember right, the san diego's are dual cored, right?

 

[lookouthere]

Originally posted by: Mik3y
if i remember right, the san diego's are dual cored, right?

no
the toledo is the one with dual core

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
what will 90nm gain AMD?

-Kevin

Well it makes the chips cheaper to make, BUT they will also be upgarding the cores with SSE3, better prefetch, and soem other goodies.

The chip will be about 5-10% faster at the same speed of current A64's, let alone offer more head room for more Mhz.

So far intel has 200mhz out of .09, it doesnt add much headroom as heat and leakage become very serious problems on .09

Hopefully SOI will make a larger difference than i think it will, or we wont see anything higher than 4000+ AMD and 3800mhz Intel.

Yea SOI and also AMD is using different Transistors in different parts of the cpu. So I think they seem to be getting along better then intel. They also are taking their time

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
what will 90nm gain AMD?

-Kevin

Well it makes the chips cheaper to make, BUT they will also be upgarding the cores with SSE3, better prefetch, and soem other goodies.

The chip will be about 5-10% faster at the same speed of current A64's, let alone offer more head room for more Mhz.

So far intel has 200mhz out of .09, it doesnt add much headroom as heat and leakage become very serious problems on .09

Hopefully SOI will make a larger difference than i think it will, or we wont see anything higher than 4000+ AMD and 3800mhz Intel.

Yea SOI and also AMD is using different Transistors in different parts of the cpu. So I think they seem to be getting along better then intel. They also are taking their time

I read about people hitting 3ghz on the 0.09um A64's (engineering sample) so I have a feeling they're doing much better than intel's implementation at this point.

 

[zephyrprime]

Hopefully SOI will make a larger difference than i think it will, or we wont see anything higher than 4000+ AMD and 3800mhz Intel.

Remember, the .09 process AMD is using also include high-k dieletric to further help reduce leakage.

 

[Accord99]

Nobody has high-K, only Intel has announced any real results with it and even Intel won't use it till .045 at the earliest.

Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Yea SOI and also AMD is using different Transistors in different parts of the cpu. So I think they seem to be getting along better then intel. They also are taking their time

AMD and IBM's PD-SOI doesn't really impact the forms of leakage that increase due to shrinking processes and using different types of transistors for different parts of a CPU has been used for a long time.

 

[Yanagi]

I read over at overclockers.com that the .09 might be delayed. dunno how accurate it is but lets hope its not.

 

[ThePlagiarmaster]

If you believe overclockers.com AMD is going out of business, and produces the worst chips on the market. They whine about AMD constantly. I haven't seen a bigger INTEL FANBOY in these forums anywhere. Well, nor in any other forums for that matter. He's worse than toms hardware. Every post he (ED) puts up slants towards Intel. Just count his AMD whining posts compared to ANY intel posts. It's like 5 to 1 or worse. Something's up there, just don't know what. He lost money on AMD stock? Intel pays him? AMD fired him from a job (or some relative) at some point in his life? He owns a large share of Intel stock?? Who knows, but something's up. I used to go there once a week (few years back), but now it's more like once every 3 months at best. Even then only when TheInq sends me there on accident...LOL.

You'll see me complain about AMD, but it's as a shareholder and a reseller. Both areas are in the same boat. AMD sells chips TOO FREAKING CHEAP. When most of my customers are buying chips less than $80, margins SUCK and so does the share price. If AMD would price closer to Intel's chips I'd make more money, they'd make more money, and my stock would be worth more. Whether someone chose AMD or Intel, the margins would be good all around. What's that, a WIN WIN WIN situation or what? It's tough to sell Intel these days to a lot of people also (home users I'm talking here). Why buy a P4 thats near twice the cost of an Athlon XP that performs about the same? About 90% of the buying public are clueless and just go the cheapest route when comparing same model#'s in a store.

However, I fully admit AMD wins across the board at all pricepoints these days (semprons look to do the same). Meaning whatever $ you spend on AMD, if you spent the same on Intel you'd always win with AMD. They're just so stinking cheap they're impossible to beat. As an upgrading freak I'd hate higher prices, but higher margins (and better stock price...even though I'm up 25% or so- damn dropped big this month) would ease that pain for sure I'm getting off topic here.

As for the .09 chips, AMD should get a lot more mileage out of it than Intel. AMD's hottest chips are putting out 64 watts or so (A64, temps seen by users are very low compared to prescott) while pres-hotts (heh) put out 105+. The die shrink will actually help AMD, where it hurt Intel. It would be different if AMD was running 3.5+ghz already (with ALU's running 6-7ghz..sheesh). But they're not. They get a LOT more done per clock, and as such shouldn't run into the Intel mhz wall for a while. To use a football analogy: Intel is like Emmit Smith. He needed a frontline that was 27'lbs larger than any other line in football to get yards. Once the line was gone, so were his big gains and yards/carry (7+ avg with the line, less than 4 without it). Consider AMD Barry Sanders (IMHO the best running back ever to touch the field). It's all about finnesse and quality of the RB, with no need for any frontline (he either lost 6yrds or ran for 80 with one shoe off...ROFL). If detroit had let him go, he'd have run over ever record on the books. If AMD charged more, they'd be able to make more fabs, and produce more chips. They have the best fab around, but just not enough of them. They sell record numbers every quarter, but make almost nothing because of the price of each one. Charging more=More fabs and more chips. They can't produce enough chips because they don't make enough $$ to buy more fabs. Hmm...Rock and a hard place here I guess. The .09 versions might change all that. Should allow double the chips or more (if IBM helps fab a bunch also). Marketshare might change quickly in the next year. Right now I don't think they can even produce enough chips to get 25% marketshare. With .09 they COULD produce enough to get 40% perhaps more. They still have to win sales mind you, but at least they could produce enough chips to get more marketshare if it was there for the taking. Which it is right now, but they can't produce enough to take advantage of it.

Plag

 

[clarkey01]

ThePlagiarmaster

welcome

and great first post !!!!!!!!!

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
what will 90nm gain AMD?

-Kevin

Well it makes the chips cheaper to make, BUT they will also be upgarding the cores with SSE3, better prefetch, and soem other goodies.

The chip will be about 5-10% faster at the same speed of current A64's, let alone offer more head room for more Mhz.

So far intel has 200mhz out of .09, it doesnt add much headroom as heat and leakage become very serious problems on .09

Hopefully SOI will make a larger difference than i think it will, or we wont see anything higher than 4000+ AMD and 3800mhz Intel.

Yea SOI and also AMD is using different Transistors in different parts of the cpu. So I think they seem to be getting along better then intel. They also are taking their time

I read about people hitting 3ghz on the 0.09um A64's (engineering sample) so I have a feeling they're doing much better than intel's implementation at this point.

supercooling... intel hits 4.4ghz on prommy IIs with prescott.

 

[zephyrprime]

Nobody has high-K, only Intel has announced any real results with it and even Intel won't use it till .045 at the earliest.

You're right. My mistake.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: SickBeast
I read about people hitting 3ghz on the 0.09um A64's (engineering sample) so I have a feeling they're doing much better than intel's implementation at this point.

supercooling... intel hits 4.4ghz on prommy IIs with prescott.

I'm pretty sure it was 3ghz on either air or water.

 

[clarkey01]

"supercooling... intel hits 4.4ghz on prommy IIs with prescott."



Presshot running @ the speed is less likely then an A64 running @ 3 Ghz

 

[bobbyk]

intel has problems with the strained silicon. It leaves the electron paths wide open and means there is less resistance meaning more leakage. It does allow for higher clock speeds.

Soi should help leakage some at least. It adds another layer to prevent it. I think the amd 90nm spec is 89 watts now. I might be wrong about that. I think it is moving to 105 in the near future.

I think amd is doing all right with 90 nm, as long as they have the performance lead by even a little bit, they don't need to rush it at all. If they have very few problems with 90nm it could be a very good year for the company. It would also mean that whenever intel did something new amd would have a better counter for it. The chips are helped more and more in rendering by clockspeeds. Rendering is one of intels' few holdouts in the benchmark arena. Soon amd will probably have that to.

 

[Gamingphreek]

The main thing i dont know about computers is chipset architecture/enginerring, and the electrical stuff.

I know about 90nm (nanometers) and how die shrinks work and all that stuff but what is strained silicon, SOI and stuff relating to that.

Also how is Intel failing?

-Kevin

 

[PsharkJF]

Hehe, Intel is failing because they can't keep upping the clockspeed much more on the current-gen P4's without requiring people use watercooling!

 

[clarkey01]

Sad But True

 

[coldpower27]

90nm should help AMD out signifcantly manufacturing wise, they will be able to get alot more out of their wafers, too bad it will be awhile before AMD's second wafer fab is up and running sometime in 2006. As it stands AMD can't provide all that many chips right now thanks to the fact that they have only a single processor fab. Compare that to Intel's 4 90nm processor fabs with 300mm wafers. And then you see why Intel has 80% market share of something in that range. Yeah, AMD is winning the price/performance ratio, but that cost them their margins, their still in thw whole, it dosnt' exactly look good when you post profit margins in the negatives over the past 3 yrs.

AMD is charging Intel prices now if you haven't noticed though , that is one of the main reason they aredoing better now.
AMD just recently dropped their prices but that in anticipation of Intel's price drop in late August.