|
Alereon posted:The 28nm successor to the AMD Ontario and Zacate low-power x86 processors, the Wichita series, has taped out at AMD for production at TSMC. "Taping out" means the chip design has been completed and sent for initial test manufacturing, after which they make any further necessary changes. About two weeks ago we learned that the AMD Radeon HD 7000-series taped out about six weeks prior, indicating that both products may be on track for a launch potentially as early as Q3. I'd expect the new C- and E-series processors to have VLIW4-based Radeon HD 7300 graphics or something to that effect, I'm thinking it will have 64 shaders (one VLIW4 SIMD block), but they could double this if they don't scale clockspeeds instead. Given how awesome the x120e and friends are, I can't wait for this. :popcorn: Sinestro fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Apr 13, 2011 |
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 05:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Oct 11, 2024 08:58 |
|
|
Quote != edit. Durr.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 19:41
|
|
|
Ooh, I hope that means a Zacate price drop is in the works.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 20:17
|
|
|
pienipple posted:Ooh, I hope that means a Zacate price drop is in the works. The rumor mills are saying that Zacate's supply is seriously constrained, and that prices should fall naturally once AMD ramps up production to fulfill demand. Given that you can buy a complete 15.6" laptop with an E-350 for under $350, I don't think that the price of the chip itself is what's driving prices on stuff like Zacate mITX and desktop boards so high.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 21:24
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:The rumor mills are saying that Zacate's supply is seriously constrained, and that prices should fall naturally once AMD ramps up production to fulfill demand. Given that you can buy a complete 15.6" laptop with an E-350 for under $350, I don't think that the price of the chip itself is what's driving prices on stuff like Zacate mITX and desktop boards so high. I hope they drop soon. I need a new NAS, and I want as much money for drives and a RAID card as possible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 23:05
|
|
|
Alereon posted:The 28nm successor to the AMD Ontario and Zacate low-power x86 processors, the Wichita series, has taped out at AMD for production at TSMC. "Taping out" means the chip design has been completed and sent for initial test manufacturing, after which they make any further necessary changes. That's next to useless. It's not telling you what stepping vs. the planned production stepping. Consider when the first reports of Sandy Bridge tapeout hit, July 2009.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 17:37
|
|
|
Yep. Tapeing out to a shipping product can take a year http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/item/13286-from-cpu-tape-out-to-shipping-takes-a-year And it's very unlikely that AMD is going to want to be first in line for TSMC's 28nm product as even though the claim to be ahead of where they thought they would be right now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 18:32
|
|
|
Keep in mind that we're talking about an incredibly simple device here, nothing like a CPU or a GPU. At 40nm the Zacate APU is 75mm^2, even with added hardware Wichita may be smaller. Small parts make excellent products for a new process shrink, as they're less affected by a high defect-rate due to process teething problems. As far as whether AMD wants to jump on 28nm early, you're drat right they do. They've been stuck on the 40nm process longer than anyone expected and are at the limits of its capabilities with the 6970. While they certainly don't want to have to deal with potentially low yields and unpredictable issues, they require the competitive advantage in the graphics space that an early and successful transition to 28nm brings. The low-power x86 market is another area where AMD is highly competitive but supply-constrained, so it makes sense to transition to 28nm quickly where they can increase their performance and potentially make gains on manufacturing cost and volume.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 19:07
|
|
|
I just want a marked down zacate mitx board for a low power sd video/emulation box I don't need to wedge a discrete graphics card into.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 19:27
|
|
|
So is Bulldozer going to be AMD's big comeback? My E8400 is three years old now and I would like to upgrade soon but I feel obligated to wait until Bulldozer is benchmarked against Sandy Bridge to see if Bulldozer is worth waiting for. I use my system primarily for gaming and AFAIK there are zero games that take advantage of eight cores. I guess eight cores would come in handy if you want to game and encode video at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 20:31
|
|
|
Maggot Monster posted:I apparently had a different experience to you guys because every loving nvidia chipset board I had would cause endless and bizarre problems. The worst of the lot was after I put together some Shuttle/nforce3 computer that would destroy harddrives. I had some bad problems with one type of nforce board that was running my expensive dual core. I had similar problems to some other posters in that my case was so full of hardware that it had very poor air circulation, and a lot of heat output in the case. I'm not making the same mistakes again. I avoid nvidia chipsets and I don't fully load cases.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 21:15
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Keep in mind that we're talking about an incredibly simple device here, nothing like a CPU or a GPU. At 40nm the Zacate APU is 75mm^2, even with added hardware Wichita may be smaller. Small parts make excellent products for a new process shrink, as they're less affected by a high defect-rate due to process teething problems. As far as whether AMD wants to jump on 28nm early, you're drat right they do. They've been stuck on the 40nm process longer than anyone expected and are at the limits of its capabilities with the 6970. While they certainly don't want to have to deal with potentially low yields and unpredictable issues, they require the competitive advantage in the graphics space that an early and successful transition to 28nm brings. The low-power x86 market is another area where AMD is highly competitive but supply-constrained, so it makes sense to transition to 28nm quickly where they can increase their performance and potentially make gains on manufacturing cost and volume. Well for CPU's AMD is still at 45nm not 40nm. As far as I know there are no 40nm CPUs only GPUs in which case, Nvidia is still at the 40nm process as well. In those regards they are certainly behind Intel with the 32nm process which is what I thought (at least the high end) Bulldozer was going to rather than 28nm. Though I don't see any reason they can't skip 32 and go to 28 if it's ready.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 21:33
|
|
|
Not A Gay Name posted:Well for CPU's AMD is still at 45nm not 40nm. As far as I know there are no 40nm CPUs only GPUs in which case, Nvidia is still at the 40nm process as well. AMD's shipping four 40nm bulk CPUs right this very minute. They're selling like crazy. It takes time to develop a design that works on a smaller process; it's not just a matter of loading it into the magical shrinking machine. Bulldozer and Llano started quite a while ago, and they're already in mass production. The very first Wichita products, which are very simple in comparison, have just now gone to initial 28nm test manufacturing. They'll find problems, like always, and it'll be a while before it's ready as a shipping product. Wichita is an ideal early step for the move to 28nm, because it's simple, and it's small. If you've got a bunch of defects on a wafer thanks to a new process that the foundry assures you is 100% ready for mass production, that's a killer if you've only got a small number of dies per wafer. If you've got some ridiculous number of tiny dies on there, you're not going to give a poo poo if a few dozen come out hosed up. You've still got plenty of products to sell. Basically, AMD's 32nm products are ready. They're taking the first steps in the move to 28nm.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 22:12
|
|
|
Not A Gay Name posted:Well for CPU's AMD is still at 45nm not 40nm. As far as I know there are no 40nm CPUs only GPUs in which case, Nvidia is still at the 40nm process as well. Alereon fucked around with this message at 02:09 on Apr 15, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 22:29
|
|
|
Alereon posted:AMD CPUs are currently manufactured at Global Foundaries on the 45nm Silicon-On-Insulator process, transitioning to 32nm. AMD GPUs are currently manufactured at TSMC on a bulk-silicon 40nm process, transitioning to 28nm. You can't make AMD CPUs at TSMC because they're designed for GF's Silicon-On-Insulator tech, and vice versa. GPUs have historically been made at "half-node" processes, which are sort of like half-steps beteween process shrinks. For example, while CPUs shrank from 90nm to 65nm to 45nm, GPUs went from 80nm to 55nm to 40nm. Wow, that makes no sense at all. It is both SOI, why is it different? (Took one class on IC design in school, never used or thought about it since)
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2011 01:52
|
|
|
Global Foundries is using SOI, TSMC (and nearly everybody else) isn't, sorry if I wasn't being clear. That means there's pretty substantial differences in the processes and the resulting chips. Those significant differences are why it made sense for AMD to fab their Zacate APUs at TSMC, since they were reusing their graphics cores and could design new CPU cores for TSMC's bulk CMOS process. E: Apparently I can't spell foundries. Alereon fucked around with this message at 02:09 on Apr 15, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2011 02:05
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Global Foundries is using SOI, TSMC (and nearly everybody else) isn't, sorry if I wasn't being clear. That means there's pretty substantial differences in the processes and the resulting chips. Those significant differences are why it made sense for AMD to fab their Zacate APUs at TSMC, since they were reusing their graphics cores and could design new CPU cores for TSMC's bulk CMOS process. Ah, that makes much more sense. I thought you were saying that TSMC had SOI as well and I was all  .
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2011 06:36
|
|
|
spasticColon posted:So is Bulldozer going to be AMD's big comeback? My E8400 is three years old now and I would like to upgrade soon but I feel obligated to wait until Bulldozer is benchmarked against Sandy Bridge to see if Bulldozer is worth waiting for. I use my system primarily for gaming and AFAIK there are zero games that take advantage of eight cores. I guess eight cores would come in handy if you want to game and encode video at the same time. I'm in your same position - rocking an E8400. Frankly, I would be surprised if AMD catches up to current Sandy Bridge products. Zacate is nice and all but per-clock its barely better than Atom on the CPU side. That has me skeptical. Zacate is a cheap part but come on. Atom wasn't even new tech when it was released. The fact is that the cards are stacked against AMD. They don't have the money to invest in great engineers and great research and etc. Bulldozer is the underdog, and while no one can predict performance before a product is actually out, I think it would be a huge surprise if Bulldozer was on-par with current Intel Sandy Bridge products. I think we'll have to consider Bulldozer a relative success if they manage to catch up to Nehalem. I will likely buy a Bulldozer anyway, because I'm an AMD fan-boy. But I'm not getting my hopes up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2011 07:39
|
|
|
Faceless Clock posted:Bulldozer is the underdog, and while no one can predict performance before a product is actually out, I think it would be a huge surprise if Bulldozer was on-par with current Intel Sandy Bridge products. I think we'll have to consider Bulldozer a relative success if they manage to catch up to Nehalem. I will admit to finally going back to Intel after nearly a decade with AMD. I respect the company but I just couldn't find it in myself to wait an indefinite amount of time to be able to upgrade to the next-gen tech. However, I would be terribly sad to see AMD start to falter, but as far as I can tell they've put themselves between a rock and a hard place with Bulldozer. Even if they can manage spectacular performance(and price ratios as is their way) compared to Sandy Bridge, it seems like they'll have taken center stage just in time for Ivy Bridge to come around.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2011 08:40
|
|
|
Cuntpunch posted:I will admit to finally going back to Intel after nearly a decade with AMD. I respect the company but I just couldn't find it in myself to wait an indefinite amount of time to be able to upgrade to the next-gen tech. However, I would be terribly sad to see AMD start to falter, but as far as I can tell they've put themselves between a rock and a hard place with Bulldozer. Even if they can manage spectacular performance(and price ratios as is their way) compared to Sandy Bridge, it seems like they'll have taken center stage just in time for Ivy Bridge to come around. I am hoping for a neck-and-neck, if not a winner.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2011 08:45
|
|
|
Unless Intel steps it up Ivy Bridge won't happen until next year. I don't expect AMD to match but at least shorten the gap. if it's within 10% Ill be happy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2011 10:23
|
|
|
Ryokurin posted:Unless Intel steps it up Ivy Bridge won't happen until next year. I don't expect AMD to match but at least shorten the gap. if it's within 10% Ill be happy. I don't care about brands, but Intel needs to stop the hyper-segmentation bullcrap Mods, could you rename this to "Bulldozer - Rumored release: Computex" Sinestro fucked around with this message at 22:11 on Apr 16, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2011 22:03
|
|
|
Wow, I went from never to constantly on Q!=E.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2011 22:08
|
|
|
Since the launch is so close I'm gonna wait and see what the AM3+ board selection is like.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2011 22:23
|
|
|
Nonpython posted:I don't care about brands, but Intel needs to stop the hyper-segmentation bullcrap What do you mean by "hyper-segmentation"? I honestly don't get the reference.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2011 22:53
|
|
|
Arsten posted:What do you mean by "hyper-segmentation"? I honestly don't get the reference. I mean the whole B65/H61/H67/P67/Q65/Q67/Z68 thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2011 23:03
|
|
|
Nonpython posted:I mean the whole B65/H61/H67/P67/Q65/Q67/Z68 thing. I would have to agree with you on this chipset bullshit. What the hell are the Q65 and Q67 chipsets for?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2011 01:26
|
|
|
Nonpython posted:I mean the whole B65/H61/H67/P67/Q65/Q67/Z68 thing. Thank you. I thought maybe you meant something in the architecture itself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2011 01:31
|
|
|
pienipple posted:Since the launch is so close I'm gonna wait and see what the AM3+ board selection is like. Think of current AM3 boards only with USB3.0 as baseline standard. Chipsets are so homogenized to the point there is no real difference between them that Intel intentionally disabled SB OCing on H67 so they earn a few extra bucks on P67 boards.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2011 01:49
|
|
|
Faceless Clock posted:Zacate is nice and all but per-clock its barely better than Atom on the CPU side. That has me skeptical. Zacate is a cheap part but come on. Atom wasn't even new tech when it was released. Faceless Clock posted:I think we'll have to consider Bulldozer a relative success if they manage to catch up to Nehalem.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2011 03:28
|
|
|
I happened to be looking at Zacates on Newegg, and saw this new Sapphire option that looks good: SAPPHIRE Pure White Fusion E350 for $109.99 It has a Marvell Yukon Ethernet chipset which tend to work better than Realtek for some people. I'm just bummed we don't have more options with passive heatsinks, you have to spend $145 for the Asus, though it is a nice product with extra eSATA and USB3.0.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2011 19:08
|
|
|
Nonpython posted:I mean the whole B65/H61/H67/P67/Q65/Q67/Z68 thing. And for me, that you must choose between VM extensions and overclocking sucks too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2011 16:54
|
|
|
Alereon posted:I happened to be looking at Zacates on Newegg, and saw this new Sapphire option that looks good: All the mITX boards seem to come with some noisy rear end high pitched fan. The MSI board I have has a tiny fan that spins at 5k+ RPM with limited options to quiet it. I ended up just sticking resistor on it to shut it up. I was looking at getting the Asus mITX board with its giant passive cooling heatsink but the reviews on Newegg made it sound like some people had heat issues
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2011 19:03
|
|
|
The reviews of the passively cooled Asus mATX board I read weren't too flattering either. Someone needs to bring out an aftermarket cooler for these. I don't think the mounting holes are standardize between boards though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2011 22:47
|
|
|
Anandtech posted a Nettop and Mini-ITX Buyer's Guide today, one of the interesting things I noticed was that they used an Antec nettop case with a 100mm quiet side-fan, which I'm thinking would let you remove the fan from the Zacate heatsink and still get acceptable cooling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2011 00:39
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Anandtech posted a Nettop and Mini-ITX Buyer's Guide today, one of the interesting things I noticed was that they used an Antec nettop case with a 100mm quiet side-fan, which I'm thinking would let you remove the fan from the Zacate heatsink and still get acceptable cooling. At least make a shroud if you do this. A lot of old Dell systems have this for P4 systems that were base models. Maybe current too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2011 10:03
|
|
|
BD clocks just got leaked. Base clocks top out around 3.2Ghz and start at 2.4Ghz. The 900Mhz-1Ghz Turbo boost over stock clocks is quite nice, and its likely to be per module too, so 2 instead of 1 core would be boosted. JF has already said that they'll be able to raise the clocks up to 500Mhz on all cores while maintaining stock TDP for at least some models as well. edit: mhzzzzzzz PC LOAD LETTER fucked around with this message at 16:29 on Apr 28, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2011 14:34
|
|
|
And it looks like BD performance numbers have been leaked. The top BD chip is supposedly as fast as the i7 2600K which is pretty good but we still don't quite know its exact price yet nor how well, if at all, it overclocks. So its possible the i5 2500K or i7 2600K might end up being better buys over all, but still this seems like good news for AMD even if Intel has a big update coming 6 months or so after that.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2011 19:22
|
|
|
Is that the top 4-core or comparing 8-core to the i7-2600K's 4-core? AMD seems to be going all-in on multithreaded performance if that's an 8 vs. 4 comparison. Then again, that would mirror their graphics strategies. It'll kinda suck when 6/8-core Sandy Bridge E parts come out. Poor AMD 
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2011 20:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Oct 11, 2024 08:58 |
|
|
Factory Factory posted:Is that the top 4-core or comparing 8-core to the i7-2600K's 4-core? AMD seems to be going all-in on multithreaded performance if that's an 8 vs. 4 comparison. Then again, that would mirror their graphics strategies. If that slide is real, the bench-marked used doesn't efficiently scale past 4 threads I don't think. So if its not a fake, then what you're seeing is effectively the performance of a 2 module 4 core BD chip being equivalent to a 2600K. Personally I think the slide is a fake.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2011 23:26
|
|
