AMD Socket-AM2: Same Performance, Faster Memory, Lower Power
by Anand Lal Shimpi on May 23, 2006 12:14 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
It's taken AMD almost the entire life-span of the Athlon 64, but Intel is finally on the run. Pick whatever measure of success you'd like, whether it is performance benchmarks, the Dell announcement, or being publicly accepted as a threat - AMD has done it. It's because of AMD's extremely successful uphill battle against Intel these past few years that we've had such high expectations from the company. So when Intel first started talking about its new Core architecture, we turned to AMD for a response that it surely must have had in the works for years, but as you all know we came up empty handed.
Only recently has AMD begun talking about what's coming next, and it will divulge even more information in the following weeks. The problem is that the architectural revisions to K8 that AMD is finally talking about now are still things we will see in the 2007 - 2008 time frame, while Intel's Core architecture is still on schedule to be a reality for 2006. What AMD does have planned to keep itself afloat during 2006 and until the new K8L core debuts is a brand new platform: Socket-AM2.
The long awaited Socket-AM2 platform marks the beginning of AMD's transition to DDR2 memory. If you'll remember, Intel made this transition about two years ago with the introduction of its 925X and 915 series of chipsets. The move to DDR2 proved to yield very little in the way of performance, but it was necessary as Intel was able to drive enough quantity of DDR2 in order to make the cost reasonable today. With DDR2 prices low enough, and availability high enough, AMD was poised to take advantage of Intel's work in establishing DDR2 as a desktop memory standard and support it on a new platform.
In AMD's uncharacteristic silence over the past several months, performance expectations for DDR2 on Socket-AM2 remained completely unset. A little over a month ago we previewed the Socket-AM2 platform and concluded that even when paired with DDR2-800, you shouldn't expect a performance increase from AM2. While AMD didn't publicly confirm or refute our benchmarks, all of its partners were in agreement with the results we had seen. Today, with final AM2 hardware in our hands, we're able to see exactly how far the platform has come in the month since we last looked at it.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
83 Comments
View All Comments
mino - Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - link
2 options:1) Quad-core K8 (on 65nm)
2) High-speed 65nm DC's(improbable)
BTW what I understand FX-64 is on the way in a few months(july-august). Seems rev. F cores could handle 3.0, just 125W TDP may be the issue.
peternelson - Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - link
Well, I don't think it's a QUAD CORE K8 (aka "Deerhound") because that is not due until late 2007.
And dualcore K8L is not until 1H/2007.
We need to choose something happening THIS year.
mino - Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - link
Actually AMD can made Quad-core CPU's even on 90nm if they need to. The core will be huge, yields poor but IMHO 2.2G Quad at 90nm is possible within 125W TDP.Also AFAIK AMD has delayed 65nm at least for a quarter intentionally since what they need now is capacity on 90nm. They could not afford any (even short-term) production reduction at this moment. Provided in 3Q/06 FAB 36 is up and running at 10k starts the could afford to dedicate some of them for some high-end opterons and FX's.
Furen - Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - link
http://img.clubic.com/photo/00119525.jpg">http://img.clubic.com/photo/00119525.jpgLook at that and tell me how you can possibly fit twice that (90nm dual-core) in one package. Dual-core CPUs are huge to begin with, doubling the number of cores would probably require a pretty big drop in L2 sizes (think 256KB per core...). AMD still is production limited and designing a quad-core chip without going to 65nm would pretty much doom it to being a VERY low-volume part. Heck, Intel's Conroe is huge as well, it's just on a smaller process (the 160sq. mm die size would correspond to something like 300+sq. mm on the 90nm process).
jones377 - Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - link
It's called Socket FGriswold - Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - link
I dont think so. Socket F isnt really a "secret" nor a stopgap solution.peternelson - Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - link
I think we hear more about socket F in June and it launches July.But that's not what this is alluding to.
There was an announcement of a roadmap change from Q1/2007 to DECEMBER 2006.
If I remember right it was two AM2 processors on 65 nanometre process.
jones377 - Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - link
Perhaps not, but it's coming out at around that timeframe. Anything else and we would have gotten wind of it long ago.mlittl3 - Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - link
A couple of things before I give my guess about the stopgap solution...1) K8L as state above WILL HAVE microarchitectural improvements. This has been all over the internet.
2) AMD's processor pricing page states that the X2 5000+ and FX-62 will be available for both 939 and AM2. I don't know if they messed up but if not, it looks like 939 users can upgrade yet again.
Okay, here's my guess for the stopgap solution...drum roll...L3 cache. I think AMD will release a 2.8 revised FX-62 with L3 cache or an ahead of schedule 3.0 GHz FX-64 with L3 cache. Just my guess.
AllYourBaseAreBelong2Us - Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - link
The stopgap solution is the 65nm process that will allow AMD to ramp up the speed a bit more and get better TDP ratings.