![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
Anandtech Previews 65nm
- Thread starter coz
- Start date
Duke3d87 said:
The 65nm Process was first stampped out about 15 months ago if I remember correctly. That's not what I meant though. I meant Price Wise and screwing up. Intel DOESN'T have to beat AMD, it wouldn't matter anyway on this forum. Intel could beat AMD by 20% on every app and there'd still be More (70%) AMD leaning folks here.
If Intel brings down the heat and sells these cheaper to make Processors at realistic but not greedy Mark ups, AMD is going to be in a world of hurt. Even if Fab 36 was running at full tilt, AMD can't compete Price Wise. The best thing that has happened to AMD is Stable Platforms and Cheaper than Hammer Processor prices. AKA Sempron and lower end Hammers. Even servers have helpped them turn profits but that's low volume.
Donnie27
sabrewolf732 said:
But that's totally unrealistic of a Price to ask LOL! So, Intel should sell Dual Core Presler for $80 or nearer to the price of a Sempron;
$87 - sempron 3100+
$86 - sempron 3000+
$71 - sempron 2800+--->ROTFFLMFAO!
Meanwhile if Cedar Mill has normalized prices somewhere between the 6xx and 5xx P4 it will mean rough waters for AMD ahead. You guys should be happy, that means AMD will have to cut prices again. After all is said and Done, competition is a Two-way street unless you think if great for AMD to over charge you, LOL again.
3800+ is $310, AMD is great and that's a steal. Yet, it is not two A64 2800+'s that sell for $105. Even if it were double the price or 100% more, it would cost only $210. Yet what they did was not have to use a memory controller and a Crossbar of the second processor then wants a 200% markup without the two missing parts plus the second package WOW! Yup, AMD loves you man. Yup they "love you long time" just like a ............never mind.
Donnie27
sabrewolf732
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2004
- Messages
- 4,776
Donnie27 said:
lol. If it's single core at 2GHz and 65nm Ill buy one.
sabrewolf732 said:lol. If it's single core at 2GHz and 65nm Ill buy one.
Sure, but they made the misprint talking about Dual Core Presler, not Single Cedar Mill. I do see your point and hell, if that's the case I'd buy one too!
Donnie27
sabrewolf732
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2004
- Messages
- 4,776
Donnie27 said:
I got confused
robberbaron
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2004
- Messages
- 6,101
Donnie27 said:
The 3800+ is the same as dual 939 3200+'s, which are about $150 each. The 2800+ is a 512k cache, single channel memory controller chip at 1.8ghz. Get the numbers straight before flaming.
robberbaron said:
I mixed up 2800+ and 1.8. You're right it I should have said 2.GHz with 512K L2. But it damned sure AIN'T the same as two 3200+'s
Yet, I still stand buy my original arguement. Here's why. The whole X2 Processor is NOT two full single Core A64's processors (at any speed) and shouldn't be sold as if it is. I didn't flame anyone BTW. The 2800 has a memory controller and it doesn't matter if it were a 64bit or even 32bit, it is still there. AMD gets to save money on fewer production steps, a Memory Controller, Package, Crossbar Interface and HT links and still charges for it. NONE of these savings are passed on to the AMD customers. This can only be seen as a good thing by AMD employees, Stockholders and or family members thereof. If it is as AMD and their Fans brag about, "We/AMD built K8 to be Dual Core right from the start". Then it becomes an even bigger *Ripp-Off if this was planned right from the start. AMD gets to sell 1.5 Processors for the price of two. IMHO that's wrong and SUCKS on AMD's part. I don't love them and don't love giving them or Intel my money.
Donnie27
robberbaron
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2004
- Messages
- 6,101
For the Dual cores, In terms of sheer die space, the execution cores and cache take up about 95%. It's not 1.5 times the cpu, its 1.95 times, basically. Plus theres the added cost of being difficult to manufacture. I think you're being paranoid, dude. The X2's are great dual cores, and it's a shame you can't appreciate them.
If you don't like the price of them, then don't buy them. You act as if a gun is being held to your head to buy an X2 right now.
If you don't like the price of them, then don't buy them. You act as if a gun is being held to your head to buy an X2 right now.
robberbaron said:
I'm not being paranoid, you're being BIASed. It has little to do with sheer die space but simply costs of manufacturing. Then it's how much that 5% (You say but I doubt) cost the consumer=P Doesn't matter if it takes up 2%, it is what that 2% costs that really matters. Hyperthreading takes up 5% of the P4 Northwood and less than that on the Prescott. Until P840-EE is was FREE. If no controller/package/Interface and etc.., is added or disabled, it cuts the cost just as the difference in Price Rates for 1MB and 512K of L2. Just as a 64bit single memory channel costs less than a 128bit Dual Channel On-Die controller and NO controller cost less than both.
So you think a Memory Controller (128 or 64bit), Crossbar interface, and etc.. accounts for 5% of what an A64 2GHz? So that means 95% of the costs of the A64 is due simply to its execution unites? WOW! So you want to have your cake and eat it too.
It's not difficult to SKIP production steps, you got that backwards. AMD's only problem is its already low yeilds of that core and it doesn't matter what line the core is meant for. You need to slow down and rethink your willingness to defend AMD at all cost and use some common sense? What the X2 3800+ is PRICE WISE, an A64 + a Sempron with a 512K instead of 256K L2 minus the package.
Donnie27
Chris_Morley
Former [H] Consumer Managing Ed.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2000
- Messages
- 3,609
There are no ripoff's in a commodity market, only what said market will bear.Donnie27 said:I mixed up 2800+ and 1.8. You're right it I should have said 2.GHz with 512K L2. But it damned sure AIN'T the same as two 3200+'s
I didn't flame anyone BTW. The 2800 has a memory controller and it doesn't matter if it were a 64bit or even 32bit, it is still there. AMD gets to save money on fewer production steps, a Memory Controller, Package, Crossbar Interface and HT links and still charges for it. NONE of these savings are passed on to the AMD customers. This can only be seen as a good thing by AMD employees, Stockholders and or family members thereof. If it is as AMD and their Fans brag about, "We/AMD built K8 to be Dual Core right from the start". Then it becomes an even bigger *Ripp-Off if this was planned right from the start. AMD gets to sell 1.5 Processors for the price of two. IMHO that's wrong and SUCKS on AMD's part. I don't love them and don't love giving them or Intel my money.
Donnie27
Donnie27 said:
A couple of things,
let's see exactly what we're talking about here
Athlon64 1MiB L2 die Image
(Thats a 130nm die, but it's the one that's nicely labled - the 90nm 1MiB L2 dies have the same basic ratio here)
5% of the die might be a bit of an exaggeration, but its not much of one.
For refernce an X2 die.
Note the shinny strip in the middle, that's where the second memory controller would be if it were being produced. Notice how not producing a second memory controller does not in fact save any silicon, nor could it because of the way the L2 and DDR/HTT intefaces are layed out on the die.
Second, I'm not sure I follow why you think not producing the second memory controller would mean: cheaper to produce for AMD.
Applying a step in fabrication (of the silicon at least) is applied to the entire die at the same time, the diffusion / etching / oxidation (insulation) is done over the entire die, there's no skipping steps in leaving out a memory controller. With the current die layout, it should cost AMD exactly the same amount to produce a die with a memory controller as it would one without (with the minor excpetion of dies lost due to defects in the memory controller).
Third, AMD's and intel's dual core pricing is very consistent when you compare it to their single core counterparts.
The high end X2s are a bit over priced right now, but for the most part, both Pentium D and X2 hover around double the cost of a comperable single core chip. The 820 is a bit cheaper than 2 5/620s but the 830 is right about twice what an 530/630 run for and the 840 is a bit more than two 540/640 chips. If you are complaining about the cost of the X2 3800+ you'd better be saying dual core chips are overpriced, not that AMD is ripping people off. At leat if you want to accuse other people of being biased you should.
Are dual core chips overpriced? Well I guess that depends over how we define overpriced, the low end X2s are some of the hottest chips in the enthusiast market now, clearly people aren't finding them too exepnsive for what they offer - at least around here.
Do dual cores have a higher profit margin than their single cour counterparts (when you accept that one failed cpu in a die means it can be resold as a single core chip), I'd say most deffinately -- for both AMD and Intel (with the possible excpetion of the 820), but then again a 3800+ Venice or 670 Prescott have much higher profit margins than a 3000+ or 620.
But as Morley said, you charge what you can for a CPU, for the simple fact that bulk of the cost of CPU is not in the silicon, the plastic or the pins; but it's in research and development and start up costs for fabs. Charge to little and your profit margins over materials cost are too thin and you don't recoup the other costs, too much for a chip and nobody buys it and again you loose money.
Chips are what the market will bear, and from that staindpoint, double the cost for twice the CPUs makes quite a bit of sense.
Chris_Morley
Former [H] Consumer Managing Ed.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2000
- Messages
- 3,609
Heh, they'd love me too if I didn't launch the world's first 64-bit gaming computer based on an Opteron processor which diluted their branding...Donnie27 said:Hey, I know you're right
Donnie27
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=pcfx+opteronhttp://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/08/21/pcfx_ships_amd_opteron_gaming/
Chris_Morley
Former [H] Consumer Managing Ed.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2000
- Messages
- 3,609
And I wished I had a tape recorder when I was talking to AMD's FX brand manager and he told me that what I did was responsible for them launching the FX...they believed there was a performance need that they weren't addressing.
Last things first. AMD was the one who bragged about building Hammers from the start to be Dual Core and how easy it was. Then you say it is hard to build and should cost more. A spokeswoman for AMD was the one who said "AMD prices it products based on Performance", nothing to do with R&D money spent LOL! AMD has already stated they'd only build about 100K. Even in this market that's peanuts. Thank goodness most folks buying AMD processors are NOT fans or AMD worshippers. If they were, the 3800+ would still cost closer to $400 instead of closer to $300 as it is NOW Yes it's what the market will bare or Supply and Demand.
You're still wrong just as he was about "Sheer Die Space". Both Intel and AMD can and do charge for features=P It doesn't matter if it takes up one tenth of one per cent or 50% of the die, get it?
The last part of what you said is way the hell off as well. There are NO disabled features. From what I've seen and read, K8 is modular and there are no Disabled memory controller on Semprons for example. There are NO two-way HT links on AthlonFX. Start thinking with your brain instead of your heart. If X2 were two whole processors, the X-Rays would show that and these DIDN'T. Only current Price Cuts make them easier to swallow.
I most certainly think X2 is the better performing of the two=P Morley can tell you I trashed Intel out more for charging for Hyperthreading on the 840D EE. We know it takes up less that 2.5% of Prescott and 5% of Northwood. Yet, look at what an 840D-EE costs? This is tied into this thread for a reason as I said earlier. AMD went with lower Yeild Expensive but nice performing and Intel went with Lesser performing, higher yeild and cheaper processors. With 65nm, Intel will get even cheaper, ship twice as many as their 90nm, overclockers will overclock even higher, and the Pressure will remain squarely on AMD=P
BTW, like Morley, I'd love to try an 820 and BTX LOL!
Donnie27
Yes it's what the market will bare or Supply and Demand.You're still wrong just as he was about "Sheer Die Space". Both Intel and AMD can and do charge for features=P It doesn't matter if it takes up one tenth of one per cent or 50% of the die, get it?
The last part of what you said is way the hell off as well.
There are NO disabled features. From what I've seen and read, K8 is modular and there are no Disabled memory controller on Semprons for example. There are NO two-way HT links on AthlonFX. Start thinking with your brain instead of your heart. If X2 were two whole processors, the X-Rays would show that and these DIDN'T. Only current Price Cuts make them easier to swallow.I most certainly think X2 is the better performing of the two=P Morley can tell you I trashed Intel out more for charging for Hyperthreading on the 840D EE. We know it takes up less that 2.5% of Prescott and 5% of Northwood. Yet, look at what an 840D-EE costs? This is tied into this thread for a reason as I said earlier. AMD went with lower Yeild Expensive but nice performing and Intel went with Lesser performing, higher yeild and cheaper processors. With 65nm, Intel will get even cheaper, ship twice as many as their 90nm, overclockers will overclock even higher, and the Pressure will remain squarely on AMD=P
BTW, like Morley, I'd love to try an 820 and BTX LOL!
Donnie27
Chris_Morley
Former [H] Consumer Managing Ed.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2000
- Messages
- 3,609
I've set my dad up with just that configuration. It runs a little hot, idles at 50, at the time I couldn't find a boxed BTX 820, so I had to buy a Thermaltake BTX unit. The first one I tried was trash and it was the only one in the states, we had to wait 9 weeks for their 'enthusiast' model with Honeywell fan, which sounds much nicer. It still isn't as quiet as a Intel BTX unit that I used on a P4 630, but I'll take it.Donnie27 said:Last things first. AMD was the one who bragged about building Hammers from the start to be Dual Core and how easy it was. Then you say it is hard to build and should cost more. A spokeswoman for AMD was the one who said "AMD prices it products based on Performance", nothing to do with R&D money spent LOL! AMD has already stated they'd only build about 100K. Even in this market that's peanuts. Thank goodness most folks buying AMD processors are NOT fans or AMD worshippers. If they were, the 3800+ would still cost closer to $400 instead of closer to $300 as it is NOW
You're still wrong just as he was about "Sheer Die Space". Both Intel and AMD can and do charge for features=P It doesn't matter if it takes up one tenth of one per cent or 50% of the die, get it?
The last part of what you said is way the hell off as well.
I most certainly think X2 is the better performing of the two=P Morley can tell you I trashed Intel out more for charging for Hyperthreading on the 840D EE. We know it takes up less that 2.5% of Prescott and 5% of Northwood. Yet, look at what an 840D-EE costs? This is tied into this thread for a reason as I said earlier. AMD went with lower Yeild Expensive but nice performing and Intel went with Lesser performing, higher yeild and cheaper processors. With 65nm, Intel will get even cheaper, ship twice as many as their 90nm, overclockers will overclock even higher, and the Pressure will remain squarely on AMD=P
BTW, like Morley, I'd love to try an 820 and BTX LOL!
Donnie27
Morley said:
I just had two buds tell me about a Gateway rig with BTX, both liked it. Eventhough it didn't blow the doors off performance wise, it was very quite and did what they asked it to do.
I still think Overclockers would have loved BTX had it been Correctly marketed to this market segment. Too bad many of the Intel bashers took the stand against it like they did. The AMD/nVidia Dual Opteron Boards have the RAM located in about the same place as BTX, so that issue is bogus at best. Just about anyone using a CoolerMaster -CM Stacker ATX/BTX case will say the same thing.
Donnie27
Donnie27