• 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.

Does AMD have an answer for Conroe?

DariusVE said:
Wait for a real Conroe Test Drive, not the "closed" presentation where the attendants only saw what the Intel presentators want to show.
Click to expand...
There are at least half a dozen of these out there, so stop trying to pull the "Intel rigged it" line.

Is K8L supposed to use socket AM2, and then K9 uses this rumored AM3? I'm confused :confused:
 
It all depends on what memory the K8L is supposed to use. I think AM2 is for DDR2 and AM3 is supposed to be for DDR3. It sucks having to buy a new CPU to upgrade your memory.
 
Donnie27 said:
No, they're supposed to match Intel prices to the nearest GHz or just below them. So FX-62 will still cost about $600, just an est. AMD will still try to sell FX-64 for the same $1000 as the E6800. Sweet deal might be on the FX-60 if you can find one.
Click to expand...
Nope, the FX line price will remain exactly where they alwsys are 827US for the 2nd model, 1031US for the 1st model.

The FX-62 will become 827US when the FX-64 launches.

Look at Intel they sold the Pentium EE 840 for 999US regardless of how competitive it was to AMD's Athlon 64x2 4800+.

Once you go beyond the 2nd model, it becomes discontinued.
 
-(Xyphox)- said:
AMD's have IMO always out performed Intel and that will not change,
Click to expand...
Your wrong that's not even remotely an opinion, that is false data, Intel outperfomed AMD in the Northwood C days. As well, before the Athlon came around AMD was hadly a force to become reckoned with.
 
BoogerBomb said:
It all depends on what memory the K8L is supposed to use. I think AM2 is for DDR2 and AM3 is supposed to be for DDR3. It sucks having to buy a new CPU to upgrade your memory.
Click to expand...
That's AMD's choice, with Intel you want to upgrade your memory you buy a new motherboard, for AMD you buy a new processor.
 
News from DigiTimes

http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20060710A1001.html

"Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) has recently indicated that its new K8L processor for its next-generation Socket AM3 platform will not be available until 2008, according to sources at Taiwan-based motherboard makers."

Take it with a grain of salt, its "sources".

Edit:
"AMD's K8L series is expected to be compatible with Socket AM2-based motherboards by adding both DDR2 and DDR3 memory controllers, according to the sources."

Wouldn't that be expensive?
 
InorganicMatter said:
There are at least half a dozen of these out there, so stop trying to pull the "Intel rigged it" line.

Is K8L supposed to use socket AM2, and then K9 uses this rumored AM3? I'm confused :confused:
Click to expand...
If AMD !!!!!!s wish to have their heads buried in the sand until the very end, let them, makes it that much harder to accept.

It would depend, the timeframe for K8L on desktop is very likely 2008, so we could be looking at both DDR2 or DDR3, I doubt DDR3 would be that cheap at that point since it would be fairly new at the time.
 
Well, from forum browsing to reading information from dailytech, digitimes, HPEC, anandtech, and various other sites, this is the sum of the "information" that I have gathered over that past few weeks:

AMD Roadmap

1. Q4 2006 - Q1 2007 - Desktops / Dual Core / AM2 Brisbane (transition to 65nm parts)
2. Mid 2007 - Servers / Quad Core / Deerhound
3. Q4 2007 - 2008 - Desktops / Quad Core / Greyhound
4. 2008 - Desktops / Dual Core / AM3 (First K8L part)

Intel Roadmap

1. Q4 2006 - Desktop / Dual Core / Allendale (2mb L2 cut down Conroe)
2. Q1 2007 - Desktops / Quad Core / Kentsfield
3. Q4 2007 - 2008 - Mobile / Dual Core / Penryn (45nm Transition)
3. 2008 - Desktop / Dual Core / Wolfdale (45nm 3mb L2 Cache)
4. 2008 - Desktop / Dual Core / Ridgefield (45nm part 6mb L2 Cache)
5. Late 2008 - Desktop / Quad Core / Bloomfield (successor to Kentsfield)

Note that this information is just the sum of what I have read online, some of it is fact, some speculation, so stuff is always subject to change. Please feel free to change dates and information if you find it incongruent from what I have found.

I don't want to start spreading misleading information :rolleyes:

And to the point:

As much as an avid AMD fan that I am, I'm not a blind fanatic, and with how things are shaping up it looks like Conroe will be the chip for a while to come, just like AMD's Athlon64's were a few years ago. Personally, imho, those playing the "wait-and-see" game might as well get on the "Conroe train" because I don't see any "solid" competition for Intel's new processor for a while to come.

...unless the 65nm transformation to Brisbane or 4x4 does miracles for AMD. :p

Oh, forgot some links to back this stuff up!

digitimes

AMD Roadmap June 1st

AMD Roadmap June 29th

Another AMD Roadmap

Intel Roadmap

Another Intel Roadmap

Last Intel Roadmap
 
EternityZX9 said:
Well, from forum browsing to reading information from dailytech, digitimes, HPEC, anandtech, and various other sites, this is the sum of the "information" that I have gathered over that past few weeks:

AMD Roadmap

1. Q4 2006 - Q1 2007 - Desktops / Dual Core / AM2 Brisbane (transition to 65nm parts)
2. Mid 2007 - Servers / Quad Core / Deerhound
3. Q4 2007 - 2008 - Desktops / Quad Core / Greyhound
4. 2008 - Desktops / Dual Core / AM3 (First K8L part)

Intel Roadmap

1. Q4 2006 - Mobile / Dual Core / Allendale
2. Q1 2007 - Desktops / Quad Core / Kentsfield
3. Q4 2007 - 2008 - Mobile / Dual Core / Wolfdale (45nm Transition)
4. Q4 2007 - 2008 - Desktop / Dual Core / Ridgefield ( 45nm part successor to Conroe)
5. Late 2008 - Desktop / Quad Core / Bloomfield (successor to Kentsfield)

Note that this information is just the sum of what I have read online, some of it is fact, some speculation, so stuff is always subject to change. Please feel free to change dates and information if you find it incongruent from what I have found.

I don't want to start spreading misleading information :rolleyes:

And to the point:

As much as an avid AMD fan that I am, I'm not a blind fanatic, and with how things are shaping up it looks like Conroe will be the chip for a while to come, just like AMD's Athlon64's were a few years ago. Personally, imho, those playing the "wait-and-see" game might as well get on the "Conroe train" because I don't see any "solid" competition for Intel's new processor for a while to come.

...unless the 65nm transformation to Brisbane or 4x4 does miracles for AMD. :p
Click to expand...
The mobile sucessor to Merom is called Penryn, Wolfdale is 45nm sucessor to Allendale.

Allendale and Conroe are like the difference between Manchester and Toledo.
 
EternityZX9 said:
Yes, I know, my mistakes in typing all that out :(
Click to expand...
Allendale isn't mobile it's slated for desktop.

Wolfdale is not the 45nm sucessor of Conroe, it actually has less cache (3MB), Ridgefield is the true sucessor of Conroe since it acutally has more cache which make sense on Intel transistions. :)
 
Allendale isn't mobile it's slated for desktop. Wolfdale is not the 45nm sucessor of Conroe, it actually has less cache (3MB), Ridgefield is the true sucessor of Conroe since it acutally has more cache which make sense on Intel transistions.
Click to expand...

Fixed, I was getting so confused reading all those websites. A lot of conflicting information. :rolleyes:
 
EternityZX9 said:
Fixed, I was getting so confused reading all those websites. A lot of conflicting information. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yes, it very hard to weed out the truth sometimes.

There are also so cores not mentioned in your list for AMD that are somewhat of interest.

Tyler, which is the 65nm sucessor to the Turionx2 Taylor for low power laptops. H1 2007.

Sherman, which is the 65nm sucessor to Socket S1 90nm Sempron processor codenamed Keene. H1 2007

Sparta, which is the 65nm sucessor to the Socket AM2 90nm Sempron processor codenamed Manilla timeframe Q2 2007
 
You are reading the article incorrectly.

The article claims that socket AM3 K8L parts are due in 2008. That makes perfect sense as socket AM3 will not be out until around then. The article you link to says nothing about the time at which socket AM2 K8L parts will arrive.

I trust AMD's public statements ( summer 2007 ) about K8L much more than I trust this telephone game BS: AMD -> MB makers -> Article writers -> Public.
 
I laugh at people who bitch about the onboard mem controller on the K8.

Seriously, when was the last time that you bought a new type of memory and DIDN'T have to buy a new CPU to "officially" take advantage of it anyway? Get over it, really. Every single speed bump for DDR1 required a new Athlon XP and a new motherboard to officially support it. Gee, that offboard memory controller really helped with upgradability huh? :rolleyes:

I haven't paid much attention to Intel stuff before Core/Core 2 came around, but I'm pretty sure Intel's switch to DDR2 required a new socket, and thus a new CPU. Seriously, that BS about the onboard memory controller was just Intel marketing FUD. I can't believe anyone buys into that kind of thing.
 
Sabrewulf165 said:
I haven't paid much attention to Intel stuff before Core/Core 2 came around, but I'm pretty sure Intel's switch to DDR2 required a new socket, and thus a new CPU. Seriously, that BS about the onboard memory controller was just Intel marketing FUD. I can't believe anyone buys into that kind of thing.
Click to expand...
Well actually, Intel made a chipset that natively supported DDR and DDR2, but it never was big because the world embraced DDR2 so quickly that there was no need for a dual memory chipset.
 
InorganicMatter said:
Well actually, Intel made a chipset that natively supported DDR and DDR2, but it never was big because the world embraced DDR2 so quickly that there was no need for a dual memory chipset.
Click to expand...

I didn't know that, but unless it was a dual socket board, my point is still valid ;) Not like you'd gain much from using DDR2 with a 478 chip anyway.
 
The article claims that socket AM3 K8L parts are due in 2008. That makes perfect sense as socket AM3 will not be out until around then. The article you link to says nothing about the time at which socket AM2 K8L parts will arrive.
Click to expand...

True, after re-reading some of the websites again, this is very possible - actually, I hope it does happen, because then AMD might have competition for Conroe, but it still gives Conroe a years headstart.
 
Sabrewulf165 said:
I didn't know that, but unless it was a dual socket board, my point is still valid ;) Not like you'd gain much from using DDR2 with a 478 chip anyway.
Click to expand...
Well the switch to LGA775 was more to address power requirements then for DDR2 itself.

Intel just decided to do it all at once with the Alderwood and Gransdale line.

Switch to PCI-E, DDR2 and LGA775.

The memory controller for Intel is not tied directly to Sockets, they can switch to a new memory type without changing the Socket.

Now with Conroe XE and Kentsfield coming up with have max thermal envelopes of 75W and 95W, LGA775 with it's support of 130W can easily support them.

With AMD, memory related upgrades are going to be tied to the the CPU.

It is somewhat of a concern, with each memory type change AMD needs to update their CPU's while on the Intel side, they just need to update thier motherboards.

With Intel though, you also got to keep in mind that sometimes they just do Socket changes so people will buy thier new chipsets, which make sense, since Intel has a good chipset buisness to cater to as well.

The switch to DDR2 wasn't a big deal anyway for either camp initally, Intel because their FSB is now saturated by way more bandwidth then it needs with Dual Channel DDR2-800 with only 800/1066FSB, AMD with it's K8 architecture which seem to favor access latencies rather then raw bandwidth, so gains with twice the bandwidth are minimal.
 
EternityZX9 said:
True, after re-reading some of the websites again, this is very possible - actually, I hope it does happen, because then AMD might have competition for Conroe, but it still gives Conroe a years headstart.
Click to expand...
Well K8L is still fairly far away so accurate information is going to be sparse at best, as well, though I don't expect a desktop derivative of K8L till 2008. Servers will likely arrive first in Mid 2007.
 
coldpower27 said:
The memory controller for Intel is not tied directly to Sockets, they can switch to a new memory type without changing the Socket.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it *COULD* be done, but you're missing what I'm getting at. If you're moving to a new type of memory, you're almost always going to be buying a new CPU anyway, and even if you're not, you probably won't gain much from it anyway (AM2 being a perfect example of this)

Also (and I say this somewhat in jest, so no flames please) with the kind of money you pay for high end motherboards these days, it's very possible for a CPU upgrade to be cheaper than a motherboard upgrade anyway ;)
 
Sabrewulf165 said:
Yeah, it *COULD* be done, but you're missing what I'm getting at. If you're moving to a new type of memory, you're almost always going to be buying a new CPU anyway, and even if you're not, you probably won't gain much from it anyway (AM2 being a perfect example of this)

Also (and I say this somewhat in jest, so no flames please) with the kind of money you pay for high end motherboards these days, it's very possible for a CPU upgrade to be cheaper than a motherboard upgrade anyway ;)
Click to expand...
Form a consumer standpoint I agree with you, if your going to upgrade your memory to a new type you might as well upgrade the entire platform CPU and motherboard included.

Well if your getting an enthusiast motherboard chances are you going to go with a performance mainstream processor or higher which is likely to be in the 300US range or higher. So no I would say I am going to say I disagree with this.
 
coldpower27 said:
Well if your getting an enthusiast motherboard chances are you going to go with a performance mainstream processor or higher which is likely to be in the 300US range or higher. So no I would say I am going to say I disagree with this.
Click to expand...

Considering top end motherboards can reach into the $200-$250 range these days, it's not entirely unlikely, especially considering enthusiasts, many of whom will purchase the cheapest fully featured CPU they can and overclock it. I'm not saying that's a majority case, just making an observation.

From my personal experience, when it comes to motherboards and CPUs, I upgrade one just about as frequently as another, and I'm hardly a hardcore overclocking enthusiast. If you upgrade once a year or more, it's hardly going to matter if a the mem controller is on the CPU. If you only upgrade every 3 years... it still won't matter!

I guess I'm not just not seeing any real world situation where this supposed advantage of offboard memory controllers is really going to matter.
 
Sabrewulf165 said:
Considering top end motherboards can reach into the $200-$250 range these days, it's not entirely unlikely, especially considering enthusiasts, many of whom will purchase the cheapest fully featured CPU they can and overclock it. I'm not saying that's a majority case, just making an observation.

From my personal experience, when it comes to motherboards and CPUs, I upgrade one just about as frequently as another, and I'm hardly a hardcore overclocking enthusiast. If you upgrade once a year or more, it's hardly going to matter if a the mem controller is on the CPU. If you only upgrade every 3 years... it still won't matter!

I guess I'm not just not seeing any real world situation where this supposed advantage of offboard memory controllers is really going to matter.
Click to expand...
That's seriously debatable, enthusiasts have a large range, that's only 1 fraction of the people who overclock. Though I do understand the point.

An offboard memory controller has advantages elsewhere, but I wouldn't say for the consumer necessarily.

This allows Intel to make their CPU's simpler without the additional logic required on the CPU itself, and allows shifting to new memory technologies quicker. If AMD wishes to support DDR3 unless the additional logic is already there, therebymaking the processor more complex in the first place, they would need to respin the chip. It also allows market segmentation of memory performance as Intel does with their chipsets.

Though I think were getting offtopic of this thread now :)

To me it doesn't really matter since i probably wouldn't upgrade my processor once I buy it.
 
Donnie27 said:
To each his or her own! Be loyal to those who are loyal to you. Sorry, AMD hasn't been. X2 prices RIGHTLY show who they care about and I don't blame them. Being loyal creates stagnation and make both AMD and Intel lazy. The only real thing I'm loyal to is my wallet.
Click to expand...


This was a few pages back, but its something that could use reiteration. Far often do i find people (myself included) just going with one side because they have had success with it, and refusing to consider the other option. In my opinion, an educated consumer, as im sure everyone here is (educated consumer is an oxymoron if you think about it), should assess both sides of the playing field and choose the best value and performance, not just stick with brand loyalty.

That being said, i personally am in quite a quandry. I want to build a new system before going off to school mid-August, so the question is (and im aware this is difficult to answer because of the very scarce ammount of information we have about the actual performance of Conroe), will Conroe's ~$400-$500 chips beat out AMD's chips of comperable price? Enough to warrant the taking the 'new technology' risk? From what i understand it will be an almost slaughter as far as performance goes, but its difficult to judge with such a lack of information. I also want to consider the fact that different platforms have different benefits and drawbacks, and i am still a bit weak on my information about Intels new fangled contraptions.

On another note...
Damn you NDA's, DAMN YOU TO SILICON HELL. :mad:
 
Nosir said:
This was a few pages back, but its something that could use reiteration. Far often do i find people (myself included) just going with one side because they have had success with it, and refusing to consider the other option. In my opinion, an educated consumer, as im sure everyone here is (educated consumer is an oxymoron if you think about it), should assess both sides of the playing field and choose the best value and performance, not just stick with brand loyalty.

That being said, i personally am in quite a quandry. I want to build a new system before going off to school mid-August, so the question is (and im aware this is difficult to answer because of the very scarce ammount of information we have about the actual performance of Conroe), will Conroe's ~$400-$500 chips beat out AMD's chips of comperable price? Enough to warrant the taking the 'new technology' risk? From what i understand it will be an almost slaughter as far as performance goes, but its difficult to judge with such a lack of information. I also want to consider the fact that different platforms have different benefits and drawbacks, and i am still a bit weak on my information about Intels new fangled contraptions.

On another note...
Damn you NDA's, DAMN YOU TO SILICON HELL. :mad:
Click to expand...
That can be basically guranteed. for 401US you will be able to get a Athlon 64x2 5000+ and that is only competitive with the E6400 best case.

the E6600 for 316US is FX-62 level, while the E6700 for 530US is beyond FX-62 performance.
 
Holy mackeral, those kinds of prices at launch are going to murder AMD sales.

I wish them luck haha.
 
wiretap said:
hmm.. but actually, that is dumb. They re-pin the 939's to a 940 which is different than the Opteron 940's, then have all the mobo manufacturers make a new style motherboard to fit it, use DDR2, then don't do anything with it at all except use the same 939 style processors....

Its like an automobile company such as GM making a whole new design for an engine bay for a car, making a new assembly line to do the task, mount the engine in the car sideways, and make it say "Flex Fuel Only" instead of 87 octane.. They basically accomplished nothing, got nowhere ahead, and lead themselves down a temporary dead end wasting their time. It really doesn't make sense, except only to put DDR2 in the machine only not to do anything with it but get slightly higher memory benchmarks.

So, what you are saying, is they are doing nothing more with the current AM2's? If so, that would nearly be the most short lived computer technology investment or implimentation I've seen. I mean, why even bother from their perspective. It seems like a waste of time and money instead of just making a great stride ahead to compete with Intel, or make it future upgradable for further AM2 models, something like Intel did with the P4. I'm sure AMD knew about Conroe some time before the public knew. They have people that leak information between the two companies to keep ahead.
Click to expand...

AMD relies on "planned obseletion."

I have a 3200+ 939 venice. By december of this year, AMD won't be manfucaturing any new 939 processors. What does all of this mean? People with the 939 pin motherboards won't have an upgrade path. We won't be able to buy new 939 pin processors. If we want to upgrade, we'll need to upgrade to AM2.

That means.. in order to upgrade, we'll need to get a whole new rig. Intel doesn't change pins as often as AMD, so you can hold onto your motherboard longer. I think this is one reason Intel has a major foot-hold in the global market.
 
Loyalty to a company doesn't make much sense to me. I admit, all of my video cards have been manufactured by Nvidia, and all of my processors have been AMDs, but if I was to buy a new comp right now.. I'd go with ATI and Intel. Conroe is going to own, and the x1900 has a superior feature-set(HDR+AA, superior AF) and its quick.

Do I feel "loyal" to amd or Nvidia? No, if they release inferior products, why should I bother buying them? If I stop buying AMD processors and Nvidia cards, that will send a message to those companies, telling them to get their act together.
 
BoogerBomb said:
I guess I should have read this thread before going on my rant about how AMD just sat on their asses thinking they had Intel beat. Sadly Conroe is next on my list and my first Intel CPU that I will have ever bought.
Click to expand...

Who cares who makes the product? The whole reason (in a way) that we have Conroe coming out now is in no small part thanks to AMD. AMD released an architecture that gave it the performance lead for roughly 2 1/2 to 3 years. Intel finally answered, and now we're benefitting. Support whatever gives the best performance at the best price, not company A or company B.

K8L is K8 rehashed and Conroe seems to have it beaten pretty good.
Click to expand...

Do you even *truly* know anything about K8L? I think not. Until any of us sees it as a working, functional chip, and we can see early, intermediate and final benchmarks, saying that "Conroe seems to have it [K8L] beaten pretty good", as well as saying K8L is "rehashed", is ignorance at best, utter stupidity at worst.

K8L is based upon K8 obviously, given the K8 in its name. However, if you truly think it's simply a rehash, just take a look at the early announced features expected (but obviously this can be prone to change) planned for K8L, and then come back and say it's rehashed.
 
That means.. in order to upgrade, we'll need to get a whole new rig. Intel doesn't change pins as often as AMD, so you can hold onto your motherboard longer. I think this is one reason Intel has a major foot-hold in the global market.
Click to expand...


That is a truly hilarious statement..
Top of the line Intel cpu's always require a chipset (motherboard) upgrade. :rolleyes:
 
BoogerBomb said:
Actually AM2 may be shot lived as I understand it AMD's next CPU the rehashed K8 will be on the AM3. Then 2 months after that will be AM4.

On-die memory controller isnt worth it. Having to upgrade CPU and mobo everytime just because of memory is just way too expensive for us consumers. Put it back on the motherboard and not the CPU.
Click to expand...

AM3 CPUs will work in AM2 motherboards... you couldn't be farther off from the truth...

dagon11985 said:
Loyalty to a company doesn't make much sense to me. I admit, all of my video cards have been manufactured by Nvidia, and all of my processors have been AMDs, but if I was to buy a new comp right now.. I'd go with ATI and Intel. Conroe is going to own, and the x1900 has a superior feature-set(HDR+AA, superior AF) and its quick.

Do I feel "loyal" to amd or Nvidia? No, if they release inferior products, why should I bother buying them? If I stop buying AMD processors and Nvidia cards, that will send a message to those companies, telling them to get their act together.
Click to expand...

Actually the only thing the x1900 series has going for it is HDR, that's it. Crossfire is no where near as good as SLI, read [H]'s article on this for more info.

I guarantee your switch to a company for a year doesn't make that big of an impact... besides, AMD and Intel watch each other and I'm sure they study each other's technology, hence why Intel is going with an integraded memory controller with the Core processors.

Sabrewulf165 said:
Yeah, it *COULD* be done, but you're missing what I'm getting at. If you're moving to a new type of memory, you're almost always going to be buying a new CPU anyway, and even if you're not, you probably won't gain much from it anyway (AM2 being a perfect example of this)

Also (and I say this somewhat in jest, so no flames please) with the kind of money you pay for high end motherboards these days, it's very possible for a CPU upgrade to be cheaper than a motherboard upgrade anyway ;)
Click to expand...

This is why I buy computer parts used...

Lou Cypher said:
That is a truly hilarious statement..
Click to expand...

I totally agree. Both companies are guilty of making new processors that require new motherboards. There is no guarantee that Conroe will be compatible with already existing Socket T motherboards, either.
 
Sabrewulf165 said:
And you can thank guys like me for the steady supply of used late model computer parts ;)
Click to expand...

*bows down*

Thank you enthusiasts for selling your quality, top model parts. God forbid if I don't have the latest and greatest in my possession ;)

Anyways, AMD is just playing the game Intel was playing, the wait and see game.
 
coldpower27 said:
Well K8L is still fairly far away so accurate information is going to be sparse at best, as well, though I don't expect a desktop derivative of K8L till 2008. Servers will likely arrive first in Mid 2007.
Click to expand...

I would say late 2007/early 2008 for a desktop K8L, if we go off the past time frame differences between AMD's server processors and desktop processors (such as the April -> September difference between the Opterons and first Athlon 64s, etc.)
 
EternityZX9 said:
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=32948



I guess this means visaris has been right all along? :p
Click to expand...
Heh, it means there are just rumors here and back about when AMD will have an answer to Conroe.

Remember the issue here is when K8L will arrive on desktop, some believe Early 2007, I think that is overly optimistic considering you never launch a old core and discontinue it in 2 months only, half a year usage typically is normal. Mid 2007, for some, Late 2007 for others and not till 2008 for some.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top