Fab36!

Fab 36 looks very impressive. I can't wait to see how the chips from this fab perform. ;)
 
Great news for AMD. More production means they can better compete with Intel in volume (and hopefully nab some more OEM deals).
 
That's disappointing, because I was hoping that Fab 36 would hit the ground running, as the saying goes. Hopefully this does not delay 65 nm uptake by AMD significantly.
 
xonik said:
That's disappointing, because I was hoping that Fab 36 would hit the ground running, as the saying goes. Hopefully this does not delay 65 nm uptake by AMD significantly.
Click to expand...

I consider 90nm hitting the ground running, it's AMD current size, and even intel isn't producing 65nm chips yet.
 
xonik said:
That's disappointing, because I was hoping that Fab 36 would hit the ground running, as the saying goes. Hopefully this does not delay 65 nm uptake by AMD significantly.
Click to expand...
that would have been nice, but far too much to expect imo. it has long been known that amd would open fab36 late this year and ramp up production from there. i'm hoping we start seeing cpu's out of it before people are predicting though, i don't want to wait another half year :( :p
 
serbiaNem said:
I consider 90nm hitting the ground running, it's AMD current size, and even intel isn't producing 65nm chips yet.
Click to expand...
It's naive to think that AMD is not currently developing 65 nm parts as we speak. Intel has been doing so for probably a year themselves, but they are well underway in terms of engineering samples. Samples are out and about, where is AMD's 65 nm samples?

If AMD wants to keep up with Intel they MUST have 65 nm engineering samples out there by the end of the year. That's hitting the ground running. They need time to work out production bugs before delivering 65 nm products come Q2/Q3 2006.
 
xonik said:
It's naive to think that AMD is not currently developing 65 nm parts as we speak. Intel has been doing so for probably a year themselves, but they are well underway in terms of engineering samples. Samples are out and about, where is AMD's 65 nm samples?

If AMD wants to keep up with Intel they MUST have 65 nm engineering samples out there by the end of the year. That's hitting the ground running. They need time to work out production bugs before delivering 65 nm products come Q2/Q3 2006.
Click to expand...

I never said they weren't in development/testing, just said they weren't in production from both intel and amd.
 
They will be very soon, as Intel has committed to an early Q1 2006 release of 65 nm technology products. You probably know that it takes time to build up acceptable yields, not to mention sufficient quantities to meet the demand.
 
xonik said:
That's disappointing, because I was hoping that Fab 36 would hit the ground running, as the saying goes. Hopefully this does not delay 65 nm uptake by AMD significantly.
Click to expand...

Indeed, especially after the rumors this past spring and summer that 65nm was on time and on track (and that Fab36 would be a 65nm plant from the start). If 65nm by the end of next year and 'substatial' 65nm production by sometime in 2007 is the roadmap it appears AMD is going to be just as far behind Intel's 65nm process as they were on the 90nm chips.

Last time they didn't get hurt by it... playing with fire though.

But I guess that answers the question as to why we weren't seeing a bigger feature set with M2.
 
Well, sure the 90nm processes came out after intel's, but didn't the 130's still produce more "horsepower" than the intel counterparts? And produce less heat?
 
FreiDOg said:
Last time they didn't get hurt by it... playing with fire though.
Click to expand...
i don't think it really made a difference. neither camp really got much performance out of the 90nm transition. from here on out, i think smaller process size will be most handy when it comes time to put more than two cores on one die.
 
i think smaller process size will be most handy when it comes time to put more than two cores on one die.
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree. On a 65nm process, it's possible for Intel to develop Quad cores or cores with some serious L1, L2 and L3 cache.
 
serbiaNem said:
I consider 90nm hitting the ground running, it's AMD current size, and even intel isn't producing 65nm chips yet.
Click to expand...

intel is getting real close to putting out a 65nm chip. guess what its TDP is?? 86w. wasnt the 130nm a64's TDP 89w?? half the nm, and only 3w less. i see no need for AMD to go to 65nm ATM, they already slaughter intel in the temp department, so unless they are adding some new special effects to the 65nm size, then theres no reason to really want a 65nm amd chip.
 
CCUABIDExORxDIE said:
intel is getting real close to putting out a 65nm chip. guess what its TDP is?? 86w. wasnt the 130nm a64's TDP 89w?? half the nm, and only 3w less. i see no need for AMD to go to 65nm ATM, they already slaughter intel in the temp department, so unless they are adding some new special effects to the 65nm size, then theres no reason to really want a 65nm amd chip.
Click to expand...

That's down from a 115W TDP on the current high end Prescotts, or a 25% reduction in power. About the same as AMD got with their straight die strink to 90nm. Not that any such comparison is worth anything.

Prescott is good for two things, media work, and heating your house in the winter.
Ceadar Mill is slightly less usefull :) .

Yonah / Sossaman are the immediate reasons for AMD to worry about intel's 65nm parts.
31W dual core mobiles (for most Yonahs it seems, DTR and extreme eiditions for gamers up to 49W or more), is only 4W more than current high end dothan, and still very comperable to AMD's single core Turion line.
Sossaman is a Yonah for servers. Dual core opterons compete favorably against 135W Paxville and similar Xeon offerfings, but against 30-60W dual core Pentium Ms?

Obivously nothing is certain until we see real benchmarks of finished products, and speculation is not all that usefull when we don't even know the final clock speeds for new offerings. But just because Ceadar Mill looks like another mediocre chip doesn't mean AMD isn't going to miss smaller, faster, lower power chips in the next 12 months.
 
thats disappointing about the whole 90nm instead of 65nm thing :/
It mentions 65nm by end of 2006, while Intel will have 65nm by beginning of 2006. Oh well let's keep up the stiff competition on both sides please! The whole CPU stuff is getting so exciting recently. Yonah, 65nm, Multi-cores, etc ! I love checking news with my XP2400+ ! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top