All of this reminds me of Intel's problems with trying to push the .25 PIII past 1.13GHz It looks like AMD's architecture just isn't going to work out very well, the same as Intel's didn't. A May release will mean this is about six months behind schedule (AMD showed the chip for the first time last October).
I just don't see that this new chip will work out, with the exception that the .13 process will lower costs (more per wafer than .25). Perhaps for the general consumer, computers based on AMD chips using the .13 core will cost less for a given clock speed (or PR or whatever). These buyers won't know/care about the heat, they'll just find that their machines are more noisy and maybe that will be enough to drive some sales away from AMD-based computers. However, for the enthusiast that overclocks it looks like Intel will be our future.
One thing that I've always wondered is whether AMD "overclocks" their chips vis-a-vis Intel chips as standard practice. What I mean is that the AMD chip, with the exception of a point in time when Intel was transitioning from high GHz PIII chips to PIV chips, doesn't seem to get as high of an overclock as easily as Intel. Additionally, the v-core for AMD's chips is higher which is an overclocking trick. This comment isn't to accuse AMD of anything, but probably the opposite - that is Intel probably sells their chips at a lower clock speed than they could to ensure there are no problems with the chips.
Facebook
Twitter