AMD 65nm chips will arrive in H1 2007

Gamer X

Banned
Feb 11, 2005
769
0
0
From Xbit Labs

According to slides which resemble those from the roadmaps of Advanced Micro Devices, the first desktop chip from the world?s second largest chipmaker made using 65nm process technology will be released in the first half of 2007 to substitute the mainstream dual-core 90nm products. Another 65nm microprocessor is slated to be released in the second half of next year and target entry-level computers.

The slides, which presumably reflect a recent roadmap of AMD, published by HKEPC web-site contain some information about code-named Brisbane and Sparta processors. The Brisbane chip will be made using 65nm process technology, will sport two processing engines and will come out in the first half of 2007. Meanwhile, the product code-named Sparta, also made using 65nm process technology, will be launched in the second half of next year.

If the slides are correct, then Brisbane will target the market of mainstream dual-core processors, whereas Sparta will serve entry-level computers.

Both 65nm processors will be designed for Socket AM2 form-factor, which means that both will support dual-channel DDR2 memory, but it is unclear what speed-bin. It is unclear which additional technologies ? enhanced security code-named Presidio, virtualization named Pacifica, etc. ? these chips will support.

AMD traditionally begins transition to thinner process technologies starting from its low-cost and mainstream product lineups. High-end offerings are typically made using mature fabrication processes.

The beginning of revenue shipments of 65nm chips was delayed by AMD. Initially AMD indicated that the ?idea? of AMD was to begin to process 65nm in the middle of 2005 and ?bring it into production in 2006?. Late in 2005 the company said it would only begin production of 65nm in late 2006.

AMD did not comment on the news-story.

 

Viditor

Diamond Member
Oct 25, 1999
3,290
0
0
That sounds about right...the mobile and server 65nm chips will be late 2006, and desktop will be early 2007.
 

dmens

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2005
2,275
965
136
So when is Intel going to debut it's next-gen desktop CPU?

LOL, comparing process tech (by far the most important advantage in this game) with a desktop design (third of three segments).

Give me the choice of prolonged netburst or immediate switch to 45nm to mass production, I'll take 45nm and give offer my left testicle for it.

well, by mid-07, there'll be 45nm parts out by intel.
 

dexvx

Diamond Member
Feb 2, 2000
3,899
0
0
Originally posted by: dmens
So when is Intel going to debut it's next-gen desktop CPU?

LOL, comparing process tech (by far the most important advantage in this game) with a desktop design (third of three segments).

Give me the choice of prolonged netburst or immediate switch to 45nm to mass production, I'll take 45nm and give offer my left testicle for it.

well, by mid-07, there'll be 45nm parts out by intel.

Bad design trumps all.
 

dmens

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2005
2,275
965
136
Nope. Process is king. Design can lag and you'll still be in business.
 

Gamer X

Banned
Feb 11, 2005
769
0
0
Originally posted by: dmens
Nope. Process is king. Design can lag and you'll still be in business.

The fact that AMD is eating up more and more of Intel's marketshare does not support
that.
 

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,604
15
81
Originally posted by: openwheelformula1
Nope, marketing is king. Process and design can lag and you'll still be in business.

perfect example: Intel.

Theyre marketings over-hyped. Would you go buy an Intel just because the TV went "Intel inside! Ding a ling ling" Nah... Most of the ad's i see are for entire desktop pc's from the likes of dell or pcworld, and you dont have a choice anyways as the pc will come with what they put in it.
 

dmens

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2005
2,275
965
136
You have to be completely retarded to claim AMD has a process lead on intel, LOL. As for market share, last I checked, intel is still in business, and in the lead.
 

openwheelformula1

Senior member
Sep 2, 2005
727
0
0
soviet, you might be underestimating the power of Intel's marketing power. You'd be amazed at how powerful "Intel Inside" has been for their revenue share. Remember a part of Intel's marketing power is Dell's exclusive use of Intel chips.

dmens: oops, there you go. Also remember market share does not lead to better product. Check GM/Ford and Toyota/Honda. Bias fans generally outweighs knowledgeable users.
 

dmens

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2005
2,275
965
136
When did I say market share leads to a better product? I said process is king. It has the ability to retain or even gain market share even with a technologically inferior product.

I cannot quantify the effects of marketing on sales, but it seems to be a favorite target of the fanboi crowd... as if dell chooses intel because of marketing, LOL.
 

openwheelformula1

Senior member
Sep 2, 2005
727
0
0
relax dmens no need to start calling names. Of course you didn't say market share leads to better product because I simply made the opposite statement. I just disagree w/ "Process is King" statement because it contributes much smaller percentage of a business' growth when compared to marketing and public's general perception. To support my words in the above statement, you can find the difference for Intel and AMD's marketing expense. Anyone who is somewhat knowledgeable knows AMD still hold the bang for buck advantage for DYI users.

Of course you can't quantify the effect of marketing on sales. You obviously seek to justify your favored company's shortcomings. Some call that "fanboi". Marketing plays a small part of Dell's decision to go exclusively Intel. Remember marketing covers a whole variety of variables in the business world. Not just advertising. Ultimately it's the cost, margin of profit and the big name of INTEL that Dell is interested in. Being a fanboy of Intel, you should've probably glorify what they are good at, and not make things up.
 

openwheelformula1

Senior member
Sep 2, 2005
727
0
0
process could reduce cost and increase profit, yet you still need to increase quality of items sold by promoting it, and this is where Intel really takes off from AMD.
 

Hacp

Lifer
Jun 8, 2005
13,923
2
81
Originally posted by: openwheelformula1
process could reduce cost and increase profit, yet you still need to increase quality of items sold by promoting it, and this is where Intel really takes off from AMD.

If Intel continued Netburst, developed 10nm technology, and started producing those chips today, what would you say? Smaller process generally = more performance.
 

BrownTown

Diamond Member
Dec 1, 2005
5,314
1
0
yeah, process is EVERYTHING, the architecture only becomes important when theprocess technology is close to the same, presscott didn't suck becasue of its architecture (although that was certainly part of it), the problem with presscott was the crappy 90nm tech leaked so much that they couldn't scale it up nearly as high as the aritecure requried in order to be efficient.
 

ahock

Member
Nov 29, 2004
165
0
0
Bottomline this is bad for AMD. There is an article at inquirer.net about what will happen in 2006 (I think it was released before 2005 ends) and one thing AMD can loose is when it will slip is process transistion.

Anyway this is I think bad for AMD.... Come 2007 Intel be at 45nm maybe.
 

openwheelformula1

Senior member
Sep 2, 2005
727
0
0
hacp: you have to set other variables fixed before discussing the consequences of process technology. Generally newer process is better, but innovation has to take place in order to take more advantage of the 90nm/65nm/45/nm technology. Recent AMD's innovations has resulted in significant performance boosts (on die memory controller for example), however Intel's recent innovation has been lagging to move Intel forward. It's not like Intel doesn't spend on R&D. The problem for Intel is that they have such a bias public perception and brand name recognition, they can continue to use netburst and still control the majority of the market share. Go ask your 80 year-old grandma if she rather have Intel or AMD when he purchases a computer from BestBuy. I remember few month ago there was an article regarding Intel adapting AMD's hyper transport architecture by 2007, but they would have to pay $15 per cpu.

There is no debate that most "enthusiasts" forums are dominated by AMD fans simply because they provide more bang for the buck, and in today's debate AMD64 is simply BETTER and more clever than Pentium4 and even current Core Duals. This is where AMD should really get credit for innovating. Competition is good for all of us DIY users. I can't wait to see Conroe's benches.

65nm from Intel has close the gap between AMD and Intel, but it hasn't been enough.
 

BrownTown

Diamond Member
Dec 1, 2005
5,314
1
0
just a little note on Intels 45nm: its pretty much gonna be the exact same tech as the 45nm except smaller. All the improvements that were supposed to come from their 45nm tech (high-k, trigate trasnistors, 1/100 the leakage and better speed) have all been pushed back until 32nm, so while Intel deffinitely has a lead in SIZE of their process, they don't really have a lead in process QUALITY. So they can make CPUs cheaper, but not better with their new tech.
 

dmens

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2005
2,275
965
136
Being a fanboy of Intel, you should've probably glorify what they are good at, and not make things up.

Make things up? No, everything I said is based on knowledge of the industry from working in cpu design. I might work for intel, but I'm not going to lie to myself or anyone about the straight industry facts. Process is king because it plays to the economies of scale.

Don't start with the tired old story that Intel's marketing power is the sole reason it keeps market share. If AMD were able to produce enough volume to supply the big boys, they'd get all the brand recognition in the world simply from exposure. The fact that they cannot compete at that level of volume means that they will have zero brand recognition to the average consumer, and no lawsuit will change that. Public perception? Most of the public hasn't even heard of AMD. Why do you think AMD is going through the lawsuit to begin with?

In any case, the designs will essentially equalize later this year. Then we'll see how important process is.

All the improvements that were supposed to come from their 45nm tech (high-k, trigate trasnistors, 1/100 the leakage and better speed) have all been pushed back until 32nm,

Trigate? 1/100 leakage? What? Pushed to 32nm? Where'd you get that info?