• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

*AMD Delays Thoroughbred. Fully Updates Roadmap for Next 2 Years.*

A

AGodspeed

Diamond Member
As you might already know, I keep pretty close tabs on Intel and AMD's latest processor roadmaps. Just today, AMD updated their processor roadmap for the next two years. Unfortunately, AMD has delayed certain Thoroughbred processors for the 2nd and 3rd quarters of this year.

Here's the full AMD roadmap for the next 2 years. I bolded the Thoroughbred parts that have been delayed.

Q1 2002:

- Athlon XP 2100+ Desktop (.18-micron = "Palomino" core)
- Duron 1.3GHz Desktop (.18-micron = "Morgan" core)
- Athlon 4 1.4GHz Mobile (.18-micron = "Palomino" core)

Q2 2002:

- Athlon XP 2200+ Desktop (.13-micron = "Thoroughbred" core) Tbred 2400+ delayed to Q3
- Duron Desktop *Undecided* through 2003
- Athlon 4 1900+ Mobile (.13-micron = "Thoroughbred" core)

Q3 2002:

- Athlon XP 2400+ Desktop (.13-micron = "Thoroughbred" core) Tbred 2600+ delayed to Q4
- Athlon 4 2000+ Mobile (.13-micron = "Thoroughbred" core)

Q4 2002:

- Athlon XP 2800+ Desktop (.13-micron SOI = "Barton" core)
- ClawHammer 3400+ Desktop (.13-micron SOI)*--> (AMD formally switches from the K7 architecture to the K8 architecture)
- Athlon 4 2200+ Mobile (.13-micron = "Thoroughbred" core)

Q1 2003:

- ClawHammer DP (.13-micron SOI. 1-2 way server/workstation processor)

1H 2003:

- ClawHammer 4000+ Desktop (.13-micron SOI)
- Athlon 4 2400+ Mobile (.13-micron = "Thoroughbred" core)

2H 2003:

- ClawHammer 4400+ (.09-micron SOI)
- ClawHammer 3500+ Mobile (.09-micron SOI)


The rest is pretty much the same. However, AMD decided not to release an Athlon XP 2200+ Palomino this quarter, but an Athlon XP 2100+ Palomino instead (which is now available on pricewatch for preorder, with an ETA of March 14th).
 
Thanks for the heads up.

Does anybody know anything about performance gains of the Barton core over a similarly configured xp 2800 on a .13 micron process?
Would it be enough to allow AMD to make the otherwise sturdy palomino core its value CPU?
 


<< Thanks for the heads up.

Does anybody know anything about performance gains of the Barton core over a similarly configured xp 2800 on a .13 micron process?
Would it be enough to allow AMD to make the otherwise sturdy palomino core its value CPU? >>

Adding SOI is just a thermal decision. Barton will likely become the foundation for AMD's line of value processors.
 
Good stuff AGodspeed. Thanks! I seems to me that AMD is coordinating the T-Bred launch to be in conjunction with 533fsb Northwood launch. Not a bad decision IMO. Yea, Barton is just .13 SOI. Nothing big really.
 
I'm sure this question has been asked a million times, will the new AMD chips be compatible with the current socket A form factor and mobos?
 


<< I'm sure this question has been asked a million times, will the new AMD chips be compatible with the current socket A form factor and mobos? >>

Not a chance in the world. The Athlon XP utilizes a 462-pin socket, the ClawHammer utilizes a 754-pin socket.
 
- Athlon XP 2200+ Desktop (.13-micron = "Thoroughbred" core) Tbred 2400+ delayed to Q3

Disappointing to say the least, especially since they've done such an outstanding job with the Hammer.

Oh well, at least I feel even better about getting my Northwood. 😉
 
THG did mention that they saw the Clawhammer utilizing a 64bit version of WinXP. I can't wait for Clawhammer to come out...I'm all giddy😛
 
What about chipsets? Will the current batch of KT266A/nForce/Sis735/ boards work with AMD's future processors? How does amd plan to compete if they dont have the right chipsets?
 


<< THG did mention that they saw the Clawhammer utilizing a 64bit version of WinXP. I can't wait for Clawhammer to come out...I'm all giddy >>



That was a mistake.
 


<< THG did mention that they saw the Clawhammer utilizing a 64bit version of WinXP. I can't wait for Clawhammer to come out...I'm all giddy😛 >>

As Zlash mentioned, THG has now corrected that to say 32-bit version of WinXP and not 64-bit.

However, just today AMD CFO Bob Rivet mentioned that ClawHammer is able to run WinXP-64, which is worth something significant IMHO.
 
Wow AGodSpeed; you're a wealth of useful information. Don't suppose you know when we might see a MS 64 bit OS, do you?
 
- ClawHammer 3400+
- ClawHammer 4000+
- ClawHammer 4400+


I don't see the pattern here, what am I missing??????
 
I think it's fair to assume that those are just milestones, and that there will be speed grades in between.

It's just that putting every speed grade on the roadmap would make it a tad cluttered. 😉
 


<< However, just today AMD CFO Bob Rivet mentioned that ClawHammer is able to run WinXP-64, which is worth something significant IMHO. >>



based on..................MSFT?
 
AMD hopes Microsoft will do WinXP-64. There is no official WinXP-64 project for anything but Itanium. And Itanium is a completely different architecture than x86-64. Operating system ports are no small potatos; in order to subsidize NT Alpha development, Microsoft asked Compaq for tens of millions of dollars...per year.

Honestly, I think the chances of Microsoft doing a x86-64 OS just for AMD are close to nil, unless AMD attains substantial gains in market share. However, remember, AMD only holds 20% of the market for new processors, and even then, a high percentage of that is and will remain Duron; it will be a very very long time before they hit a 20% share of the market for new processors with Hammer alone, if ever. And the 20% figure has to do with new processors sold, it has nothing to do with processors in use by consumers; about 95% of consumer desktops in use are Intel.

Now if Intel signals a move toward x86-64, then we'll see it. Don't hold your breath, however. 🙂
 


<< What about chipsets? Will the current batch of KT266A/nForce/Sis735/ boards work with AMD's future processors? How does amd plan to compete if they dont have the right chipsets? >>

No. None of the Socket A Chipsets will work with Hammer for various reasons like the fact that Hammer uses a HT link between the CPU and the North Bridge, the fact that Hammer practically has the entire North Bridge on the CPU (minus AGP Controller). So, there will be new chipsets and motherboards for Hammer.
 


<< 4 GHz on a desktop? What does one need with all those flops?

OMG! I don't believe I even asked that! 🙂

Cheers! >>



Scroll back to 1986

"What the hell would anybody need a 32 bit CPU for? Intel was nuts making that thing called a 386DX! At least they still decided to do the smart thing and keep making 386SX's since they were simply just a 16 bit 80286 on drugs! Noone will buy the 32 bit version!"

Welcome to 2002 🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top