Is the new 65nm X2s gonna be hot or cold item?

[nyker96]

What do you think? vote the poll!

hxxp://www.tgdaily.com/2006/12/05/amd_intros_65nm_cpus/

 

[Munky]

Depends on how well they OC compared to 90nm parts. If the average x2 3800 will OC to 3ghz or higher, then they'd be great budget dual core processors.

 

[Noubourne]

If they are all on AM2, then cold. If 939, then lukewarm.

The 939 market is the only market it makes sense to go with AMD, because of the existing install base. 65nm would only really matter to OCers and maybe HTPC builders, of those the OCers being the real market - they tend to buy multiple chips. Not many will move to AM2 to OC, if you're going to change sockets, you might as well go 775 and get the C2D.

What is a benefit for AMD either way is that they get more cores out per wafer, and can make a higher profit than they were before (or lower prices more to stay competitive with C2D).

 

[DerKaiser]

Right now, especially after Dell started selling Athlons, AMD can sell all the chips they make. This will probably continue. AMD cares a lot more about Dell than enthusiasts (as they should).

 

[nyker96]

whole lot of you think it's gonna be cold. Well I do agree but what if goes past 3.5 then it might get interesting.

 

[Sylvanas]

Be it hot or cold, It's good news for AMD- Higher yeilds and perhaps trying 65nm tech before their 'true' Quad cores hit in 07

 

[TanisHalfElven]

now would be a good time for amd to debut the non-native quad cores.

 

[nyker96]

The hot people are catching up on this poll.

I agree, they should make a stick-together 65nm quade just for fun and sell it like QX6700, make some money and make some people happy.

 

[zsdersw]

Yes, then maybe people would shut up about "true quad core" this and "elegant quad core" that.

 

[Cogman]

I voted cold. I don't think that AMD is going to have much luck in selling these (at least as the 1st generation). As far as I've read, they have the same TDP as their 90nm counterparts. This is bad in my opinion as a die shrink should result in more Energy efficiant processors (overclockable). I could be wrong though.

I think they will get their biggest boon from companies like Dell, but thats only if the price is right (they are a bit higher then their 90nm counterparts right?). I don't see a lot of computer enthusiates going for them though.

 

[A554SS1N]

I think going to 65nm is a great move - we're not talking about extra performance here, but a way for AMD to make more profits by getting higher yields, which can help them compete better int he long run. Surely anything like this has got to be good news?

 

[atom]

Exactly, hot for AMD but minimal impact to the end user. It might help the average overclock though. Going from 130 to 90 the average overclock seemed to be bumped up another 200-400 mhz IIRC. Not enough to overtake Intel but still nice.

 

[Maximilian]

I voted cold, because i thought you meant temperature. It will be colder due to 65nm blah blah we all know that heh.

But i think itll do pretty well, the clock speed should ramp up nicely.

 

[her209]

The average user cares about price...