Thoroughbred to be Released on June 10th!

RaynorWolfcastle

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
8,968
16
81
June 10th is the rumored TBred launch date

AMD reworked the Athlon XP core in shrinking the chip, resulting in a smaller die size but also reducing the number of transistors
Advanced Micro Devices will launch the desktop version of its "Thoroughbred" Athlon XP microprocessor on June 10, according to an email from the company forwarded by an anonymous source.

AMD, Sunnyvale, Calif., will launch a "2200+" (1.8-GHz) version of the Thoroughbred on that date, although 1700+ to 2100+ (1.47-GHz to 1.73-GHz) models will also eventually transition to the Thoroughbred core, the email said.

The model 2100+ desktop Thoroughbred, meanwhile, typically consumes 56.4 watts at 1.6 volts;


Seems AMD is running quite a bit behind Intel on their .13 micron process

-Ice
 

Pocatello

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 1999
9,754
2
76
Not interested. I'm waiting for the hammer or Opteron, or was it Amitron, something like that, yeah that's it.
 

Rand

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
11,071
1
81
and in that it requires 1.6V to run whereas the Northwoods run at 1.5V (stock voltage, of course)

-Ice


Hardly comparable given that it's two very different microprocessor architectures.

Not that I disagree that AMD's .13u fabrication facilities were quite late in coming on-line and being utilized in any significant degree, one can also put forth the argument that their current .13u processor is rather unadvanced relative to that used by Intel.

 

SteelCityFan

Senior member
Jun 27, 2001
782
0
0
Only a 66Mhz jump with the shrink to .13 microns?

Come on AMD.. keep up.. we need the competition to keep things cheap...
 

BD231

Lifer
Feb 26, 2001
10,568
138
106
To add to Rands comment's, it's better late then sorry. Sometimes thing's don't always go as smoothed as planed.
 

BD231

Lifer
Feb 26, 2001
10,568
138
106
Originally posted by: SteelCityFan
Only a 66Mhz jump with the shrink to .13 microns?

Come on AMD.. keep up.. we need the competition to keep things cheap...

Did you ever stop to think that it could be a limitation of the Athlon design itself?
 

RaynorWolfcastle

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
8,968
16
81
Different architecture or not, both ran at 1.75V on a 0.18 micron process. On a .13 micron process the Woody runs at 1.5V whereas the Athlon requires 1.6V. Since both cores are very similar to their predecessors, it could be that AMD is essentially "overclocking" their chips right out of the fab. On the other hand, for Intel the change of process also meant a change from Al to Cu interconnects... Meh, either way, time-wise, AMD is way back on their process development.
-Ice
 

human2k

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2001
3,563
0
0
THG recently was able to test a thouroubred that came in an ATI prototype notebook, it was an XP 1600 1.4GHZ, he said:

I am afraid that there is absolutely no performance difference! The new "Thoroughbred" is only running a lot cooler than "Palomino."

Thats gotta suck then... unless the cpu can really overclock ;) , I guess the 1.6A P4 or 1.8A gonna is STILL gonna be very popular here, hell imma probably get one now and sell my KT266A board and CPU.:D

EDIT: plus the t-bred is suppose to be the last socket A cpu (correct mE IF IM WRONG), I still want to use my old board:(
 

ST4RCUTTER

Platinum Member
Feb 13, 2001
2,841
0
0
As pm and others have pointed out, there are a lot of factors that go into how well a chip will be improved when moving from one process to another. It could very well be that the initial design tolerances of the Athlon core did not take .13um into consideration and AMD is having trouble "fitting" the Athlon to the new process. It has also been proven for some time that the AMD chips require more voltage. Some have claimed that the superscalar FPU's are to blame...honestly, I don't know the answer to this. I find it hard to believe that it will be a permanent problem though. The P3 has only 10-stages and it squeezed another 400Mhz out of .13um. The Athlon should do almost as well once AMD get a better handle on the process and iron out any problems as they arise. They will also have to help UMC along...

I did want to correct human2k, in that the Barton will be the last socket A chip AMD makes.

 

Rand

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
11,071
1
81
Originally posted by: icecool83
Different architecture or not, both ran at 1.75V on a 0.18 micron process. On a .13 micron process the Woody runs at 1.5V whereas the Athlon requires 1.6V. Since both cores are very similar to their predecessors, it could be that AMD is essentially "overclocking" their chips right out of the fab. On the other hand, for Intel the change of process also meant a change from Al to Cu interconnects... Meh, either way, time-wise, AMD is way back on their process development.
-Ice

True, but the K7 core has gone through a number of modifications, and on a number of different processes.
While the P4 is very new, has gone through only two relatively small modifications, and been manufactured on only two processes.
It could simply be the K7 core it hitting the limits of it's design, whereas the P4 core was most definitely designed to scale well beyond 5-6GHz, and hasnt even yet hit it's "sweet spot" in terms of process designs, whereas the K7 core hit it's sweet spot long ago and likely on it's original .25u process.

Also we have precious little detailed information on either Intel or AMD's current .13u lithography process,so it's almost impossible to gauge it's effects on either processor.
For all we know AMD's gate length for the K7 core on the .18u process was already below .13u which would severely limit the gains when reducing the whole process to .13u, or the opposite could be true for Intel and the P4.

Perhaps one was a simple dumb shrink while the other involved a re-layout of the internals of the core?
We have little information either way, a dumb shrink would be significantly easier and less costly but it would limit the gains seen from going to a .13u process.

The mere fact that it's a base .13u design tells us precious little about the relative merits of either process.
One .18u process could be lightyears ahead of another .013u process process, despite the fact that in theory the a .13u should be superior and is in base terms smaller then a .18u process.
The fact that they were both superficially a .18u process before, and are both superficially a .13u process now tells us very little about the internals of either process design.

There are way too many factors to make it remotely possible to compare the P4 voltage to that of the Athlon even were they both built on precisely the same process, and lithography tools.
 

BD231

Lifer
Feb 26, 2001
10,568
138
106
Well at least the T-Bred is coming out as an upgrade path for people with Socket-A motherboard's who want more power and cooler chips. The T-Bred was in no way meant to be a big performance leap like the XP was to the T-Bird. Comparing the P4 to an Athlon XP is nuts. The P4 has MUCH longer pathways and an insanely different architecture than the Athlon. You have to take into account that clock for clock the Athlon is doing a great deal more work than the P4 could ever do at the same clock speed. The T-Bred should run as cool or close to as cool as an EQUAL PERFORMING P4. The higher clocked P4?s produce a damn good deal of heat themselves. As far as voltage goes, I have always under volted my Athlon XP processors. My 1900+ run?s fine at 1.65v (normal voltage is 1.75), so I?m not worried.
 

majewski9

Platinum Member
Jun 26, 2001
2,060
0
0
I think this athlon will be very overclockable, but I dont know how far AMD is going to scale it. I wish they would ramp up frequency faster. It does look like they are going to go 1x multiplier from .5 or two model numbers instead of one after model 2200. Athlon MP 2100 is suppose to be .13 micron as well as all future durons and mobiles. I cant wait for the .13 micron Duron! It will be super cheap and very very cool running!