Why does 5000+ feature: ~300mhz, 667DDRII, and still 2x1mb Cache over 4800+

[Polish3d]

The 5000+ Windsor is expected to have:

DDR II 667
Clock of 2.667Ghz
Still 2x1mb L2 cache...


It seems an awful lot to only move 1 Perf. rating.

You'd think the 2.667 + 2x1mb cache would be the 5200+ or so

 

[Some1ne]

It's interesting in that the AMD performance number have sort of lost their meaning...they used to be analogous to P4 clock speeds, but the P4 stopped at 3.8 GHz, and AMD is up to 4800+ now. I guess it's a sign of success that the model rating system has grown beyond its dependency on the P4, but since it has, AMD is kind of free to make the different levels mean whatever it feels like. If there isn't going to be anything between the 4800+ and this new chip, then it does make sense in a way to give the new chip the next available model number, rather than to leave a hole in the range that will never get filled.

Also, it's possible that the performance of DDR2 RAM with an AMD64 chip just plain sucks, but that seems unlikely.

 

[Polish3d]

I thought they actually get it certifed though independently, so it means more than just the number

 

[Some1ne]

How would they certify it? I can see how they'd do it back when they were still claiming that a 3000+ would be as good as or better than a 3.0 GHz Intel chip, but as noted this is no longer what the ratings mean, they just indicate relative performance, so the only thing to certify would be that the 5000+ is faster than the 4800+ (assuming that the 4800+ has already been "certified" to be faster than the 4600+, and so on down the line). Independent certification just doesn't make sense now that the mapping of performance ratings to Intel clockspeeds is no longer in play.

 

[CrispyFried]

Originally posted by: Some1ne
How would they certify it? I can see how they'd do it back when they were still claiming that a 3000+ would be as good as or better than a 3.0 GHz Intel chip, but as noted this is no longer what the ratings mean, they just indicate relative performance, so the only thing to certify would be that the 5000+ is faster than the 4800+ (assuming that the 4800+ has already been "certified" to be faster than the 4600+, and so on down the line). Independent certification just doesn't make sense now that the mapping of performance ratings to Intel clockspeeds is no longer in play.

extrapolation.

 

[Polish3d]

Bump

 

[linkgoron]

Originally posted by: Frackal
The 5000+ Windsor is expected to have:

DDR II 667
Clock of 2.667Ghz
Still 2x1mb L2 cache...


It seems an awful lot to only move 1 Perf. rating.

You'd think the 2.667 + 2x1mb cache would be the 5200+ or so

The only problem I see with this is when AMD will add lower-end Athlons to the M2(?) socket. We will have (again, just like the move to 939) two(or more) 4800+, 4400+, 4600+, and all that. That's really annoying.

 

[Polish3d]

I would have thought the speed rating for a processor that adds more memory bandwidth, 300mhz of speed, AND still has 2x1mb of cache would be the 5200+ at least.

 

[Cycloptis]

When is the 5000+ being released, by the way?

 

[Polish3d]

From what I've gathered sometime around March

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: Frackal
From what I've gathered sometime around March

The CPU wars have REALLY slowed down. 🙁

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: JackBurton
The CPU wars have REALLY slowed down. 🙁

I'm hoping they'll pick up again late next year when intel finally drops the second-rate Prescott line and switches to cooler, faster P-M based cores.

 

[JLGatsby]

Is the FX-59 going to be M2?

I thought the FX-59 would be out before M2, and then that would be the end of single cores from AMD.

http://www.techspot.com/news/18869-amd-athlon64-x2-5000-details.html

This is worded in a fashion which would lead me to believe there will be many more single core chips coming.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Originally posted by: JLGatsby
Is the FX-59 going to be M2?

I thought the FX-59 would be out before M2, and then that would be the end of single cores from AMD.

http://www.techspot.com/news/18869-amd-athlon64-x2-5000-details.html

This is worded in a fashion which would lead me to believe there will be many more single core chips coming.

I thought the FX-57 was supposed to be the last single core FX chip?

I think we can expect some more single core chips for sure, but I they're going to be the budget/low end chips. I think all the mid-range and higher chips will be dual-core, as both AMD and Intel are pushing the dual-core for the defacto standard. I mean, Intel is even going to be putting dual-core Pentium M chips in laptops.

Reading that, it said blistering fast 333Mhz FSB. What does that translate to in terms of HT speed? Would it be 3330Mhz (going based on the current chips having a 200Mhz bus but the HT speed being 2000Mhz)?

 

[Fadey]

Isnt there ddr2-800 motherboards now? so why is amd using older ddr2?

 

[kleinwl]

It still makes sense to put out high speed single core chips for workstation applications. Perhaps the FX-57 is the last single core desktop chip, but the Opterons will still want to support FX like speeds in single cores.