RSSAt last, AMD inaugurates the 45 nm quad-core Opteron era
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published November 13, 2008, 3:15 PM
In perhaps the most difficult period of its history, the company that re-introduced value and performance to the CPU market finds itself having to do the same thing all over again.
On the heels of Intel's announcement that it is beginning the phase-out period for the 45 nm generation of quad-core processors that it introduced only in March 2007, AMD is announcing the immediate availability of its "Shanghai" class quad-core 45 nm processors. With frequencies capped well below 3.0 GHz, just as AMD did with the "Barcelona" class, its marketing emphasis will continue to be on low-power performance.
With Intel at least one generation ahead, with AMD having to split its resources to survive, and with the terrible state of the global economy collectively providing it with a triple-whammy, this could be AMD's most difficult sale in its history. Although the company's most recent round of successes were in the consumer field, it was actually the server segment and Opteron processors which cemented its status as a potential price/performance leader. At the outset of the "green" era, better power performance continued to play to AMD's advantage going into 2005.
But today, AMD finds itself having been leap-frogged, with the result looking as though it's 1990 all over again. If it's to catch up, it will have to respond to the triple-whammy with a triple-play: Specifically, the new Opterons will need to provide optimum performance at lowest possible power per dollar.
To that end, AMD may already have two strikes against it. This morning, the company touted "a 30 percent performance to power ratio advantage over the 50W processor-based competitive platform." That's based on recent published results on the SPECpower_ssj2008 benchmark, a new measurement system introduced by the independent SPEC assessment group only last July.
Intel's best performing low-power 45 nm processor with the profile AMD described was introduced last month: the L5430, at 2.66 GHz and 6 MB of L2 cache (the L5420 has 12 MB of L2), rated for a 50W power envelope. Today's AMD Opterons at up to 2.7 GHz has essentially an equivalent frequency, though it's rated for a 75W power envelope. AMD is claiming that its new Opterons can use less sustained power anyway, and that's going to be a tough case to prove.
SPEC's new benchmark rates what that group describes as "performance-per-power" (PDF of SPEC's methodology available here), where each unit represents an "operation per watt." The higher the number, the better.
AMD states that its recent tests with a new Opteron 2380 scored a SPECpower_ssj2008 rating of 761, whereas the similarly profiled Xeon scored a 561. Neither of those tests appear to have been published by SPEC at last check; the complete list of published specifications is here.
What that list does show, however, is a Dell PowerEdge 1950 EnergySmart III blade server with an Intel Xeon L5420 processor (at 2.5 GHz, that would be an upgrade from the EnergySmart's typical L5410 at 2.33 GHz), scoring a 744 on the SPECpower_ssj2008 test. What's more, we found a Fujitsu Siemens Primergy TX300 S4 tower server equipped with Intel's latest Xeon L5430 at 2.66 GHz and 50W, scoring an 827 on the same test.
So not exactly the 30% blowout that AMD suggests. Thus the third element of the equation -- the price -- will play a critical factor in determining Opterons' low-power viability going forward. The Opteron 2380 (the one AMD tested) will sell to manufacturers for $698 in 1,000-unit quantities. A copy of Intel's pricing sheet to resellers dated last September 21 prices its Xeon L5430 at $562 in quantity. It may indeed be a long winter for AMD.
please add me to your list ...and update me of any news in all of your aspects.
Kind regards
ALI Al-Ali
Score: 0
|I'm guessing you don't realize how this website works. There's no mailing list and no RSS/web feed. You get to come back time and time again in order to read the articles.
Score: 0
|AMD has TWO main options:
1. Cell Processor.
2. Call up SUN...they're sitting on some unused inventions-- like how to cobble up dozens of processors & ram modules without needing a bus.
And two subsequent suboptions:
Hook up with both:
1. Ubuntu or whichever LINUX has been ported to Cell.
2. Google.
Score: 0
|Intel has such a overwhelming financial advantage there is no way AMD can compete head to head, unless they are 2 steps ahead with a breaking new design. Intel can have 10 times as many engineers working on a project, while AMD's engineers are just as smart...there is just no way they can remain in lock step with Intel's R&D every release cycle without burning themselves out. As it stands right now AMD is over a year behind in terms of matching Intel's high end and it the gap seems to be growing.
Score: 0
|This is actually a kind of interesting statement.
I was in a Intel presentation not 3 weeks ago, and had a conversation with the PR person from Intel afterwards regarding the whole Netbusrt/P4 fiasco, and how well Intel has been able to turn around from it.
He mentioned how the 'Core' team was preatty big, but he also mentioned, that one of the biggest technical changes that happened at Intel, He mentioned what is was, but I can't for the life of me remember what it is now... Something wants me to say 'P3 Core' but that doesn't seem right to me. Anyways, the fact was that one of the most important technical breakthroughs for Intel wasn't done by 100s of engineers, but rather 30 of them working for a couple years together.
Pure numbers doesn't always win out... Sometimes, it just take one good idea, and a couple right people working on it.
Like AMD going over to the intergraded memory controller... something that took Intel way to long to get into. Same thing with x86-64Bit. The difference... AMD made the software industry accept these new designs, and now that they are preatty much mainstream accepted in OSes, and Software, Intel is coming to capitalize on it. Good move on them... Bad for AMD.
But at the end of the day, I still want AMD putting out products. Competition is key, and if there isn't any.. we the consumer, are screwed.
Score: 0
|If I do a search of SPECpower_ssj2008 results on www.spec.org looking for "Processor" matching 2380 I happen to find one at 731 for a SuperMicro 2021M-UR+. Could that perhaps be the missing "761" result combined with a typographic error? If I do a web search for "SPECpower_ssj2008 site:amd.com" it finds that 731 number mentioned along with the 561 number...
Score: 0
|Get used to it.
This is the CLASSIC Value-Price Model in economics betwen Intel and AMD.
The fact that AMD was able to exploit an Intel mis-step in trying to dictate the 32/64 evolution issue was an anomaly.
Score: 0
|Actually, it was seizing an opportunity from a technologically bankrupt competitor.
Nothing has really changed: that competitor remains technologically bankrupt.
Score: 0
|Palmetto Bug, the ONLY thing that is bankrupt is your ability to employ logic.
Yup, Intel is technologically bankrupt.
Ironically, it has been the licensing IBM's technological innovations that has benefitted AMD. But its interesting to note that by your illogic, AMD still cannot be competitive to a company you maintain is technologically bankrupt. LOL!
But the facts only confuse you, c0ckroach.
Now, do your dance where you pretend that you have some responsibility for Canada's accomplishments as you eschew your own heritage as you scurry about like a roach when the light is turned on.
Its a shame that you don't even have a clue as to what the Value Pricing Model is, let alone Schumpeter's "Creative Destruction" concept, of which it is an implementation...
Yup, quick!, run to Wikipedia! Maybe you can find a real Canadian who can explain the big words with more than 2 letters to you...
Score: 0
|Oh, it's you again. I actually hadn't paid attention to the nym. However, now that you've brought it to my attention by once again highlighting your own shortcomings...
...sadly, the nature of your response was indeed inevitable.
"Must be tiring lugging around that giant brain of yours, Mr. Dowd." (snicker)
Score: 0
|Scurry about c0ckroach. Scurry about...
So 'Intel is technologically bankrupt'... You don't pay attention to much , do you? ... least of all the facts!
Your illogic and idiocy stands on its own. Take a bow!
Score: 0
|Chill dudes. Ego-lizing instead of focusing on the subject only lowers you both. Even C0ckroaches don't debase themselves with this kind of childishness.
Score: 0
|