RSSAMD Preparing for Nov. '4x4' Launch
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published September 26, 2006, 1:25 PM
The Taiwanese electronics industry daily DigiTimes is citing motherboard manufacturers there as saying they're gearing up now for production of new models that will support three new AMD premium processors.
The new FX-70, -72, and -74 models, DigiTimes was told, will effectively launch AMD's new premium platform, currently code-named '4x4.' Motherboards supporting this platform will be unique because they'll feature two CPU sockets, not just one, with each Socket 1207 designed to support dual-core CPUs.
This is a connector design generally used for Opterons rather than Athlons, so manufacturers are warning this could drive the price of premium systems up even further.
But the very introduction could drive current FX-series processor prices, such as those for the FX-62 and FX-60, down, enabling AMD to argue they're more price competitive than comparable Intel models. A mid-November launch for '4x4' would be right in time with Intel's anticipated introduction of its first consumer-grade quad-core processor, the Core 2 Extreme QX6700.
AMD will have a difficult, though not impossible, case to make for its architectural strategy. A key design decision several years ago regarding its so-called crossbar connection enabled the company to adopt dual-processor/dual-core architecture today without having to radically change its fabrication processes.
Meanwhile, Intel is readying four cores on one die, and not with 90 nm lithography like AMD, but with 65 nm, reportedly with lower power consumption. Come November, AMD may have to prove its mettle with both high performance and compelling value.
AMD declined to comment on the report.
I don't see the point. Is this 4 cores per processor and two processors per mb? So 4x4? If so what would be the point, its the same as sli for video cards right? Basically a big black hole for people when technology is improved every 6 months? I mean the next generations of processor available a year later will out perform it, so why spend thousands on a new computer now when you can buy it for a few hundreds in a year or two? Buy mediocre then upgrade. Noble concept right?
I hope all programs will turn add multithreaded features soon, the performance of computers will magically be used and realized.
Score: 0
|Don't seem so... The future AMD architecture is 2 dual-core CPUs on a mobo = a total of 4 cores.
By the mean time Intel is introducing quad-core CPUs and the competition will be fierce ;)
Only time will say wich one is the winner ;)
Score: 0
|Four cores on one die at 65nm is pretty impressive. It's going to be a bit hard to keep up with Intel if AMD continues to use 90nm lithography. But I can't wait for the quad-core war, the winner will definitely rule the market.
Score: 0
|AMD is already moving to 65nm. They really aren't *that* far behind. And once again, when their quad hits the streets with HT, it's almost a no brainer as to which will outperform.
Right now, Intel has the lead...the pendulum will sweing back to AMD...and then back to Intel...and then back to AMD...and then over to {Insert CPU company here}...and so on...
Score: 0
|Intel doesn't really have a lead because all they are doing is putting two Core 2 Duos together... AMD had thought of doing the same thing, but decided go full native 4 Core on a single board.
AMD said that Intel would get to the Quad market first, but thatr they were concerened with doing it right, then doing it fast. Once the AMD Quads come out, they'll 'be ahead' again.
Not to mention the whole Torrenza move.
Score: 0
|AMD is sampling 65nm, but it's far from production, not until Q3 2007...
Score: 0
|"Intel doesn't really have a lead because all they are doing is putting two Core 2 Duos together."
Did you even read the article? --> "Meanwhile, Intel is readying four cores on one die."
AMD is the one using two dual core chips to make their "4 core" systems. The motherboard will have two sockets. You got it completely backwards.
Score: 0
|I did read the article, also the whole design idea behind their new quads. What I'm saying is that it's just a temp solution to finaly beat AMD at something.
AMD didn't bother doing it because they wanted to do it right. AMD wanted to have the first quads on a single die, and not bother with the two chips in one sort of idea. Why? Who knows, but AMD isn't behind, it's just taking another road. =)
Score: 0
|"AMD didn't bother doing it because they wanted to do it right. AMD wanted to have the first quads on a single die, and not bother with the two chips in one sort of idea."
What do you mean by two chips in one? Intel is putting four seperate cores on one die, I don't see where you are getting the two chips thing from. AMD, regardless of what they wanted, is using two seperate dual core chips for their so called four core system.
Score: 0
|I have to weigh in on Heero's side here. From news.com:
"The companies are employing very different strategies in their move to quad-core. AMD's models, due to arrive in mid-2007, will have four processing cores on a single slice of silicon.
In comparison, Intel combines two dual-core chips in a single package that plugs into a single chip socket. Kentsfield uses two Conroe chips, and Clovertown uses two Woodcrest chips, for example."
So, the so-called Intel quad-core chips really are two dual-core chips put together, whereas AMD's quads (to come out at later date) will be true quads. See the full article for more: http://news.com.com/Inte...100-1006_3-6119913.html
Score: 0
|Sounds almost like they'll be under full swing with 65nm when the quads come out, eh?
Score: 0
|After reading the posts some people have the wrong idea / dont know about the processers config. So here it is...
duel core - intel
Pentium d = two cores on one chip
core dueo = duel core on one chip
duel core amd
x2 = duel core on chip
quad core - intel
= 2x duel core on one chip
quad core - amd
= quad core on chip
Amd 4x4 = 2 x chips
Score: 0
|Intel has already built a prototype 80 core processor and plans to have it in production within 5 years.
http://tinyurl.com/qq9e4
Score: 0
|You'll kindly excuse my lack of enthusiasm...
Score: 0
|Oh I know but if that was an AMD announcement you would probably be frothing at the mouth and wetting your pants about it.
Score: 0
|One word: "RoadRunner" =)
Score: 0
|Yeah...I just get *so* excited about products that won't have the slightest bit of impact on my life...
/sarcasm
Score: 0
|So, by the sounds of it, 4x4 is actually 2 dual core 90nm CPU's on 1 motherboard?
Whilst Intel have 4 cores on a single CPU at 65nm....
Score: 0
|AMD's quad-core is just around the corner. At least, according to the roadmap the AMD sales-puke gave us last week...
Show me a 2x-dualcore CPU system using iNtel parts that can outperform this 4x4 in performance per watt.
Score: 0
|"Show me a 2x-dualcore CPU system using iNtel parts that can outperform this 4x4 in performance per watt."
That would be difficult since this isn't even out yet. Until then we don't know how well this will perform (and listening to AMD sales talk doesn't count).
Score: 0
|and listening to AMD sales talk doesn't count
Aw, shucks. *snaps fingers* ;)
Score: 0
|I can give 2 sheeeiters about performance "per watt". As long as Intel's power consumption is not outragous the performance is the key.
Score: 0
|I can give 2 sheeeiters
Nah, you can go ahead and keep those, thanks. :)
Score: 0
|The last thing I heard was that AMD's quad cores are about 6-months behind Intel's. I really don't know if this is that good of a move on AMD's part. Instead of having 2 sockets, AM2 and F for the Athlon 64 X2 and Opteron SP, and the Opteron 2200 Series, respectively. They now have to add a dual, Athlon 64 FX option.
Are they then going to have to release AM2 drop-in quad cores, like they said they were going to, as well as Socket F drop-ins, and drop-ins for this new socket? Intel only has drop-ins for 2 sockets, 775 and 771, for the Core 2 Quadro and the Quad-Core Xeons. And they're beating AMD to market.
I wouldn't waste my money on this socket AMD hasn't shown a future for at this point. This is going to add a bunch of overhead to future processors for AMD, because they now have to make 4 different quad-core desktop lines. Intel only 2, maybe 3 when they make quad core Centrinos.
Note: I'm not an intel fanatic, I use an AMD Athlon 64 X2, but thinking about going back to intel processors in the future.
Score: 0
|They set up each of their sockets to support 3 generations of CPU.
According to the roadmap AM2 supports x64, x64 (X2), and will also support the quad-core due out in the second half of '07.
Their next socket will support x64(X2), x64(x4), and their next CPU....and so on...
Hence, you could by a standard x64 now with an AM2 socket and upgrade in late '07 to an x64(x4) with nothing but a boatload of cash and a BIOS upgrade.
Score: 0
|So AM2 came out 2/3 through it's life cycle? It didn't come out until after X2 came out.
AM2 also supports Sempron 64, and Opteron 12xx.
Score: 0
|Don't forget Socket F, and Socket H.
AM2 is more for consumer level stuff(Socket 939), Socket F is the(Socket 940), and socket H, which I'm still not to sure what it's going to be used for. Oh well.
Should be an interesting year.
Score: 0
|I don't think that will be a problem.
The AMD Quad Core (not the lashed up 4x4), is still based on 90nm process, so produces lots of heat, and is also unlikely to be here anytime soon (Q3 2007).
The Intel Core 2 Quatro should leave it for dust.
Score: 0
|I'm currently running a dual Dual-Core Opteron 285 computer, and this thing is just insane. So dual, Dual Cores has been around for a while... it just wasn't cheap. =P
Score: 0
|There are memory contension issues with 4 cores on the same chip, while 2 chips has less of an issue.
Score: 0
|The AMD Quad Core (not the lashed up 4x4), is still based on 90nm process, so produces lots of heat,
...at the same wattage as it's current processors, I do not think that will be an issue.
Score: 0
|AMD got around that with HT. Intel's still way behind on that front.
Score: 0
|exactly .. to the layman 4 cores on the same chip seams better than 2 cores on 2 chips. When you concider all the facts and actually benchmark the 2 with HT the amd roadmap with there designs match up to more performance.
Score: 0
|