AMD Quietly Intros 3.0GHz Opteron Processors

[zippyjuan]

AMD Quietly Intros 3.0GHz Opteron Processors.
AMD’s Chips Break 3.0GHz Barrier

Category: CPU

by Anton Shilov

[ 04/11/2006 | 06:38 AM ]


More than three years after rival Intel Corp., Advanced Micro Devices has managed to launch processors that officially work at 3.0GHz clock-speed, a landmark speed-bin. While performance-wise such chips are much faster compared to central processing units (CPUs) from Intel at the same frequency, AMD does not advertise the achievement, as the main focus now is on dual-core processors.

AMD has quietly added AMD Opteron models 256 and 856 processors for 2-way and 8-way systems into its price-list without even publishing a press release on the matter. The chips are made using 90nm process technology, operate at 3.0GHz, sport 1MB L2 cache and integrated dual-channel PC3200 memory controller with ECC support. The new chips are likely to be drop-in compatible with existing Socket 940 infrastructure and have thermal design power of around 95W.

While 3.0GHz is certainly a milestone for AMD, the accomplishment is not publicized any significantly, as the corner-stone of AMD’s current focus are dual-core and multi-core microprocessors, not just boosted clock-speeds of single-core CPUs. For instance, maximum clock-speed of AMD desktop single-core processors is 2.80GHz now and it is unlikely to rise from there until dual-core chips hit the speed-bin.

AMD Opteron models 256 and 856 cost $851 and $1514 in 1000-unit quantities. It is unclear which server and workstation builders will use the new AMD Opteron processors.



http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20060411063742.html

[redcolours]

good!
now bring on the actual 4GHz chips!

(when are intel and AMD ever gonna bump up the raw speeds?)

[DarkFury]

good!
now bring on the actual 4GHz chips!

(when are intel and AMD ever gonna bump up the raw speeds?)
I don't think AMD can get to 4GHz with their current configuration...

[shocky123]

Not on a 90nm process, and definitely not on an Opteron architecture.

It'll be interesting to see how the quad-core opterons which are supposed to stout the new-ish 65nm process will perform, and whether or not AMD is going to need to up the core frequencies if Intel ever decides to make a competitive server processor.

~Kyle

[LegendKiller]

There is a definite shift away from raw speed. Intel only hit the speeds they did by lengthening the pipeline, which turned out to be a huge mistake, since even that gets you nowhere in the end. It was pure marketing and desperation, not efficiency or strategic planning.

AMD learned from Intel's mistake and it appears, with Yonah and the other derivatives of that line, that Intel has learned from Intel's mistakes.

Another good example is the OMAP processor in some of the new Pocket PCs as compared to the XScale. The OMAP runs at 200 some mhz while the XScale runs at 400+. The OMAP is just as fast, and some say faster, than the Xscale *and* it uses less battery power.

[zero2dash]

Haven't both AMD and Intel gone on record to say they're not focusing on clock speed anymore, but instead 'performance'? (You know, since the "clock speed warZ" of the late-90's up until recently.)

Ah well...I guess this falls into the "proving our doubters wrong" category for AMD.

Bring on Socket M2! :woohoo:
I need to see some benchmarks comparing Conroe to an M2 A64X2.