AMD prepares dual-core 45nm surprise.

Kuroimaho · Feb 17, 2009

Fudzilla said:
Callisto with 6MB of L3 cache

AMD has another surprise for Intel. It's preparing a CPU codenamed Callisto and this is a new CPU that we haven’t seen on the roadmap before.

The Heka three-core is nothing more than Deneb quad-core without one core, and with this in mind AMD wants to do the same with the new dual-core. The CPU, codenamed Callisto, is a 45nm dual-core with 1MB L2 and a massive 6MB of L3 cache.

This is an AM3 CPU that is harvested from the Deneb core and despite the fact that it might be quite a big chip, it should give dual-core Pentium CPUs a run for its money. You can expect this CPU in Q2 2009 and we are sure that this CPU might give Intel's Core 2 dual-core generation a lot to fight for.

So if you couldn't make up your mind between the 720 and the 9XX soon comes the new dual with 3Mb L3/core to confuse things even more, especially if they keep it around the current 7750 price which is 70$.
What would be 2 cores at 4G enough for ?

Zurvan · Feb 17, 2009

I think this is Deneb with 2 faulty cores. The actual Dual Core chip is Regor and it was planned for Q309 along with RS880 IIRC

Caviman2201 · Feb 17, 2009

really makes you wonder if they're having problems with the 45nm yields...

Firestrider · Feb 17, 2009

Caviman2201 said:
really makes you wonder if they're having problems with the 45nm yields...

Yes it does. They will be losing a lot of money if this is true.

Archer0915 · Feb 17, 2009

I don't think it is as bad as ppl think it is just easier to cut cores and sell as dual or tri at a lower rate. There is that whole economic thing to consider and the fact is there is not much cost difference in the manufacturing process between the two. Think about cars same holds true and more so the Cougar, T-Bird same car diffrent badge the real kicker is the Cadillac Escolade HMMMM wonder if chevy and gmc make anything like that? I could be wrong but it is easier to re badge and modify than retool as market demands change.

Rick James · Feb 17, 2009

Can someone answer me this. Whats better? 8 megs of L2 cache or 8 megs of L3 cache? Ok.. Then why?

Archer0915 · Feb 17, 2009

Rick James said:
Can someone answer me this. Whats better? 8 megs of L2 cache or 8 megs of L3 cache? Ok.. Then why?

L2 it is faster in general. L2 is better.

Rick James · Feb 17, 2009

Archer0915 said:
L2 it is faster in general. L2 is better.

Then why doesn't amd use 8 megs of L2 instead of L3?

Archer0915 · Feb 17, 2009

CPU fetch L1 fetch L2 fetch L3 fetch Ram fetch HDD. Does anybody have a chart they can scan and post?

Archer0915 · Feb 17, 2009

Cost.

Firestrider · Feb 17, 2009

Rick James said:
Then why doesn't amd use 8 megs of L2 instead of L3?

Good question.

I think the reason why AMD introduced the L3 cache is for cache snooping in dual or quad processor systems.

Firestrider · Feb 17, 2009

Archer0915 said:
Cost.

8 MB of L2 cache would cost the same as 4x512KB of L2 cache + 6MB of L3 cache.

Firestrider · Feb 17, 2009

Archer0915 said:
CPU fetch L1 fetch L2 fetch L3 fetch Ram fetch HDD. Does anybody have a chart they can scan and post?

Take a look here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_hierarchy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPU_cache

Caviman2201 · Feb 17, 2009

Firestrider said:
Good question.

I think the reason why AMD introduced the L3 cache is for cache snooping in dual or quad processor systems.

It would certainly seem Intel has gone the way of AMD instead of the other way around... I don't know the specifics of it, but it seems Quads and up work better with L3 rather than L2

Firestrider · Feb 17, 2009

Caviman2201 said:
It would certainly seem Intel has gone the way of AMD instead of the other way around... I don't know the specifics of it, but it seems Quads and up work better with L3 rather than L2

Yeah because Intel was aiming at making a server processor with Nehalem thus needed to introduce L3 cache. I think people would be happier on desktop with the IMC, QPI, and large quick access L2 cache.

Firestrider · Feb 17, 2009

Archer0915 said:
I don't think it is as bad as ppl think it is just easier to cut cores and sell as dual or tri at a lower rate. There is that whole economic thing to consider and the fact is there is not much cost difference in the manufacturing process between the two. Think about cars same holds true and more so the Cougar, T-Bird same car diffrent badge the real kicker is the Cadillac Escolade HMMMM wonder if chevy and gmc make anything like that? I could be wrong but it is easier to re badge and modify than retool as market demands change.

Yeah but the processors with the cores that are cut could have been sold as quads. AMD is losing profit by selling them as duals and triples.

Intel (Nehalem) has the same structure as the Phenoms but I don't see one sold as a triple or dual core. Intel could be trashing the processors with faulty cores though, I don't know.

Rick James · Feb 17, 2009

Firestrider said:
Yeah but the processors with the cores that are cut could have been sold as quads. AMD is losing profit by selling them as duals and triples.

Intel (Nehalem) has the same structure as the Phenoms but I don't see one sold as a triple or dual core. Intel could be trashing the processors with faulty cores though, I don't know.

A Tri Core C2D. Oh i could only wish

Archer0915 · Feb 17, 2009

Firestrider said:
8 MB of L2 cache would cost the same as 4x512KB of L2 cache + 6MB of L3 cache.

I was talking about a rework not the process

Thanks for the fast response on the chart :beer:

Archer0915 · Feb 17, 2009

Firestrider said:
Yeah but the processors with the cores that are cut could have been sold as quads. AMD is losing profit by selling them as duals and triples.

Intel (Nehalem) has the same structure as the Phenoms but I don't see one sold as a triple or dual core. Intel could be trashing the processors with faulty cores though, I don't know.

Could have but if inventories are high then cut cores drop prices and move product and long as they stay in the black.

Edit: let us not get into econ I hated that crap took some businesses instead.

AlabamaCajun · Feb 17, 2009

AMD is doing what most smart companies are doing. Call it maximizing product or productivity increases. It comes down to using as much as produced as you can and I see no problem with that. You get the tech you want at the lowest price of all performance chips out there. The company recovers the cost of expensive silicon and processes. We use to watch houses being built. Workers would cut a 5 foot piece of sheetrock or plywood and throw out or burn the other 3 feet. Why waste so much material? The salvage business is one huge business today and some are the only companies still holding up. If AMD can pick out the chips with good NB and cache that have 2 or 3 cores operable then more power to them.

This argument has come up too many times. :argue:

Pick One!
Neha is quite different and it may not run with a lame core.
Intel either wastes a lot or they are unable to.
Lamed Nehas are being sold to companies or countries as duals and not saying what process they are.
They make great clay pigeons "Pull"

AMD prepares dual-core 45nm surprise.

Member

Member

Member

Member

"The Expert"

Disabled

"The Expert"

Disabled

"The Expert"

"The Expert"

Member

Member

Member

Attachments

Member

Member

Member

Disabled

"The Expert"

"The Expert"

Member

Similar threads