No announcement yet.

THE INTEL KILLER is here!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • THE INTEL KILLER is here!

    http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/story.html?id=1011297004

    Check this site out!

  • #2
    Yes - the Hammer series of CPUs will be very interesting to see. The big question I have is that AMD is keeping the x86 architecture, this means that the Hammers will be the first revolutionary architecture change since the 386!

    Keeping the x86 code means the core will be huge and expensive - but it runs older 16 and 32-bit code faster. Intel's Itanium is smaller because it is not hardware compatible with anything but 64-bit code.

    So there are good and bad points :)
    What came first - Insanity or Society?

    Comment


    • #3
      It all looks and sounds good but we'll have to wait for a bit more independant results to really get the picture on it's true nature though. :smokin:
      <center> </center>

      Comment


      • #4
        The new core is not all that big....I think its around 100 sqmm (about the same as the current Duron but its on .13 micron with 512K cache) and it wont be that expensive. The current Northwoods are about the same size I believe.

        Comment


        • #5
          I think the 100MM2 mentioned above would be for the Palamino at .13um. The Northwood is actually 146mm2 and the Clawhammer is expected to be about the same.

          Comment


          • #6
            Have a look at the following link......it talks in some detail about the different architectures at the moment but it doesn't give us any idea about the hammer die size. But about half way down it looks at current die sizes....the current palamino on .13um will be only 80sq mm....the current Intel willy is 217sq mm.

            Any the link is a good read.

            http://www.vanshardware.com/reviews/...hlonXP2000.htm

            Edit: the following link indicates the Clawhammer will be 104sq mm at .13 um and only 64 sq mm at .09 um . Intel's Northwood at .13um is still at 146 sq mm

            http://www.geek.com/procspec/amd/k8.htm

            Comment


            • #7
              What I was trying to get at is that because the Hammer series are hardware compatible with x86 instructions, this will make the core very tricky and complex. The main reason Intel dropped the x86 compatibility from the Itanium was to start again with a clean slate - over 22 years the x86 architecture has just been patched again and again and again - it's a mess to work with.

              But I do think AMD are right in making the Hammers backward compatible in hardware - it will take years for 64-bit programs to materialise, for example the 386 was introduced in 1987 and it took 8 years for a 32-bit consumer O/S to be available (Win95)

              Just my thoughts :)
              What came first - Insanity or Society?

              Comment


              • #8
                Complexity doesn't seem to hurt too much....have a look

                http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/story.html?id=1011297004

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Oldbugger
                  Complexity doesn't seem to hurt too much....have a look

                  http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/story.html?id=1011297004

                  I've seen that Oldbugger - what I meant was that the chip will be DIFFICULT to manufacture, not be slow. This means that AMD will have to spend big $$$ not only in development, but researching manufacturing costs. Intel had the same problem with the Pentium Pro - very expensive, most of the cost was in the manufacturing :)
                  What came first - Insanity or Society?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    They are already sampling and expect costs to be lower than the existing Northwood....also I understand that they will still be socket 462's ........nice continuity

                    EDIT: still vapour-ware but it looks nice....when I have one in the hand it will look even better

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      socket 462? Damn I can throw my mobo away!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Don't worry there MySTiCuSS as socket A has a 462 pinout which is just another name for it. ;)
                        But another chipset will probably be required in most cases to run Clawhammer though. :?:
                        <center> </center>

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X