AOA Forums AOA Forums AOA Forums Folding For Team 45 AOA Files Home Front Page Become an AOA Subscriber! UserCP Calendar Memberlist FAQ Search Forum Home


Go Back   AOA Forums > Hardware > AMD Motherboards & CPUs

AMD Motherboards & CPUs Questions or comments on AMD products?


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 21st September, 2002, 01:44 AM
Lionfish's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: September 2001
Location: So Cal, near Robbie
Posts: 2,767

Hammer Delay Reason

Source


The postponed launch of the K8-core processors is indeed due to problems in the back-end verification of SOI technology and minor changes in processor design, Richard Heye, vice president of platform engineering and infrastructure at Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), confirmed on September 20 during a visit to the company’s partners in Taiwan.

However, he indicated that the new 64-bit K8 processors would definitely be launched in the first quarter of 2003 and volume shipments would be available in the second quarter of next year. Heye added that AMD is also planning to introduce the 64-bit K8 processors into the mainstream desktop market, where prices are set at U***999 on average, by the end of 2003.

The Barton-core processors, which will also adopt the SOI manufacturing technology, will hit the market in the first quarter of 2003 as well, Heye said.

As for the company’s other production plans, Heye said that AMD has decided to outsource production its 0.13-process K7 products to United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC), the world’s second-largest foundry, in 2003, not by the end of this year as the market previously expected.
__________________
Ep0x 8K3A, XP1700+ T-bred JIUHB-(310)XPMW,DLT3C,189x12.5=2.36
1 gig mb PC 3200 Corsair .
Swiftech H20 setup with MCW372 block.
eVGA 6800 GT.
350 w Sparkle PS.

XFIRE= rottys
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 21st September, 2002, 06:44 PM
LORD's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: March 2002
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 144

I think it is something that has been on quite a few peoples minds. I know I for one have been wondering when will they release some faster chips. I'm getting tired of playing with this Palomino at 2.1. Although I don't bother running it like that.



__________________
LATER!
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 23rd September, 2002, 11:00 AM
Member
 
Join Date: September 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 29

I hope they can learn more about working with soi with the barton. Maby that could be one reason why they are even doing it.
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 23rd September, 2002, 07:04 PM
cloasters's Avatar
Asst. BBS Administrator
 
Join Date: September 2001
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 21,956

I think I read that IBM is manufacturing SOI processors, and has been for ~6 months. As IBM concerns itself with Servers, there seems to be little chance that IBM will help AMD with its implementation of SOI in the K8!

If SOI was easy to achieve, Intel would be using the technology!
__________________
When the world will be better.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 26th September, 2002, 01:00 PM
BMM's Avatar
BMM BMM is offline
Member
 
Join Date: July 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 45
Send a message via ICQ to BMM

I never thought that Hammer would reach the market in 2002, but I didn't really foresee this kind of delay - when Hammer comes out in 0.13µ SOI it's going to fight against a 0,09µ Prescott CPU (which is probably only going to be a slightly enhanced P4 w/ better Hyperthreading and higher frequencies) - and it's going to be a hard battle for both companies - I hope that this battle will eventually be a benifit for the buyers because of lower pricing...
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 26th September, 2002, 09:06 PM
cloasters's Avatar
Asst. BBS Administrator
 
Join Date: September 2001
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 21,956

If I remember correctly, Intel fanfared 13 nanometer as if it was right around the corner. Converting to it was more difficult and took more time than they thought it would. I don't know if shrinking the die size to 9 nanometer will be the same. I read that producing the photo masks for 9 nanometer is exponentially more expensive than 13 nanometer. That's one hint that 9 nanometer may take longer than bragged about.

Each die shrink brings great benefits in decreasing power demand and heat production, which makes higher operating frequencies easier to reach.

SOI accomplishes the same goal. Less demand for power, cooler temps, more speed.

AFAIK, only one of the giant Taiwanese Fabs is looking at a possible future die shrink to 9 nanometers. And it isn't the one that AMD awarded a hefty contract, AFAIK. Unsmiley face for AMD fans.

Nonetheless, technology doesn't improve in a smooth linear path. Eventually, Intel will benefit from AMD's costly research into SOI. AMD will benefit from Intel leading the way to 9 nanometer. Even if both companies carefully guard and patent
the methodology (they will. Probably before they produce even 'Alpha' silicon) needed to leap ahead, its nemesis will reap at least some of the benefit of their work.

But both companies will NOT have both new capabilities at the same time. Such is business.

It's too bad that AMD only has paper launches of Hammer's and Barton's now. Things often take longer than they're expected to. Remember, AMD is a tiny company compared to Intel. Tiny. I don't mind rooting for the under dog.
__________________
When the world will be better.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 26th September, 2002, 09:40 PM
BMM's Avatar
BMM BMM is offline
Member
 
Join Date: July 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 45
Send a message via ICQ to BMM

Yes, it is very likely that Intels 90nm proces will be delayed also - maybe as a tactical move from Intels side (depends on Hammers performance and launch date), but we have seen that Intel is able to make SRAM-chips on a 90nm proces, but I do not know whether they are getting good yields or not - The first A1 Prescott is probably only coming in a couple of months, and then the launch date depends on how good the yields are.
SOI will reduce the vcore of the Hammer and thereby the power requirements, but if AMD cannot make acceptable yields within the next few months theyll probably launch hammer without SOI and introduce SOI at a later stage... I am confident that AMD is going to use SOI and with this delay we could hope for a redesign in Hammers ondie MCH...

Take a look at this thread on realworldtech.
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Can I set a delay? MONKEYMAN OS, Software, Firmware, and BIOS 5 19th April, 2005 04:54 PM
New Castle or Claw Hammer 64Bitchin AMD Motherboards & CPUs 10 28th October, 2004 01:07 PM
24182 3Dmarks with AMD Hammer marcofra2000 Benchmarking 2 17th September, 2003 06:44 PM
Hammer already being fabbed? dimmreaper AMD Motherboards & CPUs 1 8th August, 2002 10:01 AM
What is the big deal about Hammer and X86-64 anyway? dimmreaper AMD Motherboards & CPUs 17 2nd April, 2002 08:27 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:06 PM.


Copyright ©2001 - 2010, AOA Forums
Don't Click Here Don't Click Here Either

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0