Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hammer Prototype Test

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

  • Hammer Prototype Test



    Jerry Jones
    I found a great domain name for sale on Dan.com. Check it out!

  • #2
    I wonder why AMD's 64bit processor is only rated at 1.2 Ghz???

    Intel's 2.2 Ghz beat the Hammer in "almost" every benchmark, l can only assume what a 2.2 Hammer would do to a 2.2 Intel.

    Let's not forget that Intel has the 3.06 Ghz chip and by the end of this year, Intel is planning to go 5.0Ghz.

    We'll see what happens.

    Comment


    • #3
      What time-line did you see P4 going to 5gig in 2003? Based on the progression of things I think 4gigs will be the max within the year.
      Considering it has taken them 2 odd years to gain a gig 1/2. I just don't see 2 gigs in a year when your already at 3.06 to start.
      HT was introduced and a move to quad 200mhz-fsb will help compensate for what is obviously a slow down in speed grades.

      But then again maybe Intel has been holding back due to lack of competition. We all know the chip was designed to have a LARGE mhz number to win over the most sheep. (It needs double the level 2 cache, double the fsb, SSE2, HT, and a way higher mhz to compete with a 500mhz slower AMD)
      funky
      Oh my god MAGNUM!

      Comment


      • #4
        Elie inquired:

        "I wonder why AMD's 64bit processor is only rated at 1.2 Ghz???"

        c't:

        'The system we tested was an Athlon 64 with...a clock frequency of 1.2 GHz.'

        'Though that is a far cry from the opening clock frequency of 2 GHz planned for the new series at launch it nevertheless allows interesting conclusions regarding the performance one can expect from the Hammer CPUs to be drawn.'

        Translation:

        ***c't got an early 'prototype' version for testing purposes and not the 2ghz version expected to be ready by March 2003 at the CeBIT Demo.***

        c't:

        'The Athlon 64 even proved to be a match for the higher-clocked Pentium 4 of current design.'

        'In view of the performance values achieved in our tests AMD would be entitled, without it weighing on their conscience one byte, to name its 1.2 GHz model the Athlon 64 2000+.'

        'Should AMD manage to maintain this level of achievement the Athlon 64 with an opening clock frequency of 2 GHz, which is expected to make its debut at or around the time of the CeBIT 2003 trade fair, can quite reasonably be expected to brandish at its appearance a rating of 3300+.'

        Translation:

        ***A 2ghz, 64-bit HAMMER (scheduled for demonstration at CeBIT in March 2003) will equal the performance of a 3.3ghz, 32-bit Pentium 4.***

        Jerry Jones
        I found a great domain name for sale on Dan.com. Check it out!
        Last edited by Jerry Jones; 22 January 2003, 17:00.

        Comment


        • #5


          "German site TecChannel.de has revealed some notable information about Hammer."

          "According to the section of the article on Athlon XP and Athlon 64 (translated), the initially released model numbers for Athlon 64 will be 2800+, 3100+, and 3400+, with actual clock numbers between 1.8GHz and 2.4GHz with 1 MB (arriving Q2) or 256 KB (arriving Q3) L2 caches."

          "Later this year we'll see 3700+ and 4000+ parts topping out the lineup."

          "Sometime around 1H'04 AMD will migrate to 90 nm with probable DDR-II support."

          "There's also some Intel roadmap info which suggests that AMD's PR numbers at 4000+ by the end of the year could be higher than Intel's GHz, which tops out at greater than or equal to 3.4GHz with Prescott, according to the roadmaps."

          "That could mean 3.4GHz or all the way up to 4GHz."

          "It's too soon to tell."

          Jerry Jones
          I found a great domain name for sale on Dan.com. Check it out!

          Comment


          • #6
            P.S.

            I haven't spotted a single report to confirm Elie's suggestion that a 5ghz Intel chip will be ready by the end of this year (2003).

            If anybody sees such a report, post and *then* I'll believe it.

            Otherwise, I'll take that with a grain of salt.

            Jerry Jones
            I found a great domain name for sale on Dan.com. Check it out!

            Comment


            • #7
              I saw a report a long time ago that Intel is working at the next chip rated at 5 Ghz, I also read Intel is working on a 20Ghz chip.
              Sorry don't have any links.

              So when Intel releases the 4 Ghz chip later this year, it will be interesting to see how it compares with AMD's 2Ghz offering.

              To tell you the truth the only thing that attracted me to the AMD was because of the smart SMP implementation unlike Intel. However Intel currently is still way ahead of the game in terms of performance, sorry Jerrold

              We'll see March 2003

              Regards,
              Elie

              Comment


              • #8
                But is Intel even ready to release a 4ghz chip THIS YEAR?

                Not even that is certain.

                But if AMD ships Hammer as expected by the end of this quarter, then... as c't magazine indicated...

                ...a 2ghz, 64-bit HAMMER (scheduled for demonstration at CeBIT in March 2003) will equal the performance of a 3.3ghz, 32-bit Pentium 4.

                That could be the real news of the first six months of this year.

                It would mean that AMD would again have a speed advantage over Intel by mid-summer of this year...

                ...at least until Intel comes out with 'what's next.'

                :-)

                Jerry Jones
                I found a great domain name for sale on Dan.com. Check it out!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Interesting article about AMD's fab in Dresden:



                  Jerry Jones
                  I found a great domain name for sale on Dan.com. Check it out!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    "However Intel currently is still way ahead of the game in terms of performance"

                    Way ahead? The 2800+ compares very well with a 2800 p4, Considering Intel tops @3.06 ghz which isn't much faster and a whole lot more buck$ I don't see what you mean.
                    funky
                    Oh my god MAGNUM!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I am neither a fan of AMD or Intel, but I do admire both companies CPU's over the past few year.

                      It looks like Hammer will be a great performacer IF AMD can get the yields up in a reasonable time. They have had problems with yields. The 2800+ only recently became availble in the retail market. If they can get hammer out the door at 2.2GHz it will be quite competitive.

                      On the other hand, Intel has had quite a while to perfect their current 0.13 process. I'm betting this process will top out around 3500Mhz since they are already having thermal problem, ie the 3.06 puts out A LOT of heat. Then again, they could refine the current process and surprise us with a push to 4Ghz.

                      If Intel is has Prescott (0.09u) ready to go then AMD could be in for a surprise. I doubt they do though because we usually see the newest Intel process in mobile CPU's and no word of Prescott in mobile form yet.

                      It's going to be and interesting spring.
                      - Mark

                      Core 2 Duo E6400 o/c 3.2GHz - Asus P5B Deluxe - 2048MB Corsair Twinx 6400C4 - ATI AIW X1900 - Seagate 7200.10 SATA 320GB primary - Western Digital SE16 SATA 320GB secondary - Samsung SATA Lightscribe DVD/CDRW- Midiland 4100 Speakers - Presonus Firepod - Dell FP2001 20" LCD - Windows XP Home

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Funky, benchmarks speak fo rthem selves.

                        Check out this review by Tom...


                        Cheers,
                        Elie

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I read the benchmark in CT last month. It doesn't really mean much, since the CPU was tested in 32-bit mode. Nobody knows how fast it will be in a 64-bit environment.

                          The big question: Will AMD's 64-bit mode be binary compatible to Intel's 64-bit processors?

                          I DO hope AMD has the good sense to develop a decent chipset for it as well. I'm not buying anything that has VIA inside.
                          Resistance is futile - Microborg will assimilate you.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I do not think AMD's will not be binary compatible with intels.

                            amd,sis,nivia,via all have prototype AMD 64 bit boards

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              And where are the 64 bit O/S and software? 64 bit CPUs are next-to-useless without these, even if they can emulate 32 bit mode. And I mistrust emulation
                              Brian (the devil incarnate)

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X