Linked by Jordan Spencer Cunningham on Sat 28th Feb 2009 20:29 UTC
AMD AMD recently said that they'd be starting onto the 32nm track, beginning production around the fourth quarter of 2010. Intel, on the other hand, has already demonstrated some of its prototypes and will be rolling these babies out to the public come the fourth quarter of-- ah-- this year. AMD isn't manufacturing these chips, however, and is instead laying the load on the newborn Foundry Company, which was created with the help of AMD out of ATI.
Thread beginning with comment 351127
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Alittle lag can be a good thing
by lord-storm on Sat 28th Feb 2009 22:43 UTC
lord-storm
Member since:
2005-07-12

I remember when AMD was ahead of intel in production... You know what happened? AMD got a good kick to the head. Show your cards too early causes problems. I can remember mistakes made first by intel opened up the AMD64 64bit to kick intel for a round intill production was changed.

And we all know that AMD at some point will provide a chip that is cooler and more efficient than intel at some stage. I hope they can bring out some more 45W TDP proc's that consumers can buy. AMD need to be the first to bring out the 6-8 core proc and surprise intel.

Reply Score: 2

gustl Member since:
2006-01-19

AMD need to be the first to bring out the 6-8 core proc and surprise intel.


I think differently.
AMD needs to integrate the northbridge, southbridge and 3D graphic chips into the CPU, getting closer to the "system on a chip" design.

With today's desktop needs, faster/more cores are no longer the number one priorities. Less power consumption/decent speed for the overall system is much more important.
At a time when an Intel Atom consumes 5W TDP, but a northbridge chip consumes 20W, some paradigms have to be shifted.

Reply Parent Score: 2

psychicist Member since:
2007-01-27

"AMD need to be the first to bring out the 6-8 core proc and surprise intel.


I think differently.
AMD needs to integrate the northbridge, southbridge and 3D graphic chips into the CPU, getting closer to the "system on a chip" design.
"

We're past the point where one size fits all, so actually both of you are right and it depends on the application which processor or system-on-chip you choose.

For my development server/workstation I'd like to have as many cores, as much memory and hard drive capacity and speed as I could reasonably afford. For a mobile computing device such as a (mini)notebook I could live with much less computing power.

As a matter of fact I'm using my current notebook with an Intel Pentium IV at 2 GHz containing 512 MB of RAM and 60 GB hard drive to connect to my development "server" with an AMD Phenom Q9650, 8 GB of RAM and terabytes of hard drive space. The combination works fine so it's not "either/or" anymore, it's "both/and".

Reply Parent Score: 2