HKEPC reports that low-voltage, quad-core Clovertown (L5310) will be released at 50W TDP. That would certainly be impressive. AMD has been talking about delivering Quad-core at 80W TDP and hyping it up a lot. If Intel delivers their 50W QC almost a quarter or two before K8L arrives, that would be something (this is a big IF, since Intel hasn't announced this part). AMD will still keep on hyping up the idle power, but really, who gives crap about idle power in data centers or rendering farms? Also, the 1066 FSB will be more than enough, at least for rendering farms (check out Kentfield reviews from Tom's Hardware--1066 FSB does not cause a bottleneck on most benchmarks).
What does "same power envelope" mean anyways? You move to next-generation process, the power is expected to go down. Then you reduce the clock speed a little bit, that gives you additional power savings. Next-generation process also allows you lower voltages, reducing power even further. Everyone is doing it. Only AMD is hyping it.
Expect to see a lot of hype on idle power from AMD. Probably AMD expects their K8Ls to just sit idle? :)
Again, does 2P quad-core make 4P more irrelevant?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
26 comments:
How many watts is the North Bridge(mem controller), do you know?
I think they will be using the same northbridge as woodcrest (I think it consumes 20W), at least for a while. Plus there are FB DIMMs. But the simple fact is, 85W TDP Woodcres + NB + FBDIMMs consume less power at the wall than 89W Opteron + DDR2. That means, 50W Clovertown will give Intel even bigger advantage if everything else remains the same. And AMD has said that they will remain in the same power envelope.
AMD K8L Quad-Core Facts:
Quad-Core 2.0GHz (of not higher) will have TDP of 68W MAX -- of that 68W, 22W is the Memory Controller (CPU TDP now at 46W, pwning Clovertown in the ass). Clovertown will not be able to compete with K8L fanboy.
Northbridge for Woodcrest consumes 34w. 8x FB-DIMM's consumes over 80w. Intel Fanboys don't realize AMD already pwns Intel on CPU power consumption. 20w of the CPU's TDP is Memory Controller, nothing to do with CPU. So let's do math:
3.0GHz Woodcrest TDP: 100w (adjusting for Intel's lies)
3.0GHz Opteron64 TDP: 75w (adjusting for Memory Controller)
As you see, Opteron has a 25% lead and always will. Quad-Core CPU's @ 68w - 22W (new MC TDP) means a Quad-Core 2GHz+ CPU consumes 48w MAX (Clovertown's 50w TDP in reality will be 65w) @ 1.6GHz -- too low to compete with K8L.
Intel Clovertown @ 2.66GHz will be 120w (140w real) and compare that to 95w (73w for CPU) to Opteron -- sorry, AMD wins again.
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/08/15/amd_releases_socket_f_and_am2_opteron/
"..at least one benchmark (SPECfp_rate2000 (Linux) by 11%..it is still offering the most power-efficient processor - if not only the processor's power requirement is considered, but the power of the memory and Northbridge as well."
Not a good sign when you lost most benchmarks and point out to one where you win by just 11%. And they just admitted that AMD's platform(not CPU) is more power efficient. Desktop solutions do not use FBDIMM, therefore just leaving cooler Core 2s and hotter Northbridge vs warmer K8s and cooler Northbridge.
But how do you know if K8L can compete at all if you've never seen it? PS, AMD calls it Barcelona in updated HardOCP article.
3.0GHz Woodcrest TDP: 100w (adjusting for Intel's lies)
3.0GHz Opteron64 TDP: 75w (adjusting for Memory Controller)
Problem with that, Intel/AMD don't name their CPUs via GHZ for a reason. Are you talking about UP? DP? MP? Comparing Woodcrest vs Socket F, Xeon 5160(fastest DP) is rated at 80W, Opteron 2220SE is rated at 120W. Please tell us about this adjusting you've done. Intel's lies? For the IMC, a 120W CPU is a 120W CPU.
As you see, Opteron has a 25% lead and always will. Quad-Core CPU's @ 68w - 22W (new MC TDP) means a Quad-Core 2GHz+ CPU consumes 48w MAX (Clovertown's 50w TDP in reality will be 65w) @ 1.6GHz -- too low to compete with K8L.
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/08/15/amd_releases_socket_f_and_am2_opteron/
"AMD confirmed to TG Daily that it will be offering a 68W quad-core processor." Just offering, means they'll be the lowest. 50W is less than 68W. Sounds like a really low voltage/underclocked CPU just to grab the TDP crown.
"Intel Clovertown @ 2.66GHz will be 120w (140w real) and compare that to 95w (73w for CPU) to Opteron -- sorry, AMD wins again."
Sorry, but Clovertown@2.66GHZ is the high end part. Opteron 2220SE, the highest end DP, just dual core, is rated 120W. I'm guessing AMD will have to clock the Barcelonas lower if they want to keep talking performance per watt.
"Again, does 2P quad-core make 4P more irrelevant?"
More like Intel is bringing more power to everyone:)
They've got Tigerton for MP systems.
Jeez Anonymous, your kind are getting dumber every day. Way to skew facts in favor of your beloves (albeit slower) Intel.
?
I use facts, you dig from your brain.
"I use facts, you dig from your brain."
And where do you think I got the info that's in my brain from? (I set myself up for an insult with that)
Mike, the pure fact is that, Woodcres beats Opteron in power measurements performed at the wall--both Intel-sponsered and independent benchmarks have confirmed that.
Adding up TDPs is the stupidest way of judging power consumption--you are comparing two systems based on power that they will *NEVER* consume.
And for god's sake, don't adjust Intel's TDPs upwards. We all know that Woodcrest under load consumes far less power than Opteron under load. Let AMD quote whatever they want to quote and let Intel quote whatever they want to quote. The ultimate test is what the consumer sees--and Intel today wins hands down in that test.
Just as a thought exercise: How can every single woodcrest chip consume 65 W when they are clocked differently? The answer is, they do not. All that Intel is saying is under normal load, none of those chips will go beyond 65W. Does that mean they can consume 35W? Yes it does, and it is confirmed by AnandTech. They have shown that the Woodcrest chip itself under load consumes about 35W. I think their number for Opteron was 55W, but I am not sure.
The bottom-line is, if a chip that Intel rated at 65W consumes less power than AMD's chip at 89W, then certainly Intel's chip at 50W will consume less power than AMD's chip at 89W.
You can keep howling about the TDPs and how they are different. But what matters to the consumer is how much power each platform consumes, and how much heat it generates. And thanks to Woodcres, today AMD is in bad shape.
More like Intel is bringing more power to everyone:)
You nailed it. And that is precisely why I like Intel. I am planning on posting something on this topic.
Intel invests most cycles in PCIe SIG. It was the first one to support PCIe on platforms--catapulting us into the era of extreme graphics, 10 gig Ethernet and what not. There was a time when hardware RAID controllers were a server-only feature. Now with P965 chipset, I get SATA II RAID controller with 8 ports! Again, Intel ws the first one to start supporting SATA. My computer is better today because of Intel.
Today at home I have a C2D computer with 2x250 gig RAID storage and a 1.2 TB NAS to backup my videos, all under $2500, thanks to Intel.
Surely they screwed up on Netburst. But I wouldn't even try to count AMD's screw-ups. And with C2D, they are making amends for their mistakes.
"Surely they screwed up on Netburst. But I wouldn't even try to count AMD's screw-ups"
I'll do it for you:
1) Believed Intel was a good company in 1989
2) Not incorporating IMC earlier
3) Not hiring me as their designer
"And where do you think I got the info that's in my brain from? (I set myself up for an insult with that)"
3.0GHz Woodcrest TDP: 100w (adjusting for Intel's lies)
3.0GHz Opteron64 TDP: 75w (adjusting for Memory Controller)
Woodcrest@3GHZ is 80W, not adjusting for Intel's "lies".
There is no Socket F Opteron@3GHZ. Closest to 3GHZ, 2.8GHZ is Opteron 2220SE, rated at 119W. Opteron 285, fastest DP from last generation at 2.6GHZ is 95W. More than Intel's high end at 80W, ~50% more than Intel's maintream of 65W.
Comparison of current DP solutions from Intel and AMD..
Intel has a low voltage part(LV 5148) coming Q306 rated at 40W, mainstream(5110-5150) at 65W, and high end(5160) at 80W.
AMD has the High Efficiency (2210HE-2216HE) rated at 68W, mainstream (2210-2218) rated at 95W, high end (2220 SE) at 120W.
In summarization, the mainstream Xeon 51XXs are cooler than AMD's HE 22XX. Clovertown will have twice as many cores as 2200SE, yet have similar TDP.
"In summarization, the mainstream Xeon 51XXs are cooler than AMD's HE 22XX. Clovertown will have twice as many cores as 2200SE, yet have similar TDP."
Let's get some facts straight right here and now fanboy.
Clovertown will be well over 140w and run twice as hot as Opteron's, don't think so? Buy one and find out. You can sit there and count just CPU's, fine, but I actually have a brain and quite often it starts getting thoughts in there such as "Hey, here's the truth" and here it is:
Clovertown + NB = 165w
Opteron64 = 95w
22W of the 68W, 95W & 120W TDP's is the Memory Controller, leaving real CPU TDP's @ 46W, 73W & 98W respectively - FAR lower than Clovertown. I count in NB in Intel platforms, simply because fair competition (something you likely don't believe in) dictates such as truthful act.
Quad-Core parts from AMD will be 68W - 22W (or more) of which is the Memory Controller, so we're lookin at FAST PERFORMING (2GHz+) 43w TDP chips, not slow-ass 1.6GHz Clovertown's.
As much as you don't want to believe it, Intel isn't #1.
"Clovertown will be well over 140w and run twice as hot as Opteron's"
Clovertowns will be ~twice as hot as Woodcrest 65W, ~120W. Opteron 2220SE is 120W, yet 2 cores less.
"Clovertown + NB = 165w
Opteron64 = 95w"
?
You're using the top Clovertown vs a regular Opteron. AMD has said they will increase performance without increasing power, meaning they'll keep their 68W/95W/120W envelopes. Comparing CPU, not platform, it's 50vs68 65vs95 120Wvs120W
"22W of the 68W, 95W & 120W TDP's is the Memory Controller, leaving real CPU TDP's @ 46W, 73W & 98W respectively - FAR lower than Clovertown."
If it's part of the CPU, then it is part of the CPU.
"I count in NB in Intel platforms, simply because fair competition (something you likely don't believe in) dictates such as truthful act."
AMD is not a chipset company. Other companies also make chipsets for Intel. NB varies from chipset to chipset. As AMD is primarily CPU, why are you disadvanting the Xeons by adding NB to the CPUs wattage, when there are other factors that add to the overall platform?
"Quad-Core parts from AMD will be 68W - 22W (or more) of which is the Memory Controller, so we're lookin at FAST PERFORMING (2GHz+) 43w TDP chips, not slow-ass 1.6GHz Clovertown's."
Dual core at slower clocks tear up single cores in certain apps. Server apps are already threaded for the most part, they need more cores not clock. AMD has said they'll offer !a 68W part. And again, the IMC is part of the CPU, you simply can't take them out of the TDP, if you design a MB with IMC out of the CPU's TDP..Not good idea. The TDP is designated for a reason.
"You're using the top Clovertown vs a regular Opteron."
Okay, let's use Top-End vs. Top-End. And since you don't evaluate on a PLATFORM LEVEL (even though every single other non-fanboy buyer does) we'll look at CPU's:
Clovertown 2.66GHz: 140w
Opteron64 2.8GHz: 95w
Why 95w? I'm talking K8L Quad-Core (likely it'll be even less W). AMD is still winning here.
"AMD is not a chipset company."
Really?
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_873,00.html
Looks like you just got Owned.
Only Intel makes Chipsets for Woodcrest systems, Nvidia doesn't.
"NB varies from chipset to chipset."
No, not really. It stays about 30w.
"As AMD is primarily CPU, why are you disadvanting the Xeons by adding NB to the CPUs wattage, when there are other factors that add to the overall platform?"
Because the Memory Controller is in there. I'll adjust for other devices (~10w) and it still adds ~20w.
"The TDP is designated for a reason."
TDP means how much heat it can disperse, says nothing about power consumption. NB run hot, CPU's run hot, count them together and you got REALLY hot Intel boards.
Clovertown 2.66GHz: 140w
Opteron64 2.8GHz: 95w
Intel has constantly said 110-120. THG's tests show it under the 840EE.
Opteron64(Socket F 2200SE, socket F since previous generation didn't have 2.8DP) is 120W.
So if TDP is designated for heat, why would you rate the 2.8Opteron at 95W when the IMC is part of the CPU, therefore affecting heat?
"Opteron64(Socket F 2200SE, socket F since previous generation didn't have 2.8DP) is 120W.
So if TDP is designated for heat, why would you rate the 2.8Opteron at 95W when the IMC is part of the CPU, therefore affecting heat?"
I already said TDP of Memory Controller is 22w of the 95w total -- learning more and stop reading.
"I already said TDP of Memory Controller is 22w of the 95w total -- learning more and stop reading."
?
22W of 95W would leave ~73W. 2200SE is rated at 120W. Why would you add NB to Intel's rating yet subtract IMC from AMD?
"22W of 95W would leave ~73W. 2200SE is rated at 120W. Why would you add NB to Intel's rating yet subtract IMC from AMD?"
Obviously you didn't learn from what I wrote the last time.
I said "I am talking about K8L Quad-Core" -- 95w will be mainstream parts (if AMD vows for 120w it's b/c it's cheaper for them). 140w for Clovertown is not including NB, NB is 20w (MC only). NB + Clovertown is 160w vs. 120w for AMD -- you begin to see (if you're not dumb) why AMD is better.
"I am talking about K8L Quad-Core" -- 95w will be mainstream parts (if AMD vows for 120w it's b/c it's cheaper for them). 140w for Clovertown is not including NB, NB is 20w (MC only). NB + Clovertown is 160w vs. 120w for AMD -- you begin to see (if you're not dumb) why AMD is better."
There is no 'mainstream' quad core from AMD according to their roadmap (though Intel will offer Q6600).
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/cpu/amd/analystday/slide46.png
Mainstream are X2(anything non FX). But comparing current maintream DP solutions, Xeon 5160 is rated at 80W, while others are rated at 65W. 2200SE is rated at 120W, while others are rated at 95W. Clovertown has been confirmed by motherboard makers to be ~110-120W range. You're off by a good chunk percentage wise.
And the 120W will double the cores. Yet Opteron is already at 120W, just 2 cores. AMD will have to seriously underclock to reach 120W.
Please tell us how you get 140W for Clovertown again:)
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2768&p=3
Image link won't work, but quads look to be designated for FX only.
Wow...I try to be nice and inform you Intel fanboys, but this is nothing but a haven for dillusional morons. Bye-Bye.
AMD has never said they'll lower power, they said they'll increase performance while keeping the same thermal envelope. So I don't see how you get 95W AMD quads, unless they aren't planning to get clocked that high.
Bye to you to Mike:)
Mike, thanks for putting a link to my blog on your blog. Appreciate it!
viagra soft tabs free viagra without prescription viagra facts try viagra for free buying viagra online in britain viagra and alcohol viagra for cheap viagra doseage mexican viagra viagra jokes viagra cheap free viagra samples before buying levitra vs viagra cheap herbal viagra
Post a Comment