First of all, sheez this forum annoys me.. Takes like 2 minutes to get the page to show ! Feels like I'm taking crazypills waiting so long ..

To the case.

http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/itnews.php?tid=746541

So 2,3Ghz top bin for Barcelona. June mass production, if not delay.

But notice, only 2,6Ghz Barcelona scheduled for 2Q08, and with a 120W envelope. That's much, ain't it? Better hope it performs like heck.


http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/d [...] 62530.html

Intel plans a 65nm 3Ghz 1600 PSB (Processor System Bus) in second half sometime.

Xeon 45nm DP processors are also second half.


The bad: How will things stack up in 2Q08? 2,6Ghz Barcelona against, what 3,4 - 3,7Ghz 45nm Xeon?

Thoughts? And anyone knows the difference between PSB and FSB? Also, I'm wondering what processors AMD used in their Barcelona vs Clovertown 40%+ "comparison"

Im pretty sure its just another name for the FSB, processor side bus instead of front side bus.

Is that 120W still using the maximum peak power draw, as AMD has always done. Intel uses an *average* power draw. In other words, the average for the AMD is always well below their "TDP". This is why good reviews are careful to do a platform average over a lengthy standardized use benchmark with varying cpu loads. In this real world test, you see why Google has gone with Opterons, etc.

Another interesting point, the correct benchmarks for servers are *very different* from the usual benchmarks Tom's and other consumer sites use.

The fastest Barcelona planned so far is a 2.6GHz processor, model 8272SE and 2272SE. If on schedule, this would be releasing on Q2 08.

That's at least 14 months away! For a 2.6GHz as the top end? That's it? AMD should consider seppuku. At least they would die with honour! 8O

I have a feeling 2.6Ghz in Q2 '08 must be wrong. It just doesn't make sense.

I'm not horribly interested in quad-cores at the moment, though. Dual-core processors still strike my fancy for anything short of heavy multimedia encoding.

Apparently this info is coherent with this Feb. 5 chart from Daily Tech:

By the time we are ready for the Barcelona Vs Clovertown showdown, it will be Barcelona vs Penryn, or Barcelona vs Nehalem

Might be Barcelona vs. Intel Qubit!

If the Barcelonas that have to hold the fort for the next 14 months are running in the low 2GHz range where are all these zippydoo wonderkin features that are going to make it such an "awesome" CPU? Everything I've seen makes it seem as if it will be roughly equal to Intel's offerings clock per clock, give or take 5%.

The 3800+ X2 @ 2.0GHz wins in MOST things against a 965EE a 3.73GHz so clock speed isn't the only factor in determining IPC.

As far as the clockspeed of Barcelona the first dual core chips from AMD were several hundred MHz slower than the single core chips. That's just how physics works. You can't get a 2.8GHz quad at the same envelope as a 2.8GHz dual.

According to everyone's favorite rag AMD is going to start using average instead of max so the TDP will come down by around 20% or more.

QFT. I think we all know how little clockspeeds matter when comparing chips with different architectures.

Granted, but to cut to the chase: IN BENCH WE TRUST. One bench will tell the tale that 10,000 speculative posts can't! I can hardly wait for the true performance numbers on K10. It will be anything but dull around here that day!

you sure do know how to rain on my hopefull "Go AMD!" party... not necesarilly cuz i am an AMD fanboy, i just know that if AMD comes out with an Intel raping CPU, the prices for CPUs will drop again. Cant wait to see AMDs future Desktop CPU line-up.

From one Ninja to the next.. things are going to get reaaaaaally cheap. Wallets ready, prepare to pay... /Green Velvet..

Actually it will be Shanghai vs. Nehalem or perhaps K11(?) vs. Nehalem.

I guess if you compare a multithreaded app using a 2.2GHz dual core and a 3.0GHz single core what do you think will win?

More cores allows for lower clock speed. For server apps more cores are better than fewer faster cores.