re: 3GHz is a launch frequency for Core 2. AMD's 90nm K8 launched at 2.2GHz and single core. It's naive to think that Core 2 won't improve in speed faster than the EOL 90nm K8.
You're comparing launch frequency of a new design (Core 2) on a very mature Intel 65nm process, with that of a mature design (initial 90nm K8) on a very new (i.e. very new when initial 90nm K8 was launched) AMD 90nm process!?!?
I agree that K8 is nearing EOL. Still rev G will improve faster in speed than 90nm rev F because I think it will see more process improvements. Fafaik the roadmap for CMW doesn't feature major speed jumps either. For now it might not be unreasonable to assume that until AMD comes with either the new mobile core, or rev H, that the current performance gap between Intel's CMW line and AMD's K8 line will remain approximately as big as it is now (comparing DC CMW's with DC K8's), with the gap being larger in desktop and mobile than in the server segment.
re: The issue here is the *launch* of 65nm relative to what it can do for AMD's *current* competitiveness. The answer is: nothing. 65nm G-step is less competitive than 90nm F-step, so it's a net step backwards for AMD.
65nm rev G allows AMD to shift to dual core X2's at a fast pace. X2's even at somewhat lower speed perform better and are hence more competitive than single cores. So in the sense that rev G allows a much richer DC/SC ratio rev G is more competitive. Only if you compare an 'average' bin 90nm DC with an average bin 65nm DC you are probably ('probably' because we don't know what 'average' is) right that it is a step backwards.
Obviously, this will improve over time, and H-step has a much greater chance of outclocking Rev-F. But H-step is still many quarters away from mass production.
It seems you're saying that rev G will outclock rev F some time (e.g. two to three quarters or so) after launch. If so I agree with that. I think the design goal of rev H was obviously to improve IPC, not clock speed perse. Therefor evolutionary jumps in speed are more likely imo (comparing DC rev H with DC rev G) than any revolutionary jumps.
Regards,
Rink
