Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[wbmw]

Re: I think it's scheduled to launch 2006-7 and be tied to 65nm.

2006 seems unlikely to me since it has not been on any roadmaps, even leaked ones. I've always assumed AMD's strategy would be to ramp up 65nm K8 before developing a new micro-architecture, and the evidence is finally starting to support that. My best guess schedule puts AMD's 65nm K8 in early Q3 with "K10" in mid-07, while under worst case conditions both schedules may be pushed out as much as 6 months. So in terms of next micro-architecture, I see mid to late 2007.

Re: The minimum I think it will have is a stretched pipeline in the mid to late teens. Also macro-op enhancements a la P-M and probably a 2Mb cache in the large models as well as an L3 cache in the server version. I think you are looking at 10-15% for the 2Mb model with maybe 20-25% for the L3 cached version. The target clock speed I would put at 4 Ghz.

That sounds fairly impressive, but if this is true, it pretty much puts K10 about even with Conroe in terms of per clock performance, but at a much higher frequency. The only question is how low AMD can gate power with a longer pipeline and heavy frequency push. Intel may end up having the lower power core in 2007, even though AMD holds the performance crown. Unless of course Conroe ends up scaling better than expected, and also keeping in mind that this is purely speculation.

Re: In summary I don't think Conroe will deliver the KO blow you think it will but it will stop the howls of laughter about Prescott with its quite poor performance/watt.

A KO blow is relative. One could argue that AMD's major gains have been due to a head start on integrated memory controller, 64-bits, dual core in servers, far better performance and lower power, etc. The Merom/Conroe generation fixes all these things except for IMC, and that will be fixed with Whitefield in 2007. With performance, power, and features at parity or close to it, AMD's momentum may end up reversed once again due to Intel's brand preference.

Re: OTOH if AMD keep ahead of you in cores per die then they will keep their momentum going.

When have you ever been ahead of Intel?

Except for servers, Intel has had dual cores as long as AMD. And they happen to scale relatively similar. The only difference is that AMD already had such low power cores that they could go to dual cores without as much as a frequency hit - something Intel won't have to worry about with the Merom/Conroe generation. It sounds like there are already rumors of a dual Conroe MCM (quad cores) for around the time when AMD will have a quad core K8 (late '06/early '07).