Replies to post #29242 on Intel Corp (INTC)

[mas]

So no wager then motor mouth ? ;-) Tri-cores will ship when broken quad yields give up sufficient numbers like I always said. Where you getting 50W from, fool ? They only have to find 7% more clock than a FX62, you don't think SiGe will do that ? You sure did when your money was on the Green side ;-). Opinions for sale, Opinions for sale, see the phony 'chipdesigner' ;-). Cell is broken due to the new complex multi-core design and if you were a proper chipdesigner you would know that but hey spread more FUD about stuff you know jackshit about, it would be nothing new ;-).

[wbmw]

Re: Oh, is that all? You mean, they don't want to release a 175W 3GHz DC part? Really? Just the small issue of dropping that down 50W or so is all?

Well........

For an FX chip, I'll agree that power is less of a concern. 175W would be pushing it, but what about 140W? Doesn't AMD's new socket support this TDP?

I'd say the more relevant question would be if AMD can bring the FX-62 down to desktop level TDPs (95W) and make an Athlon X2 5400+ out of it. If so, it would be one more speed bin across the entire product line, and it certainly wouldn't hurt their competitiveness vs Conroe. On the other hand, if it does not allow a drop in power for other skus, then an FX-64 would be completely irrelevant, since the fastest Conroe (X6900 by that time) would still beat it by a wide margin.