Slashdot Mirror
AMD Announces "Duron" Processor
Intoxicated Duck writes: "ZDNet reported that AMD announced it's Duron processor this morning. Looks like they're trying to compete with the Celeron. Wait! wasn't the Celeron supposed to compete with AMD?" What about overclocking?
Much bloodwine was used in the creation of this ultimate tool - many of our warriors were killed infiltrating the evil Intel and stealing the Pentiumgram Schematics. With this station we will be the ultimate power in the universe! (oops, wrong storyline)
Even the High Counsel likes it's smooth black design and holographic technology. The Duron sisters also appreciate it's diabolical looks! You will buy one today or DIE. KAPLAH!
If these were set up in a Dual-CPU configuration would you have to pronounce it Duron-Duron?
The amazing Duron (tm) non-stick processor. So hot you can fry an egg on it! And its patented non-stick coating means no scraping and easy cleaning.
The product namespace is getting so crowded that we're eventually going to end up driving Dodge Urethras and using computers with the new Pederast Pro processor.
the Press Release is here. And the FAQ is here. The Spitfire has come a long way baby ;)
Here is Anand's Comdex '99 coverage, which is an excellent resource for those wanting to know more about AMD's future.
--------
Oscarfish.com: tropical fish with attitude. Way t
Hehehe, the string "5x86-133pr75" caught my eye and it took me a while to realise it wasn't leet speak!
--
Fuck the system? Nah, you might catch something.
OK, I'm something of a processor new junky. I follow this kind of stuff with an unhealthy devotion, so I figured I'd explain to everyone what this is before /.'s general ignorance about the subject (From my perspective anyway. Remember, I'm obsessed with this stuff.) starts to show through.
.18 process, it's just that the basic layout has been improved), and added 64K of L2 cache. Yeah, I know, 64K sounds tiny, but it's really not that bad. The most important thing about this cache is that it is an exclusive cache. In most processors, the L2 ends up duplicating the information in the L1 and only uses the amount of cache beyond the size of the L1 for additional data. For example, a Celeron has 32K of L1 and 128K of L2, however 32K of that L2 is simply holding the same information as is in the L1, giving you a total effective cache size of 128K. The Duron is different. Being based on the Athlon core, it has 128K of L1 plus the 64K of exclusive L2, which holds entirely unique data. This gives you an effective total cache size of 192K, 50% more than the Celeron which is the Duron's primary competitor. Plus, the Duron is based on the Athlon core, which is simply a lot better than the PIII core.
What is the Duron? Essentially it's AMD's answer to the Celeron. Right now their answer to the Celeron is the K6 series, but the K6 core has short pipelines and is not very optimized for high clockspeeds. The bottom line is that the K6-2 currently maxes out at 550 mhz (and in limited quantities) and it's not likely it will ever get much higher. The K6-2+ and K6-3+ (mobile chips only, with 128K and 256K on-die L2 respectively and the additional 3DNow! instructions which were added when the Athlon came out) currently max out at 500 mhz, and I doubt they'll ever get past 600 before they are phased out. Even 600 is a reach.
On the other end of the spectrum there is the Athlon. The Athlon is a brand new core that is extremely well optimized for high clockspeed. These things reach high clockspeeds so well that AMD has to underclock them to meet their contracts with OEMs (who request a certain number of processors at each clockspeed). Obviously the Athlon is where AMD's future lies, but they are considerably more expensive to manufacture than the K6 series. The combination of a large die size, the need for externel L2 cache chips, and the slot packaging adds to the price. Furthermore, AMD is finally making good money selling Athlons for the high end. They don't want to simply cut Athlon prices to sell them for the low end. AMD needs something else for the low end market.
Enter the Duron. The Duron used to have the codename of Spitfire while it was in development, so if you've heard that name before you know what it is. Basically, AMD took the Athlon core, optimized it a bit more to shrink the die and lower power consumption somewhat (although it's still made with a
The Duron itself will be released in a "Socket A" package sometime in June. Socket A is just like Slot A (which the Athlon uses), only it's a socket. The reason for the socket is because sockets are cheaper and the lack of external L2 makes a slot unecessary. The launch of the Duron will be preceded by a couple weeks by the launch of AMD's "Thunderbird" processor. The Thunderbird is just like the Duron only with 256K of exclusive L2 cache, giving it a total effective cache size of 384K. This processor should offer a real performance boost over the regular Athlon and will eventually completely replace it. Indeed, Thunderbird is just the code name. It will simply be called "Athlon" when it's released. The Thunderbird will be available for both slot A and socket A motherboards, giving those who already own a slot A motherboard an upgrade path.
I hope I didn't leave anything out.
I am not an idiot. Please use my name to email me.
"That's right, I'm quoting myself."
-Upsilon
As for overclocking potential, my (not so humble) opinion is that it will be a hell of an overclocker. Look at the K7 - err Athlon, and this is basically a K7 with on die cache. Rumors were that the release of Spitfire - err, Duron, was delayed because it was actually beating the Athlon in benchmarks. So like the Celeron the clock speeds will probably lag behind the Athlon.
As long as they overclock as well as I think they will, I know I'm getting one. As a hardcore overclocker (and op in #celeron, efnets biggest overclocking-based channel) I think getting a chip that's gonna run at 900mhz or 1ghz for less than 200 bucks is about as good as it gets. Don't be scared by the 'value cpu' label. This is the K7 core with faster cache, albiet less of it.
Bottom line? They'll probably be faster than a P3 at the same clockspeed, for at most half the price. And that's without even putting overclocking into the picture. Don't you love competition?
- tred
The name is lame :-(
;-)
For an English speaker this Latin-derived name may associate with "durable", but for the Russian speakers it will probably associate with "durak", that means fool in Russian.
As for me, I like the idea of dual Thunderbird better
Tigers respect lions, elephants and hippos. Maggots respect no one. (C) S. Dovlatov
Intel is proud to announce it's newest line of processors, created to combine the speed of AMD with the iMac style of computer, The MD 20/20/86. The MD will come in grape, banana and fruit punch.
Warning! Use of these processors in multiple cpu combinations, especially if flavors are mixed may cause your computer to be blurry-eyed, slow, late-rising and generally hungover in the morning.
"Your software will become one with the GPL. We have analyzed the legalese of your software licenese as not being able to withstand us. Your lawyers are irrelevent! Resistance is futile! Your archaic programming practices are authority driven! We wish to improve outselves. You must comply! Your software will adapt to service us!"
In all seriousness, isn't AMD having horrible supply problems already?
It depends what you mean. AMD is having far less trouble turning out it's high end chips (ie Athlons above 800MHz) than Intel is with its equivalently clocked PIIICu's, as evidenced by the chip availabilities. From the look of things, it's the K6-2/3 line which is pretty much already spoken for, so if you want one of those, you are probably going to have to search for it. On the other hand, you might as well get a low-end Athlon or a budget Duron anyway and you get the advantages of a 21164-derived FPU which scrags any Intel processor and a nine-way instruction scheduler. Oh, and against the Celeron, both the Athlon and the Duron have 200MHz buses in contrast to the 66MHz one on the Celery. Take your pick ... it's not hard ... I'll not rush you ...
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
No way!
It's "Durandal" from the Marathon series!
It will soon take over each of its users and trasform them into time-travelling space marines!
Pope
Freedom is Slavery! Ignorance is Strength! Monopolies offer Choice!
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
If I were to release a processor to compete with the Celeron, I would call it the Asparagon.
I have noted that the K6-III has disappeared from the stores, and this explains it. It is a matter of product positioning. The K6-III had more cache, and fit the SS7 socket, but had a larger die than the K6-2. Why spend acres of silicon in on line 25 in Austin making K6-III parts, with a larger margin on the cheaper K6-2, when a new middle line processor is in the works.
Ah, economics... The new part needs shelf space by itself, so kill off the neato part nearest it.
Free the mallocs!
Maybe the AMD chip will be just a little slower than the Intel chip for a little less money. Then, Intel will come out with a chip that costs even less, but runs a little slower. Then, AMD comes roaring back with a chip...
Pretty soon, both Intel and AMD will be shipping out little pieces of cardboard with smaller and smaller corrugation. "Now, the Intel Celeron 7000 is just a little slower than the Celeron 6500, but what are you going to do, use both Megahertz at the same time?"
I mean, what were the AMD guys thinking??? I love AMD, and I even bought a K6-2 knowing that a Celeron would have been faster, out of loyalty to AMD and dislike for Intel. But, "Duron"? Isn't that the name of a popular brand of paint? I believe it's "Duron Paints and Wall-Coverings" or some such. http://www.duron.com So, they've named their new processor after paint. Wonderful. Don't tech guys ever go into hardware stores? What is Joe Average going to buy, a computer with a fast-sounding Celeron processor, or one that sounds like it doubles as a listing in a paint chip catalogue. AMD, I love you, but call it something else.
;-) Come on, AMD, wake up and change it before it's a marketing nightmare. Joe Average doesn't want a computer that's named after paint he can buy at any hardware store, and Joe Average is the main consumer for this value chip.
What was wrong with the code-name "Spitfire," anyway? The only other thing called a "spitfire" is an old type of fast sportster. It's a cool name, and counters "Celeron" quite nicely. A consumer sees "Celeron" and "Spitfire" chips and they sound competitive--remember that AMD needs John Q. Public to buy the chip, not just Slashdotters who know what they're buying beyond name. But, an average joe sees "Celeron" versus "Duron," and it's fairly obvious which one sounds better. Guys want fast, not just durable, and impressions count in selling any product.
Again, I hate to put too much emphasis on just a name, but, it's a marketing nightmare. It's a paint company name, and it sounds slow instead of showy. Gee, sounds like it should be the name for the new Cyrix chip, eh?
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."--Tacitus, *The Annals*
Well, back in the 80's CPU:s were soldered to the motherboard. The socket method wasn't used until the 486:s came out (or thereabouts), which would be in the early 90's.
Hell, in the early 80's even the memory was soldered to the motherboard, to upgrade you had to use an (expensive) ISA-card. Same for CPUs, there were 286 plugin cards for the 8086es.
If you want a truly modular computer, go get a PCI backplane, a CPU card, a disk controller card and whatnots. Not very common in home computer systems, but they do exist for industrial PCs.
It's true! Durex Avanti condoms are made of it. Look here to find out about them.
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
They made a song about this chip in the 60s...
:)
Da Duron-ron-ron Da Duron-ron...
My journal has hot