Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AMD's Roadmap revealed

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the socket-to-me dept.

NoPants writes "It looks like the aces at Anandtech were able to get their hands on some of AMD's internal roadmaps. Anand has some interesting information including the new upcoming Socket 939 CPU standard as well as AMD's predicted release dates for Athlon 64 4000+ processors. Hopefully this will shed some light on what AMD is trying to do with all the different socket types..."

4 of 298 comments (clear)

  1. well thats nice by ZenBased · · Score: 5, Insightful

    but my amd 700mhz proc is still quite fast enough to give me debian, fluxbox, openoffice etc.. ah well there must be enough people out there who cant live without a fast proc

    --
    http://www.virtualconcepts.nl/
  2. Re:Grhh... by TrueBuckeye · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not to mention the fact that it lowers costs to them, and thus to the consumer, to do this. From what I've heard, they are able to take cpu's with some bad cache, which isn't uncommon, disable that non-functioning section, and then sell the cpu as a 512k cache cpu rather than wasting the entire chip. Lower performance, lower cost, but less waste. This is a far cry from the world of the Intel 486 sx vs dx with the math co-processor fiasco.

    --
    Was that night on the marge of Lake LaBarge I cremated Sam McGee...
  3. Socket, shmocket ... I want RAM! by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only reason I'm even considering one of these gems is so I can cram more memory into a system for video work. All the boards I've seen for Athlon 64 max at 3Gb. The SK8* boards for the Athlon FX will take, IIRC 8Gb. Where's the boards I can cram 32 or more into?

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  4. Re:Real Mhz on the 4000 chip? by DanglingPointer2004 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    False advertising? It's called marketing. They never said "Our 3200+ is equivalent to Intel's P4 3.2C". Find that on the AMD site and you are making sense. Also, compare a duron chip to a celeron chip that are "rated the same". There is no comparison, but then, neither company specifically said "these two chips are the same speed", so you can't really complain. You can't blindly trust a number to tell you how well a processor will perform, there's a lot more to it than MHz and GHz. As for Tom's Hardware, I would look at who pays their bills before counting on their "benchmarks" too closely.