Quite true, but not for the reasons you claim, there was ALSO supposed to be a K6-3+. Guess why it was canned? I'll let a much smarter guy put you in the know:
Check the second article on the page; it explains the problems AMD has been having quite succinctly...
To try to give you a full story, the K6-3+ has been on and off the AMD roadmap for a couple of months, it is currently on BUT there is no sign that these cache problems have been solved...
----------------------------------- Jeff Coulter Geek in the clouds Virtuoso - Smart Personal Agent Jeffcoulter@users.sourceforge.net ICQ: 33011156 -----------------------------------
"He who will not reason is a bigot; he who cannot is a fool; he who dares not is a slave." - Sir William Drummond
Intel has been having problems ramping the CuMine because of the on-die cache, something that AMD has been having great troubles doing as well. They cannot get good yields of their K6-3 above 450mhz because of that very problem.
The on die cache makes a huge difference, look at the benchmarks, the 1Ghz Athlon with off die cache is not that much faster than the 800mhz CuMine which has it's cache on die.
With current processors being 10 times faster than their memory, the cache has become increasingly important... AMD must realize this but has decided to create a even bigger problem by rushing these 'faster' chips to marked by using a devious trick, they have changed the divider on the off-die cache to much lower than the ½ on the original Athlons thus making the speed gains of all their chips that run at higher than 700mhz lower than their clock speed indicates.
Intel on the other hand has solved the problem with on die cache, which has cost them dearly in the short term but they have been rapidly improving yields. They are also proving that on die cache is the only real solution in the long term by nearly equaling a chip that is 200mhz faster than the 800mhz CuMine even though the architecture of the CuMine is greatly inferior to the Athlon.
Lately, I have noticed that the supply problems are starting to subside and the CuMine at all speeds but 800mhz are readily available. Nevertheless, I have serious doubts that Intel can provide a steady supply of 1Ghz CuMine chips without some process tweaking and a few of their infamous microcode and stepping changes.
Of course, all indications show AMD is having great success with their Thunderbird chips that have on die cache. When the Thunderbird arrives, in all probability, they will give the CuMine the same spanking the original Athlon gave the original P3.
Of course this is a "Mine is bigger than yours" kind of thing but it is giving us faster chips at lower prices, that is all that really matters to us mere mortals.;-)
----------------------------------- Jeff Coulter Geek in the clouds Virtuoso - Smart Personal Agent jeffcoulter@users.sourceforge.net ICQ: 33011156 ----------------------------------- "He who will not reason is a bigot; he who cannot is a fool; he who dares not is a slave." - Sir William Drummond
Slashdot Mirror
Quite true, but not for the reasons you claim, there was ALSO supposed to be a K6-3+. Guess why it was canned? I'll let a much smarter guy put you in the know:
0 02
http://www.jc -news.com/pc/index.cgi?search=K6-3+cache&peek=200
Check the second article on the page; it explains the problems AMD has been having quite succinctly...
To try to give you a full story, the K6-3+ has been on and off the AMD roadmap for a couple of months, it is currently on BUT there is no sign that these cache problems have been solved...
-----------------------------------
Jeff Coulter
Geek in the clouds
Virtuoso - Smart Personal Agent
Jeffcoulter@users.sourceforge.net
ICQ: 33011156
-----------------------------------
"He who will not reason is a bigot; he who cannot
is a fool; he who dares not is a slave."
- Sir William Drummond
Intel has been having problems ramping the CuMine because of the on-die cache, something that AMD has been having great troubles doing as well. They cannot get good yields of their K6-3 above 450mhz because of that very problem.
;-)
The on die cache makes a huge difference, look at the benchmarks, the 1Ghz Athlon with off die cache is not that much faster than the 800mhz CuMine which has it's cache on die.
With current processors being 10 times faster than their memory, the cache has become increasingly important... AMD must realize this but has decided to create a even bigger problem by rushing these 'faster' chips to marked by using a devious trick, they have changed the divider on the off-die cache to much lower than the ½ on the original Athlons thus making the speed gains of all their chips that run at higher than 700mhz lower than their clock speed indicates.
Intel on the other hand has solved the problem with on die cache, which has cost them dearly in the short term but they have been rapidly improving yields. They are also proving that on die cache is the only real solution in the long term by nearly equaling a chip that is 200mhz faster than the 800mhz CuMine even though the architecture of the CuMine is greatly inferior to the Athlon.
Lately, I have noticed that the supply problems are starting to subside and the CuMine at all speeds but 800mhz are readily available. Nevertheless, I have serious doubts that Intel can provide a steady supply of 1Ghz CuMine chips without some process tweaking and a few of their infamous microcode and stepping changes.
Of course, all indications show AMD is having great success with their Thunderbird chips that have on die cache. When the Thunderbird arrives, in all probability, they will give the CuMine the same spanking the original Athlon gave the original P3.
Of course this is a "Mine is bigger than yours" kind of thing but it is giving us faster chips at lower prices, that is all that really matters to us mere mortals.
-----------------------------------
Jeff Coulter
Geek in the clouds
Virtuoso - Smart Personal Agent
jeffcoulter@users.sourceforge.net
ICQ: 33011156
-----------------------------------
"He who will not reason is a bigot; he who cannot is a fool; he who dares not is a slave."
- Sir William Drummond