I don't know where you went to school but slapping two dies on a chip instead of putting one moderately larger [than a single] die is going to cost more. There is going to be more die surface area when you have two independent processors on the chip since you duplicate a lot of house keeping [e.g. FSB interface, clocks, etc]. And space is money since it limits the number of dies per wafer and ultimately their yields.
Suppose you're right and there is no advantage to using a dual-die approach. Why doesn't AMD just HT link two dies on one chip then? The truth is the quad-core layout and design is the more optimal approach over dual-die processors.
Also the cores can talk over the internal SRQ instead of polluting the HT links. Simply put, there is a lot of memory bandwidth in an AMD processor. You have the three HT links running at 4GB/sec each, then the memory interface at 6.4GB/sec.
Is that there are people out there that think this is a good idea. It could be the greed or just misguided ideals. But the fact that there are people out there that think this is both a good idea and worth of working on is just sad.
People rent movies because it beats watching paint dry. All this DRM stuff is doing is making wall paint more and more interesting...
As I understand it you cannot publish anything that would be reasonably interpretted as true that is not in fact truthful, does not serve the public good, etc.
There is no rumor exception to the libel law in Canada as far as I've read. So long as the rumor is plausible it can be legitimately be construed as true by the public and therefore be considered for libel violations.
In short, no, you can't just rant on any random website about how some person is a criminal or whatever just because you don't get along. It has to be true and serve public interest before you can even consider a defense.
Point is, you can still buy 939-pin boards today. So even though AMD is going through new sockets you're not stuck if you need a replacement.
Also keep in mind AMD is the company bringing on-board memory controllers, HT links and the like. HT v3.0 is around the corner and it promises higher bandwidth, lower latency and more versatility.
Sure Intel is stuck on 775 today [with no less than a 4 or 5 diff incompatible chipsets] but they're also the company NOT bringing you point-to-point links, integrated low latency memory controllers or real HPC numbers. So I don't know how much we should be cheering them on [*]
Tom
[*] Note that I think the C2D is really awesome core. It runs ice cold, can overclock like mad, undervolt at the same time and gets an IPC that rivals the Athlon64. If Intel could just figure out the server side of things they'd be a real competitor...
sockets change because the technology changes. A different die design may need more Vcc inputs, different memory technology may need more I/O pins etc. Also newer opterons are adding HT links which definitely require more pins.
Also DDR2 is just double-data rate memory [hence the name]. The diff between DDR1 and DDR2 is the electrical spec is different, the process is different, there are different memory commands and the frequency is higher.
In theory a dual-channel DDR2-800 should top out at a max of 12.8GiB/sec compared to 6.4GiB with current technology. Of course you'll only max out 60-75% of this [due to timing and overhead] but 75% of 12.8GiB/sec is still more than 75% of 6.4GiB/sec.
The fact that you can still buy 939-pin gear today even though the standard is AM2 for desktops means you should shut your whiny little trap. AMD has plans to include backwards compatibility in future sockets as far as I understand.
Finally, why do you need to upgrade everyday? If you have a 939-pin AMDX2 4800+ today chances are it'll still be a good processor 5 years from now. So if you treat your box right [e.g. put it on a UPS, clean out the dust, etc] it should last a long time. Hell, I have friends still running Pentium II boxes...
So quit your uninformed bitchy little rant and get real.
As others pointed out, inter core communication has to hit the FSB. That makes things like owning/modifying/etc cache lines slower as you have to communicate that outside the chip.
There are also process challenges. Two dies take more space than 4 cores on one die since you have replicated some of the technology [e.g. FSB interface driver for instance]. Space == money therefore it's more costly.
If one dual-core takes 65W [current C2D rating] than two of them will take 130W at least [Intels ratings are not maximums]. AMD plans on fitting their quadcore within the 95W enveloppe. Given that this also includes the memory controller you're saving an additional 20W or so. In theory you could save ~55W going the AMD route.
Also currently, C2D processors have lame power savings, you can only step into one of two modes [at least on the E6300] and it's processor wide. The quad-core from AMD will allow PER-CORE frequency changes [and with more precision than before] meaning that when the thing isn't under full load you can save quite a bit. For instance, the Opteron 885 [dual core 2.6Ghz] is rated for about 32W at idle down from 95W at full load. I imagine the quad-core will have a similar idle rating.
First off, that isn't true. Things like Vcc sources have to move around to acommodate new designs. You're also disregarding the move to DDR2 which has a different interface as well.
You've been able to get 939 and 940 pin boards for a LONG WHILE [even now given AM2 is out]. Sure 754-pin has disappeared but AMD doesn't even sell 754-pin desktop processors anymore [laptops being the exception].
You might as well bitch out Intel for not being able to get Super Socket 7 motherboards anymore for your P54C processor.
Most sufficiently large "OSS Friendly" companies are MSFT users at heart. They cling to the OSS side of things usually just to drum up business. That Intel does this [???, they do? my ipw2200 driver works fine without clickthroughs...] is no big surprise really.
the AM2's are basically refined K8 cores with the same instructions, same pipeline, same cache, etc.
Boring. Core and Core 2 are new designs that can get people interested in looking at.
Especically since Core 2 is way cooler [literally and figuratively] than an AMD64. Granted HT is saving the Opteron front but for the desktop Core 2 Duo is a very good option. This is coming from a staunch AMD supporter and Intel playah-hater.
No, because AMD is 95W at 90nm, the quad-cores will be 65nm parts.
The quad-core from AMD will be a real 4 core in a single die designed to fit in the 95W power enveloppe. Unlike Intel who designed a 65W processor and just pasted two of them on there.
they're dual-die. There is a difference. First, the dual-die process takes more power. Second, it costs more. Boo.
Core2Duo is neato, you can overclock them like mad and the ALU/FPU is very efficient. But let's not kid ourselves. dual-die is not the same thing as quad-core.
You don't have to describe how you made the tiny 65nm circuit, you just have to do it. Can you honestly tell me with an electron scope you could figure out how the circuit was made?
I agree there is a problem if your employees steal your companies technology and take it elsewhere. That's where employee contracts come in handy. I think instead of a Patent act we should have a secrecy act. That is, you can be sued if you take advantage of someone elses secrets by poaching employees or espionage [but not via co-invention].
That way we don't penalize the folk who co-invent ideas (e.g. independently) and we can penalize those who steal company assets.
While it's true I don't have kids, it's been my impression from my interactions with youths that they seem to be totally satisfied with their seemingly domain over the world. Of course some of that is inexperienced ignorant cockyness but I think there is more to it than that.
Yeah, but if I can make an ASIC of similar quality as well shouldn't that affect your value? Patents are artificial constructs. You can either make the ASIC or not. Being obstructed by a THOUGHT is ludicrous. Getting patents on things that all of your competitors could easily do as well means your business is not well founded.
I'm all for copyright, because at least you have to create something. Patents are far too often abused in terms of proof of concept, vagueness, etc to actually be considered a good idea.
I grew up learning bits and pieces of my roots, I also was connected to my parents generation through music, literature and politics. My parents talked to me about their lives before I was born, etc. I was a Beatles fan before I was into any sort of 80s/90s pop music. You think the average 15 year old gives two shits about the 70s or 80s? About where their people come from? Or their cultures?
Patents on many things are kinda moot. Put a patent on your CPU design, but only a handful of companies on earth can actually make an ASIC...If foundry's are a dime-a-dozen what's your value? [hint: they're not, which is why being able to make reliable chips is a value proposition worth holding onto]
If companies just focused on things they can offer, at qualities no one else can then they'd make money. It's when they get this entitled sense of "I have a right to be making gobs of money regardless of what I do" that we get into this patent mess.
How about "text" too... as in "I text'ed you that note." TXT speak too... I <3 you? WTF IS THAT!?!!?!?
The problem is they advertise this stuff in newspeak so that the kids don't realize that we had the same toys a decade or two before. As if all of a sudden wireless voice comm is something new, or chatting on a computer, or saving an audio recording for later, even to listen to it portably...
I fear for kids, honestly, they're growing up without the slightest connection to the their past.
Dell = monopoly which sells laptops for $399... they ought to cost more but for some reason they can afford it... hmmm.../me hugs my Inspiron 630m which I did not pay $399 for...
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know where you went to school but slapping two dies on a chip instead of putting one moderately larger [than a single] die is going to cost more. There is going to be more die surface area when you have two independent processors on the chip since you duplicate a lot of house keeping [e.g. FSB interface, clocks, etc]. And space is money since it limits the number of dies per wafer and ultimately their yields.
Suppose you're right and there is no advantage to using a dual-die approach. Why doesn't AMD just HT link two dies on one chip then? The truth is the quad-core layout and design is the more optimal approach over dual-die processors.
Also the cores can talk over the internal SRQ instead of polluting the HT links. Simply put, there is a lot of memory bandwidth in an AMD processor. You have the three HT links running at 4GB/sec each, then the memory interface at 6.4GB/sec.
Tom
Is that there are people out there that think this is a good idea. It could be the greed or just misguided ideals. But the fact that there are people out there that think this is both a good idea and worth of working on is just sad.
People rent movies because it beats watching paint dry. All this DRM stuff is doing is making wall paint more and more interesting...
Tom
As I understand it you cannot publish anything that would be reasonably interpretted as true that is not in fact truthful, does not serve the public good, etc.
There is no rumor exception to the libel law in Canada as far as I've read. So long as the rumor is plausible it can be legitimately be construed as true by the public and therefore be considered for libel violations.
In short, no, you can't just rant on any random website about how some person is a criminal or whatever just because you don't get along. It has to be true and serve public interest before you can even consider a defense.
Tom
It's hyperbole for a reason.
Point is, you can still buy 939-pin boards today. So even though AMD is going through new sockets you're not stuck if you need a replacement.
Also keep in mind AMD is the company bringing on-board memory controllers, HT links and the like. HT v3.0 is around the corner and it promises higher bandwidth, lower latency and more versatility.
Sure Intel is stuck on 775 today [with no less than a 4 or 5 diff incompatible chipsets] but they're also the company NOT bringing you point-to-point links, integrated low latency memory controllers or real HPC numbers. So I don't know how much we should be cheering them on [*]
Tom
[*] Note that I think the C2D is really awesome core. It runs ice cold, can overclock like mad, undervolt at the same time and gets an IPC that rivals the Athlon64. If Intel could just figure out the server side of things they'd be a real competitor...
Free speech isn't absolute...
Defamatory Libel is a crime in Canada and most likely the USA as well.
So before we all jump the gun and say BUT ITS FREE SPEECHES!!!! keep in mind you CANNOT say anything you want without consequence...
Tom
sockets change because the technology changes. A different die design may need more Vcc inputs, different memory technology may need more I/O pins etc. Also newer opterons are adding HT links which definitely require more pins.
Also DDR2 is just double-data rate memory [hence the name]. The diff between DDR1 and DDR2 is the electrical spec is different, the process is different, there are different memory commands and the frequency is higher.
In theory a dual-channel DDR2-800 should top out at a max of 12.8GiB/sec compared to 6.4GiB with current technology. Of course you'll only max out 60-75% of this [due to timing and overhead] but 75% of 12.8GiB/sec is still more than 75% of 6.4GiB/sec.
The fact that you can still buy 939-pin gear today even though the standard is AM2 for desktops means you should shut your whiny little trap. AMD has plans to include backwards compatibility in future sockets as far as I understand.
Finally, why do you need to upgrade everyday? If you have a 939-pin AMDX2 4800+ today chances are it'll still be a good processor 5 years from now. So if you treat your box right [e.g. put it on a UPS, clean out the dust, etc] it should last a long time. Hell, I have friends still running Pentium II boxes...
So quit your uninformed bitchy little rant and get real.
Tom
As others pointed out, inter core communication has to hit the FSB. That makes things like owning/modifying/etc cache lines slower as you have to communicate that outside the chip.
There are also process challenges. Two dies take more space than 4 cores on one die since you have replicated some of the technology [e.g. FSB interface driver for instance]. Space == money therefore it's more costly.
If one dual-core takes 65W [current C2D rating] than two of them will take 130W at least [Intels ratings are not maximums]. AMD plans on fitting their quadcore within the 95W enveloppe. Given that this also includes the memory controller you're saving an additional 20W or so. In theory you could save ~55W going the AMD route.
Also currently, C2D processors have lame power savings, you can only step into one of two modes [at least on the E6300] and it's processor wide. The quad-core from AMD will allow PER-CORE frequency changes [and with more precision than before] meaning that when the thing isn't under full load you can save quite a bit. For instance, the Opteron 885 [dual core 2.6Ghz] is rated for about 32W at idle down from 95W at full load. I imagine the quad-core will have a similar idle rating.
Tom
First off, that isn't true. Things like Vcc sources have to move around to acommodate new designs. You're also disregarding the move to DDR2 which has a different interface as well.
You've been able to get 939 and 940 pin boards for a LONG WHILE [even now given AM2 is out]. Sure 754-pin has disappeared but AMD doesn't even sell 754-pin desktop processors anymore [laptops being the exception].
You might as well bitch out Intel for not being able to get Super Socket 7 motherboards anymore for your P54C processor.
Tom
ring-0 tasks run with uid=0 permissions. They're typically kernel processes, but as root you can do things like pwn other process memory spaces.
Tom
yeah no shit. As root you can just pwn things running ring-0 [or equiv] on the processor. You don't need to exploit a bad API to do this.
Now if you could insert modules as a non uid=0 user then that'd be something...
Tom
Most sufficiently large "OSS Friendly" companies are MSFT users at heart. They cling to the OSS side of things usually just to drum up business. That Intel does this [???, they do? my ipw2200 driver works fine without clickthroughs...] is no big surprise really.
Tom
the AM2's are basically refined K8 cores with the same instructions, same pipeline, same cache, etc.
Boring. Core and Core 2 are new designs that can get people interested in looking at.
Especically since Core 2 is way cooler [literally and figuratively] than an AMD64. Granted HT is saving the Opteron front but for the desktop Core 2 Duo is a very good option. This is coming from a staunch AMD supporter and Intel playah-hater.
Tom
No, because AMD is 95W at 90nm, the quad-cores will be 65nm parts.
The quad-core from AMD will be a real 4 core in a single die designed to fit in the 95W power enveloppe. Unlike Intel who designed a 65W processor and just pasted two of them on there.
Tom
they're dual-die. There is a difference. First, the dual-die process takes more power. Second, it costs more. Boo.
Core2Duo is neato, you can overclock them like mad and the ALU/FPU is very efficient. But let's not kid ourselves. dual-die is not the same thing as quad-core.
Tom
You don't have to describe how you made the tiny 65nm circuit, you just have to do it. Can you honestly tell me with an electron scope you could figure out how the circuit was made?
I agree there is a problem if your employees steal your companies technology and take it elsewhere. That's where employee contracts come in handy. I think instead of a Patent act we should have a secrecy act. That is, you can be sued if you take advantage of someone elses secrets by poaching employees or espionage [but not via co-invention].
That way we don't penalize the folk who co-invent ideas (e.g. independently) and we can penalize those who steal company assets.
Tom
While it's true I don't have kids, it's been my impression from my interactions with youths that they seem to be totally satisfied with their seemingly domain over the world. Of course some of that is inexperienced ignorant cockyness but I think there is more to it than that.
Meh, eitherway, I still hate web 1.0+ speak...
Tom
Yeah, but if I can make an ASIC of similar quality as well shouldn't that affect your value? Patents are artificial constructs. You can either make the ASIC or not. Being obstructed by a THOUGHT is ludicrous. Getting patents on things that all of your competitors could easily do as well means your business is not well founded.
I'm all for copyright, because at least you have to create something. Patents are far too often abused in terms of proof of concept, vagueness, etc to actually be considered a good idea.
Tom
I grew up learning bits and pieces of my roots, I also was connected to my parents generation through music, literature and politics. My parents talked to me about their lives before I was born, etc. I was a Beatles fan before I was into any sort of 80s/90s pop music. You think the average 15 year old gives two shits about the 70s or 80s? About where their people come from? Or their cultures?
Tom
Patents on many things are kinda moot. Put a patent on your CPU design, but only a handful of companies on earth can actually make an ASIC...If foundry's are a dime-a-dozen what's your value? [hint: they're not, which is why being able to make reliable chips is a value proposition worth holding onto]
If companies just focused on things they can offer, at qualities no one else can then they'd make money. It's when they get this entitled sense of "I have a right to be making gobs of money regardless of what I do" that we get into this patent mess.
Tom
Then as another poster pointed out it's a subscription. I get TIME magazines in the mail ... I "auto receive" the latest issue automatically...
So if I read the magazine on the bus to work am I buscasting?
Tom
How about "text" too ... as in "I text'ed you that note." TXT speak too ... I <3 you? WTF IS THAT!?!!?!?
The problem is they advertise this stuff in newspeak so that the kids don't realize that we had the same toys a decade or two before. As if all of a sudden wireless voice comm is something new, or chatting on a computer, or saving an audio recording for later, even to listen to it portably...
I fear for kids, honestly, they're growing up without the slightest connection to the their past.
Tom
How about "recording."
I mean we had cassette players in the 70s and 80s that were portable. We called what was on them "recordings."
Why is this so hard?
Podcasting is a term used by retards who think they invented something new. OMG A PORTABLE COPY OF SOMEONES NOISE HOLE!!!!
Tom
You see, pussies are afraid, asses shit all over everything but pricks fuck all of them...
or osmething liek that...
whatever it's noon, I'm going home
PEACE!
Dell = monopoly which sells laptops for $399... they ought to cost more but for some reason they can afford it ... hmmm... /me hugs my Inspiron 630m which I did not pay $399 for ...
Tom
You talk funny mister.
Tom