12-core Shanghai-processor

Anyone know if the upcoming AMD 12-core is meant for businesses like Opteron/Xeon/Alpha processors?

I reckon they have the possibility to make AMD as popular as they were during the Athlon vs. P4 days
Who knows, might beat the octa-core Nehalem.

Links:
http://www.techpowerup.com/58134/12-core_CPUs_From_AMD_on_Their_Way.html
http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/18/amds-shanghai-proffers-12-cores-hypertransport-3-0/
http://www.dvhardware.net/article26665.html
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Forg...MD-Details-Upon-Its-12-Core-Chips-83768.shtml

Please don't start an all-out Intel vs. AMD flame war, only constructive comments that may actually give us a clue which company will get the upper hand (if you're gonna start any Intel vs. AMD at all) - with Shanghai/Istanbul or Nehalem.

Cheers,
Peezee.

EDIT: If you're wondering, I do prefer Intel. But if AMD beats them fair and square like in the Athlon days, I could still end up with an AMD processor. I think it's only healthy to bring up some competition, and even though I do have a love for Intel-based processors, I do not look down upon AMD.

 

I miss the Athlon4 days Even though i can't really be complaining over Core 2 Duo processors. They overclock like insane and for little bucks i got plenty of horse power, actually more than the most top end line of retail processors (E6800 at that time). Ok, minus smaller L2 cache but that doesn't make a large difference for stuff i do...
I just hope AMD will bring something brutal next time so that whole market balances again, Intel is dominating now and this ain't good for consumers...

 

This is the first I've heard of this.

Is this the answer we have been waiting for?

I really hope this levels the playing field, this can't go on for much longer, surely not.

 

I think AMD will bring it bk. i mean once they start pumping out 3GHz 45nm Phenoms and get this native 6 core processor made i think they will pull bk some ground. i mean if u compare a Q6600 to a 9850 u will find that it is pretty even with AMD winning some benchmarks and intel winning others. so give it time and i think AMD will coem bk just it might take a while.

 

I think far as desktop goes, 6, 8, and 12 cores are probably just a bit overkill, software hasnt even really caught up with multi-threading yet.

Intel will probably lead in low resolution gaming benchmarks (with clock advantage) but will stay even in the medium to high resolution ones. I say over the next year over all Intel/AMD will be pretty close in performance.

Intel will likely have a slight edge in manufacturing ability allowing for higher clocks and lower temps. I do expect AMD 45nm to go better than their 65nm (which really was not very good compared to Intel's), but far as just the CPU goes Intel will lower power consumption with AMD leading in overall platform (CPU/MB/RAM) and lower prices.

In servers is where it will get interesting, right now AMD still leads in saleability, but once Nehelam comes out that cap will close, even if Intel's quickpath isn't as good as HT. There will likely be 'core wars' and Shanghai is the beginning of that on the server side. What really needs to be seen is if Intel will stay with FBDIMMs or use DDR3 to drop to lower power consumption. Other than that I think it will be a toss up between different benchmarks.

 

It's going to be interesting when AMD's 45nm gets up and running, to see how well their High-K mix fares against Intel's. It has the potential to be better researched seeing as it's being developed jointly with other companies like IBM and Sony, I suppose it could go either way though.

Still haven't heard anything more about TSMC's 45nm process, which they said wasn't going to use High-K silicon.

 

Interesting, would definitely like to see AMD come out swinging and knock Intel down notch or 2...and this could really be their best shot at it.

 

Ha, I heard some stuff about Intel making a six core processor, and AMD DOUBLED that! Sweet, too bad it's a business core and won't game worth crap.

 

You guys are talking about AMD vs INTEL and saying amd and intel will be pretty close to each other next year ...do guys consider tht INTEL have already made there 80 core processors on 11 Feb 2007

 

Apparently AMD has trouble producing quad-cores (seeing them forced to launch tri-cores instead of getting rid of them). So, 12 cores and moving to 45nm at the same time looks very, very risky.

 

Intels 6 core processor is for servers only and is 3 dual cores in the same package. AMD are not moving to 45nm and 12 core CPU's at the same time. they are moving to 45nm about 2nd half of this year and introducing a native 6 core processor towards end of this year and then releasing a 12 core CPU beginning of next year. AMDs Quad cores a native so all 4 cores on same die so if one doesn't work they would either have to throw it or do what they decided to do. Intel on the other hand have to dual cores in the same package so if one dual core CPU isn't working properly they will just stick a different dual core in and sell the Damaged dual core as a single core.

Intels 80 core processor is impressive yes but they only have one and actually i think you will find they are using this technology development in the Graphics card they are about to release i thinks its called the Larrabee or something like that. this is the weirdest GPU i have ever seen because it has 16-24 processors on it clocked at 2.5GHz and well be processing graphics in the form of x86 code. oh well guess we ill see what happens.

 

At the same time: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=415&page=3

"I asked David Kanter what he thought of AMD's aggressive mid-2008 time frame and here's what he had to say:

David Kanter: Mid-2008 is a very aggressive target for AMD, since they will be shifting to immersion lithography. It would be a real victory for AMD, but a bit of healthy skepticism is due. The other thing is, that it's possible they hit mid-08 but in really really low volumes.

Kanter also added that immersion lithography is a brand new chip fabrication process that no one has ever done before and AMD has had major delay issues in the past."

It looks like they are taking a gamble (which, like all gambles, might just pay).

 

I'm surprised it took people 3 days or so to discover this thread, on the AMD part of the Guru3D forums

I really don't know if the 12-core Shanghai will beat the octa-core Nehalem though. I mean, think of the 2900XT vs 8800GTX. The 2900XT had much more brutal stats, but it always runs only at about 50-80% efficiency, making it much slower. Might just be the same thing around here.

 

I have no intentions of hijacking the thread, but I have to make a point. The Phenom 9850 is AMD's top of the line model, while the Q6600 is relatively mid-range in Intel's line. Until AMD has something that wins some benchmarks over the QX9770, there isn't a whole lot of competition. I'm not hating AMD here, heck I'm running an X2 3600+ as I type this.

 

Yes, you're on to something. The MHz race turned into multi-core race. Which is useless without massive multithreaded applications.

 

Many multithreaded applications/games are to be released, so it's okay. But they could still increase the MHz.
I'm also wondering why Intel supplies every CPU with the same crappy stock cooler? They could improve the heatsinks alot, thus being able to clock the CPUs much higher.

However, I do doubt we'll be seeing 12-threaded applications soon.
The Nehalem will be in quad and octa-core versions, yes? I doubt we'll be able to use more than 8 cores for anything really, till 2010 or so.

 

Well, eight cores could probably be used right now for rendering. But for the rest of us, I don't know. Until Intel/AMD comes up with a way to shutdown unused cores, the idea of 3 extra cores running full-speed while doing nothing, does not appeal to me. And Nehalem probably won't address this. From what I've read, it's just a Core2 architecture with a HyperTransport style interface (which is good).

 

Yeah, heard that too. But as they've been working on it for so long - maybe they do have something up their sleeve. Only time will tell.
I wonder what Nehalem will be named officially when released

Anyway, think Nehalem will come in a dual-core version? (If so, my bet would be that's their cheaper end of the line, like E4500 is now)...

 

Well, getting rid of the FSB is something up their sleeve. Apparently Core2 is being starved by it. It will be something like removing the brakes. In turn, this will mean a huge cache will no longer be necessary. As in, less transistors per CPU. As in, more cores per waffer. As in, lower prices.
All in all, not as revolutionary as Intel would make you believe, but a much needed evolution instead. If intel has something else to bring to the table, that would be great, but I'm not complaining about Nehalem as it is.

I'm really not sure. AMD doesn't seem successful in releasing a dual core version of the Phenom, so splitting a 4 core die in half may not be that easy.

 

AMD's AM2+ already has split power planes per core. It allows each core to have different voltage and different clock frequency.

Despite what people think AMD isn't trying to make the best over clocker or enthusiast CPU, they are trying to make cheap mainstream products and great server solutions. The server chips that trickle down to enthusiast desktop may or may not be Uber chips, but that isnt their point. They are trying to make a good server process and release the entire platform; thats why AMD couldnt get into the server market until later releases of Opteron was that some OEMs wanted to have the complete solution from one supplier.

Hence why AMD has some really nice platforms and winning alot of designs with OEMs based on providing what the OEMs (their customers) what they want.

I should add Server+Workstation should get looped into one product. AMD would like to increase their performance on the workstation (far as rendering) and I believe that why they added OoO and larger bit registers.