AMD adjusts three-core Phenom roll-out plan, moles claim
Quad-core roadmap revised too
AMD's upcoming tri-core Phenom 8000-series desktop processors will appear next month, though only two of the anticipated three three-core CPUs will make it to market, it has been claimed.
According to PC manufacturer sources cited by Chinese-language site HKEPC, only the 2.1GHz Phenom 8400 and the 2.3GHz Phenom 8600 will arrive in March - presumably after a CeBIT launch.
Skip a month, however, and May will see the arrival of the 2.4GHz 8750, with the 2.1GHz 8450 and 2.3GHz 8650 following it in the broader May-June timeframe, the moles suggested.
What distinguishes the 8x50 chips from 8x00 parts is, apparently, that they're based on a more recent version of the core, the so-called 'B3 stepping'. The 8400, 8600 and 8700 are all B2s. With the 8700 most recently scheduled for a Q2 appearance, AMD presumably decided that was too close to the debut of a B3 part at the same clock speed and - if the moles are correct - cancelled it.
Likewise, the quad-core Phenom 9900, clocked at 2.6GHz, is claimed to have been knocked on the head. Ditto the 2.4GHz 9700.
According to the moles, Q2 will see the arrival of the 2.2GHz 9550, the 2.3GHz 9650 and the 2.4GHz 9750. The 2.6GHz P9950 will ship in Q3, it's said. All the quad-cores are down as being based upon the B3 core stepping.
I hope you understand the term "defect". Defects are supposed to be thrown. This case they are recycled.... errrr.. rebranded to tri-core.
But of course I would also get one if the price is right... again for budget concerns.
PS: check the AMD website for their comparative comparison of dual-cores:
ever wonder... where are these intel specs 45nm, S-SSE3, and some intel lower TDP's missing, etc? why didn't AMD post the updated specs of intel when AMD post theirs down to 45W TDPs?
who's using 3DNow! ? , it's year 2008.... not 1998.
all AMD's marketing hype. 8)
@Edison Asuncion Jr.
I hope you never run a business, you may find that you're not very good at it. Intel only stick together 2 dual core processors, which have a higher yield rate than they'd get if they made quad core processors. Nobody gets 100% yield rate. AMD are just being sensible, and I certainly wouldn't consider 3-core processors trash, I'd be quite happy to buy one if the price was significantly lower than the quads.
Selling what is supposed to be trash already.
AMD quadcores with 1 defective core to be sold as tri-cores? So instead of trashing the ones with defective core, AMD would rather sell them.
Anyways there is no such thing as hard bread for me. I would still go AMD for budget solutions, and Intel for real performance.
Cheers to all. 8)
Sounds sensible to me
It's the same principle that Intel use when rating their chips - e.g. ones that can't hit 3GHz are marked as 2.6GHz, and ones where one half of the L2 cache fail tests are sold with 2Mb cache.
Of course, you could be lucky and get a 3GHz part that has been marked as 2.6GHz because the yield of 3Ghz chips is greater than the demand...
Agreed - sounds to me like they're not entirely sure of their manufacturing ability to be honest.
Will they extend this to 2 defective cores and release it as a dual core CPU? Or 1?? Haven't seen Intel suggesting this approach, but then I suppose it's an extension of the original clock speeds. Intel only ever fab'ed Pentiums, and then tested them to see how far they would clock, which determined the final spec of each one. In fact it meant you could take the risk of buying a slower one and hoping it was just marked as such due to demand, you could then overclock.
High demand for these could see hacks coming out that tries enabling the 4th core...