| From: jjayxxxx | 12/2/2006 2:46:19 PM | | | | | | As a long time reader of the Mod. AMD thread and a contributor to the thread by hosting the EPS contest and all of the other archived data on the contest website, I have something to say...
Message 23064359
Please DO NOT reply to this post with anything off topic. If you wish to reply, do so at the above linked post.
Regards,
JJ |
| | Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | KeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: mas_ who wrote (218638) | 12/2/2006 2:47:41 PM | | From: Elmer Phud | | | | mas,
You're trying to draw me into the same kind of argument you're having with Doug. I'm not that stubborn so if it get you to stop then yes, I completely agree with everything you say about everything, in the past, now and in the future. |
| | Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | KeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: plantlife who wrote (218640) | 12/2/2006 3:08:12 PM | | From: pgerassi | | | | Dear Plantlife:
HT 3.0 is the next version of hypertransport. It includes HT clocks to 2.6GHz (41.6GB/s on a 32/32 HT link), the capability to split a HT link into two smaller sub links, can be used as a up to 1 meter long capacitively coupled link for chassis interconnect, can be put to sleep and woken up, can change speeds dynamically and be hot plugged (inserted and removed while the system is running).
For further information check:
hypertransport.org
Pete |
| | Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | KeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: pgerassi who wrote (218506) | 12/2/2006 3:11:40 PM | | From: Joe NYC | | | | Pete,
I would pay for good content, but I refuse to pay more than once for something.
Yeah. When a new version comes out, you should be required to just pay for the media, not for the use of intellectual property that you already paid for. Also, if kids scratch the CD or DVD, it should not mean that the use of intellectual property is "revoked", and you have to pay again.
Some think that with the internet, copyright itself should be abandoned as new knowledge is made freely and everyone can copy it. Other means should be made for compensation for the creators.
What do you mean by this? You want some commissar awarding compensation?
Joe |
| | Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | KeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| To: dougSF30 who wrote (218514) | 12/2/2006 3:24:48 PM | | From: Joe NYC | | | | Doug,
16.8 mm x 18 mm = 302 mm^2
That's a big chip.
It is not that big for servers and high end desktop. However, DC version of it, which should be some 60% to 65% of it seems a bit on the high side, and not much smaller than current DC chips on 90nm. Something soes not seem to add up.
Joe |
| | Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | KeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| To: mas_ who wrote (218630) | 12/2/2006 3:29:57 PM | | From: dougSF30 | | | | also the technical difference between 45nm and 65nm wil be less than 65nm to 90nm
Links for this, please?
By the time K8L comes out 4-core Tigerton MP will be here.
I actually agree with you on this one. I think Intel is going to pull in Tigerton/Caneland from current official schedule. |
| | Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | KeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| To: dougSF30 who wrote (218525) | 12/2/2006 3:34:38 PM | | From: Joe NYC | | | | Doug,
I think the analog / I/O portions of the chip don't scale down as readily as core and cache. So shrinking of the 65nm chips (Rev G) will be less than ideal. But 100 mm^2 (the higher end) for mainstream parts is just fine. There will also be SC low end parts, that will be smaller.
Joe |
| | Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | KeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| |
