Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pgerassi who wrote (235802)	7/6/2007 12:50:22 PM
From: wbmw	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: You also forgot that these may be overclocked parts. Pete, you're absolutely right. If you define overclocking as a part that's beyond the rated clock frequency and TDP of the other units, and it needs a bump in voltage to get there, then there is really no difference between that and what Intel has done for Apple with the X5365. However, I think you're wrong about Intel not supporting it. I think Intel supports all their parts, including the "factory overclocked" 3.73GHz Kentsfield parts that Dell uses in their XPS line (see: dell.com and if the link doesn't work, you ought to be able to find it on their website yourself). They don't support user overclocked chips, but we're talking about pretty big customers here. Dell and Apple ensure that their cooling solutions are more robust and can support the extra thermal headroom, and I'm sure Intel works with them to ensure they have enough parts that can reach these speeds reliably. And I know you'll disagree, but I also consider the Athlon X2 6000+ to be an overclocked part, given the unreasonable power dissipation in many reviews (well exceeding even the 130W TDP quad core Kentsfield Extreme Edition, see: techreport.com ). Of course, AMD appears to have a non-overclocked 6000+ ready to launch this quarter at a more reasonable 89W TDP, which should more closely match the current 5600+ and allow them to ramp into lower price points (see: crn.com "The system builder, who preferred to remain anonymous, said manufacturer prices for the top-of-the-line Athlon 64 X2 6000+ would drop from $241-per-unit to about $170."). Eventually, as of August or September, Intel will launch their G-0 stepping, which will also bring the power of 3.0GHz Clovertown and Kentsfield to a more reasonable 120W and 130W TDP, respectively (Intel is doing much better these days in coming in below TDP, see: lostcircuits.com ). This will be available and ramp at the same time as Barcelona, so IMO any comparisons should include reference to the current scores. Whether or not you agree with the legitimacy of these scores is a personal matter. In my opinion, posting scores for an overclocked part is legitimate if it ships that way from major OEM customers, and the systems come with support, either from the vendor or from Intel. And at any rate, this argument will be rendered moot when the non-overclocked 3.0GHz Xeon X5365 actually ships. P.S. should you feel the need to respond, this is the last post that SI will allow me to post for today. So better if we continue this conversation tomorrow, especially since I expect it to strike a chord with your definition of TDP. And yes I know that AMD is slightly more conservative than Intel in TDP, but today both companies come in well below their stated TDPs (again, see: lostcircuits.com )