1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

AMD planning 45nm 12-Core 'Istanbul' Processor ?

Discussion in 'AMD Overclocking' started by AirRaid, Apr 24, 2008.

  1. AirRaid

    AirRaid Guest


    Hardware Dodeca-core: The Megahertz Race is Now Officially the Multi-
    core Race

    AMD engineers reveal details about the company's upcoming 45nm
    processor roadmap, including plans for 12-core processors

    "Shanghai! Shanghai!" the reporters cry during the AMD's financial
    analyst day today. Despite the fact that the company will lay off
    nearly 5% of its work force this week, followed by another 5% next
    month, most employees interviewed by DailyTech continue to convey an
    optimistic outlook.

    The next major milestone for the CPU engineers comes late this year,
    with the debut of 45nm Shanghai. Shanghai, for all intents and
    purposes, is nearly identical to the B3 stepping of Socket 1207
    Opteron (Barcelona) shipping today. However, where as Barcelona had
    its HyperTransport 3.0 clock generator fused off, Shanghai will once
    again attempt to get HT3.0 right.

    Original roadmaps anticipated that HT3.0 would be used for socket-to-
    socket communication, but also for communication to the Southbridge
    controllers. Motherboard manufacturers have confirmed that this is no
    longer the case, and that HT3.0 will only be used for inter-CPU

    "Don't be disappointed, AMD is making up for it," hints one engineer.
    Further conversations revealed that inter-CPU communication is going
    to be a big deal with the 45nm refresh. The first breadcrumb comes
    with a new "native six-core" Shanghai derivative, currently codenamed
    Istanbul. This processor is clearly targeted at Intel's recently
    announced six-core, 45nm Dunnington processor.

    But sextuple-core processors have been done, or at least we'll see the
    first ones this year. The real neat stuff comes a few months after,
    where AMD will finally ditch the "native-core" rhetoric. Two separate
    reports sent to DailyTech from AMD partners indicate that Shanghai and
    its derivatives will also get twin-die per package treatment.

    AMD planned twin-die configurations as far back as the K8
    architecture, though abandoned those efforts. The company never
    explained why those processors were nixed, but just weeks later
    "native quad-core" became a major marketing campaign for AMD in
    anticipation of Barcelona.

    A twin-die Istanbul processor could enable 12 cores in a single
    package. Each of these cores will communicate to each other via the
    now-enabled HT3.0 interconnect on the processor.

    The rabbit hole gets deeper. Since each of these processors will
    contain a dual-channel memory controller, a single-core can emulate
    quad-channel memory functions by accessing the other dual-channel
    memory controller on the same socket. This move is likely a
    preemptive strike against Intel's Nehalem tri-channel memory

    Motherboard manufacturers claim Shanghai and its many-core derivatives
    will be backwards compatible with existing Socket 1207 motherboards.
    However, processor-to-processor communication will downgrade to lower
    HyperTransport frequencies on these older motherboards. The newest
    1207+ motherboards will officially support the HyperTransport 3.0

    Shanghai is currently taped out and running Windows at AMD.



    AMD can’t get to 45nm fast enough.
    A 12-core package?

    If there was a bright spot in AMD’s first quarter, it was the new PC
    and graphics products that have either recently shipped or are in the
    pipeline for 2008. Barcelona, the company’s quad-core design
    manufactured using a 65nm process, bombed last year. Meanwhile, Intel
    is minting millions of 45nm chips. So it’s no surprise that AMD is
    shifting to 45nm processors as quickly as possible.

    During the earnings call last week, AMD executives said the 45nm
    processor, code-named Shanghai, was on track and would be shipping in
    volume in the fourth quarter. By all accounts, Shanghai is largely a
    “shrink” of the recently-released B3 version of Barcelona, which
    corrected a flaw in the original design. But Daily Tech reports that
    AMD has more ambitious plans for the 45nm design.

    Citing AMD engineers, the site says AMD will produce a six-core
    version, code-named Istanbul, and then, in a reversal of its “native-
    quad-core” strategy of putting all cores on a single piece of silicon,
    offer a two-die package with a total of 12 cores. The two processors
    will be connected using AMD’s HyperTransport 3.0 bus.

    To be clear, this platform is designed for the server and workstation
    market. Based on recent presentations, AMD will also release a 45nm
    enthusiast desktop platform, code-named Leo, later this year that will
    consist of triple-core and quad-core chips. Mainstream and budget
    desktops, as well as business systems, will continue to use platforms
    based on 65nm processors until sometime in 2009.



    AMD readying 12-core 45nm processors for late 2008
    by David Gonzales on Apr 19, 2008 at 10:29 PM

    Forget quad-core, AMD is preparing a dodeca-core chip. If you didn’t
    stay in boarding school if you need refreshing with your greek
    vocabulary, dodeca means 12, and that’s 12 cores for you right there.
    Imagine, a dozen times faster than a normal chip. But how fast does
    one’s computer ever really need to be? AMD doesn’t seem to care if
    there’s an answer to that question or not (just as its closest
    competitor Intel doesn’t), and moves on with their plan to produce a
    12-core processor to be released by late 2008. It will reportedly be
    called the Shanghai, and will be a 45nm successor to their not-so-
    successful Barcelona chip.

    The AMD Shanghai will supposedly come with HyperTransport 3.0 and six
    cores so it can stand up against Intel’s upcoming Dunnington chips in
    a race towards becoming the fastest processors on Earth. And while the
    six-core variety of the Shanghai isn’t even close to coming to market,
    AMD already has plans for a follow-up: a 12-core version, called
    Istanbul, packing 12 cores (what else?) and HyperTransport 3.0
    interconnect as well.

    Get that? The first version of this product is already 3.0 while some
    companies can’t even get 2.0 right. That’s what they meant with all
    the numbers, right?



    AMD talks 45nm Shanghai w/12-cores, HyperTransport 3

    AMD engineers this week said that the company plans on introducing new
    12-core processors later this year. The first processors based on 45nm
    Shanghai platform are due later this year and will be nearly identical
    to the B3 variant of the Socket 1207 Opteron (Barcelona) shipping
    today, according to DailyTech. The processors will reportedly use the
    faster HyperTransport 3.0 for inter-CPU communication and will debut
    later this year as a "native six-core" Shanghai derivative, currently
    code-named Istanbul. That processor, the report claims, is "clearly
    targeted at Intel's recently announced six-core, 45nm Dunnington
    processor." A few months later, Shanghai and its derivatives will also
    get twin-die per package treatment, allowing for up to 12-cores per
    package, the report says.

    Each of these processors will contain a dual-channel memory
    controller, allowing a single-core to emulate quad-channel memory
    functions by accessing the other dual-channel memory controller on the
    same socket and offering an alternative to Intel's Nehalem tri-channel
    memory controller, DailyTech notes.

    Citing motherboard manufacturers, the report says that Shanghai and
    its multiple-core derivatives will be backwards compatible with
    existing Socket 1207 motherboards, but that processor-to-processor
    communication will downgrade to lower HyperTransport frequencies on
    older motherboards. The publication also notes that the newer 1207+
    motherboards will officially support the HyperTransport 3.0
    AirRaid, Apr 24, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. AirRaid

    Yousuf Khan Guest

    Well, at least there is an air of practicality entering AMD's designs
    now. Twin-die 12-cores will get them to market much sooner.

    Yousuf Khan
    Yousuf Khan, Apr 25, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. AirRaid

    Augustus Guest

    Is this the followup to the "Constantinople" core?
    Augustus, Apr 26, 2008
  4. AirRaid

    nobody Guest

    They'd better don't screw up on this one - they already used up all
    the margin of error they had, and then some. But then, it's not the
    first time AMD is on the brink of extinction, and they always came
    back even stronger than anyone, including but not limited to INTC,
    could expect. K7 in 1999, K8 in 2003 - both times Intel got their ass
    whipped big time for a couple years straight... Why not this time
    again? Wish them luck - without AMD the whole CPU world would be
    boring and damn expensive.

    nobody, Apr 26, 2008
  5. AirRaid

    Augustus Guest

    They'd better don't screw up on this one - they already used up all
    Let's hope they can pull it off. I'm still waiting for a dual core from them
    that actually signifigantly ouperforms my S939 Opteron 185 2Mb unit at
    3.2Ghz. The performance increases I've seen from my A8N-E system versus the
    one I just built for my son, with an X2 5600+ 2Mb unit clocked at 3.2 Ghz
    are solely due to the newer chipset and DDR2 clockings. I'm looking at
    upgrading my system in the next few months, and I don't see a Phenom or an
    X2 6400+ in my future, unfortunately. I swore by the PIII Coppermine and
    Tualatin line, but then Intel went to the Willamette then Northwood P4's.
    That's when I started with Bartons, A64's and Opterons. The Intel lineup
    can't be beat right now, it's been leaps and bounds ahead of AMD for the
    last couple of years. Intel needs real competition, and not just in the
    bottom feeder lineup. My T7600 4Mb L2 Core2Duo runs circles around both of
    my 3.2Ghz AMD units.
    Augustus, Apr 26, 2008
  6. AirRaid

    Augustus Guest

    I upgraded one of my machines to a Core 2 Quad Q6600 a while back;
    I'm using my Opteron 185 box ( as well as an Opteron 180) for digital
    mixing and music using Cubase 4 on one and Sonar Producer 7 on the other.
    Both are written for multicore. Both choke when adding and mixing effects in
    a 10-12 track mix. Badly. I ran Sonar 7 Producer on to the T7600 Dell
    laptop, installed the same M-Audio MobilePre USB and mixing hardware, and
    believe me, the Intel Core2Duo setup slows down, but never stops and flakes
    out. Same memory on each. The Opterons are both running RAID0 setups with
    256Kb stripes. The Dell is a 7200RPM laptop HDD. So there's just a bit of
    difference in multicore ability there.
    Augustus, Apr 26, 2008
  7. AirRaid

    Robert Myers Guest

    Amdroid fantasy. The PC as a platform is pushed on the low end by
    game boxes and on the high end by IBM and Sun.

    What could be more boring than the x86 domination we have now?
    Without AMD, there would be no such monoculture.

    As it is, Via is still in the x86 business and will continue in the
    x86 business, even if AMD fails.

    No matter what, Intel will have price and performance competition.
    Things might have progressed more slowly, but Intel would be pushing
    the fab envelope, anyway, because that's where it's real strength is.
    Take AMD out of the picture completely and there is still no way for
    Intel to relax.

    Robert Myers, Apr 26, 2008
  8. AirRaid

    nobody Guest

    Did you mean "without Intel"?

    nobody, Apr 27, 2008
  9. AirRaid

    Miles Bader Guest

    I suppose if AMD hadn't been around, there would have been a greater
    chance of Intel getting their butts whipped by some other architecture,
    instead of by AMD.

    Of course AMD _did_ come up with "x86-64", which is an improvement over
    the x86 (obviously even Intel thinks so).

    Miles Bader, Apr 28, 2008
  10. AirRaid

    krw Guest

    What architecture? You grossly underestimate the x86 inertia.
    Intel did too, but had no interest in pushing it forward to product.
    krw, Apr 29, 2008
  11. AirRaid

    Miles Bader Guest

    "greater chance"

    Not necessarily a _good_ chance, but it's the only way I can make sense
    of the grandparent poster's ranting...

    Miles Bader, Apr 29, 2008
  12. AirRaid

    nobody Guest

    Don't try to make sense of something containing none of it whatsoever.

    nobody, Apr 29, 2008
  13. AirRaid

    krw Guest

    Ten times zero is what?
    krw, Apr 29, 2008
  14. AirRaid

    Wes Newell Guest

    Funny, that's not how I recall it. Intel dropped their x86-64 bit plans
    after trying to push it onto Microsoft, and Microsoft telling them to
    shove off. I think this link will get more to the truth.

    Wes Newell, Apr 29, 2008
  15. They did, but was told by MS to dump it & use AMD64 code
    MS did not want to make 2 ver. of Windows.

    avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
    Virus Database (VPS): 080429-0, 29/04/2008
    Tested on: 29/04/2008 11:52:34 PM
    avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2008 ALWIL Software.
    Gary Colligan, Apr 29, 2008
  16. From a history perspective, the P7 circa 1996 was to be the 64-bit follow-on
    to the ia32 architecture. Then Intel shifted gears and joined with HP
    to merge the P7 with some stuff at HP, producing Itanium. Itanium _was_
    intel's 64-bit story (with the 32-bit x86 support in the processor). However,
    Merced was late and slow and AMD did x86_64 and Intel was forced to include

    Scott Lurndal, Apr 29, 2008
  17. AirRaid

    krw Guest

    Only after it was clear that AMD64 was going to happen whatever
    Intel did, did Intel try to get in front of the train (to derail
    it). M$ didn't see that in their interest either.
    krw, Apr 29, 2008
  18. AirRaid

    krw Guest

    Later, after AMD64 was a done deal.
    krw, Apr 30, 2008
  19. AirRaid

    Wes Newell Guest

    Of course they had. But they didn't want 64 bit to come out for x86 to
    compete with Itanium. And by trying to protect it, they basically screwed
    themselves. Only after AMD released theirs did they try to bring their x86
    64 bit code out. MS had already done a version of windows for Itanium and
    weren't going to play Intels games at their expense.
    Wes Newell, Apr 30, 2008
  20. Former: Netburst, IIRC.
    Latter: Anything other than netburst?

    Scott Lurndal, May 1, 2008
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.