AMD 65nm Dual Core Out Brisbane Opinions?

diduknowthat

formerly liuliuboy
Brisban is suppose to run cooler because it uses less energy. But besides that, I dont see where it'll have any advantages over its 90nm counterparts.
 

Geoff

VIP Member
Performance wise theres really no difference, its like when the Pentium D's moved from the 8xx to the 9xx (although it had twice the cache), there wasnt much difference performance wise.
 

Dual_Corex2

banned
[-0MEGA-];570280 said:
Performance wise theres really no difference, its like when the Pentium D's moved from the 8xx to the 9xx (although it had twice the cache), there wasnt much difference performance wise.

Thats cuz they were P4s LOL. You cant make P4s much faster then they already are, no matter what you do to them...lol.
 

holyjunk

New Member
Brisbane uses lower energy consumption and I have also heard of the x2 3600+ overclocked to 3.1 ghz. Though I expect 2nd batch of 65nm parts to overclock better. In all actuality the Brisbane parts perform 1%-7% slower than their 90nm counterparts. Though they are still better performance/watts than the 90nm parts. The decrease is due to increased latency which is explained by Amd so they can later add more cache.
 

holyjunk

New Member
im waiting for those shiny new 45 nm intel processors to come out

Not a whole lot performance wise. For them they got high-end k something that uses a new type of metal to reduce heat and power consumption also there is the addition of ss4.
 

Hairy_Lee

VIP Member
AMD work very differently than intel do with regards to refining their processors. Intel are known for big leaps but very infrequently whilst AMD are known for doing lots of regular little tweaks.

Just because they have switched to 65nm dont expect anything wonderous yet.
The main reason for the switch to 65nm is to reduce costs; performance/clock increases will come later
 
Top