| CPU Center / AMD K9 Processor | | | Author | Message | | | May 1, 2003 - 11:55:30pm | 1 of 17 | | | Login |
| Rumors are already starting for next-generation AMD processor. First, some AMD history...
K3 = (386 class)
K4 = (486 class)
K5 = (Pentium class)
K6 = K6 / K6-2 / K6-3 (Pentium II class)
K7 = Athlon / Athlon XP / Duron
K8 = Hammer -- Athlon 64 / Opteron
K9 = Future AMD
And now for some rumors on K9...
1) Integrated DDR-II Memory Controller
2) Speculative Branching -- up to 8 branches
3) 3 x87 FPU, 3 SSE2, and 2 ALU units
4) Pipelines -- 15 ALU stages & 20 FPU stages
5) L3 Cache might use 1T-SRAM (eDRAM)
6) HyperTransport II –- Octal Data Rate
7) sharing free execution units between two processors |
| | | AMD Kryptonites:
K5 is also called enhanced 486. It's a 486 class, inferior to Pentium class.
K6, using Socket 7, is still a Pentium class but an improved one in terms of performance - still inferior to P2.
K7 (tbird) is a P2 class with additional 3dnow! instructions.
K7 (XP) is P3 class. Comparing Athlon XP 1600+ with Pentium-III Tualatin 1.4GHz, they both have the same benchmark.
K8, supposingly, is in its own class due to x86-64 instructions. |
| | | May 2, 2003 - 1:20:52pm (edit: 5/2/03 - 1:23pm) | 3 of 17 | | To: Pichu | Login |
| K6-2 and K6-3 had 3DNow! which put it in the Pentium II class.
K7 Athlon had 3dnow! + SSE + on board cache which put it in PIII class.
K7 Athlon TBird had on die cache and smaller die size which put it in PIII Coppermine class.
K7 Athlon XP had higher bus speed and faster clock which put it above PIII and into first gen P4 class.
K7 (XP) is P3 class. Comparing Athlon XP 1600+ with Pentium-III Tualatin 1.4GHz, they both have the same benchmark.
thats a biased viewpoint, because Athlon XP goes up to much higher clock speed than PIII, which puts it more in the P4 range of performance. Only recently the P4 has pulled ahead with high speed ramping and AMD hasnt updated its architecture for a while. but clearly Athlon XP beats PIII across the line, and competes very well (even superior) to early generation P4.
Perhaps 400 MHz bus will push Athlon XP into better comparison with modern P4. |
| | | I'm guessing the marketing name of K9 will be named after some type of dog.
Bulldog
Big Dawg
Wolfy XP™
Who let the dawgs out? Who! Who! Who! |
| | | May 2, 2003 - 2:58:28pm (edit: 5/2/03 - 3:11pm) | 5 of 17 | | To: Quaid | Login |
| No, I'm talking about architecture. Do you know what's architecture? P2 has Pentium pro architecture (32-bit apps tend to run a lot faster than 16-bit apps unlike the old pentium), very close to k7. K6's design (note, FPU is also very inferior to P2, but k7's FPU performs just as well as P2/P3) is based on the old Pentium design rather than the Pro design. Just by adding some pathetic 21 3dnow instructions, that won't change the architecture at all!!!
By class, we would have assumed it's architecture. Stop daydreaming and go do your homework. |
| | | LOL I'm sure Woof™XP will be the one!
Anyway, with Athlons going into the 400+ MHz bus, doesn't that not matter much, since P4 are already aat 533, 800? |
| | | What about Bitch XP™?
That's what it's gonna be to the P4 ;-) |
| | | May 2, 2003 - 3:25:22pm (edit: 5/2/03 - 3:40pm) | 8 of 17 | | To: Pichu | Login |
|
No, I'm talking about architecture. Do you know what's architecture?
yes I know what's architecture. right now you say you were comparing architecture, but clearly you were regarding performance when you made this statement:
K7 (XP) is P3 class. Comparing Athlon XP 1600+ with Pentium-III Tualatin 1.4GHz, they both have the same benchmark.
so by referring to the benchmark you make no reference to anything regarding architecture.
By class, we would have assumed it's architecture. Stop daydreaming and go do your homework.
no, by class I assume it's class. dont tell me what "we" would assume. the word "class" can be interpreted to be many things. but if you meant to compare arcitectures, you should have specified what about the particular architecture places it in your particlar class as you say.
K6's design (note, FPU is also very inferior to P2, but k7's FPU performs just as well as P2/P3) is based on the old Pentium design rather than the Pro design. Just by adding some pathetic 21 3dnow instructions, that won't change the architecture at all!!!
so then what is the big difference in architecture from K7 TBird to K7 XP that makes TBbird = P2 and XP = P3? TBird and XP are not that much different, less difference than from K6-3 to K7, and less difference from P2 to P3. you are also overlooking the original K7 Athlon, which was after the K6-3 but before K7 TBird.
Now you do your homework. |
| | | May 2, 2003 - 3:37:17pm (edit: 5/2/03 - 3:45pm) | 9 of 17 | | To: boggyb | Login |
|
What about Bitch XP™?
That's what it's gonna be to the P4 ;-)
if your gonna be a fanboy, atleast be a smart fanboy. P4 will in no way be comparable to K9. K7 is still competing with P4 curently and the K8 isn't even out yet. K9 is far ahead. you should have atleast said P5 or P6 if you were trying to be phunny. |
| | | May 2, 2003 - 3:40:40pm (edit: 5/2/03 - 3:44pm) | 10 of 17 | | To: Quaid | Login |
| ummm... differences:
Pentium-II is based on Pentium Pro architecture, for the following reasons:
1- 16-bit apps tend to run faster on pentium system than on pentium pro or Pentium-II at the same frequencies
2- 32-bit apps tend to run doubly on Pentium-Pro or Pentium-II compared to Pentium system
3- FPU on P2/Pro is more superior than the Pentium system.
Likewise, K6-3 can never go on par with Pentium-II due to different architectural designs.
Architecutral improvements tend to lead better performance in the same frequencies. I use performance as a contrast in architecture; I know it's a simple-minded way of putting things, but that should be able to convince you these minor differences. If I've gone through datasheets, you probably will be too bored just to read them.
Well, there's no difference between P2 and P3, except for the additional cache, instructions, and the way they are designed. But those are the purpose of nomenclature. Likewise, K7 is suppose to be on par with P2/P3's design, but we know that P3 has a limitation of 1.4GHz whereas K7's design doesn't have a limitation.
If you don't like architecture, we would say it's architectural design. But the term may confuse one even further. Nevertheless, What I'm saying is as follows:
K5 = 486e or Enhanced 486
K6 = 586e or Enhanced Pentium
Cyrix 6x86 (or whatever it's called) is also Enhanced Pentium class.
K7+ is suppose to be in their own class because they are based on different designs. However, on the performance level due to the same frequency, K7 is rather closer to Pentium-III comparing to overall applications.
Original Athlon uses off chip cache, much like the P2 processor. Do you not agree with my words? If not, you should study a little bit more before offering a debate you can never win. |
| | View Printable | | | CPU Center / AMD K9 Processor |
|
|