I won't wait. Agena is precisely what I WANT.
Multiple cores, better calculations, and most importantly does not cook hotdogs like current QXes do.

And screw DDR3 still. I don't want to wait until it gets mainstream and replaced swiftly by then DDR4.

Definitely wrong wording, sorry. Meant clock to clock performance. AMD can die if they only par C2Q's clock performance. I'm estimating 15-20% which IMO is still a little pessimistic considering it's a generational gap (unlike Yorkfield, which preproduction testing says about 5-10% per clock over C2Q)
I'm taking the TDP values from Dailytech (WikiPee's Phenom article)


2.8 might be around 100W, but then Core 2 Quad's offerings would go around 115-125W then. I *think* Intel would just push Yorkfield exclusively to the mid/high end with the current C2Qs to cope with the low end, so there won't be much decrease in TDPs.

I won't even consider anything above 100W, so Intel has nothing to sell to me in terms of Quads. Quads are much better for digital content creation stuff possible. (Imagine After Effects AND Maya rendering at the same time= . It's toture on my Barton.)

Heck, I would pay AMD a premium if they'd just keep Q6700/Q6800 performance with the current 89W TDP.

I'm practically not buying yet so I'm not committed to anything, Penryn has me stoked a bit (especially for the 95W bit at 3+Ghz) but I'll still have to see consumer-product benchies, or even details first. There's a big possibility that they'll just push older QXes to low prices and keep the nice new ones on top (that cleared out Netburst stock rather fast), considering refresh specs are rather godly (lol).

AMD could do this too, leaving Phenom X2 for the consumer, but Intel's July (And probably another one in Q4) cuts will have to make them respond otherwise. If they both run cheap on consumer-grade, I'll give up and buy nothing for the fifth year.

What puzzles me is that C2Q's TDP has always been 2X the TDP of C2D. If this was logic applied, that's a double dosage of a mobile core. Which is even more puzzling when there's rumours on a mobile Penryn quad core for desktop replacements. Unless Penryn duo itself has gone back to 45W, a value that I could even give up quad-core for, as SSE4 should help media stuff up.

Someone with the bragging rights for 4X4 (X2).

*crickets*

But as a marketing tagline to prolong DDR2's life, it could seem well enough for DAAMIT to not take a substantial loss for moving to AM3/DDR3 much later.

What do you think of SSE128 anyways? Substantial increase like Core was? Because basing on the POV benches that came earlier it doesn't really seem to help this chip float.

TheINQ says Samsuuuung + DAAAAAAAMIIITTT is UUUUUUUNSTOOOOPPPPABLE for Intel to handle.
If it really is done however, at minimal:
They'll be in the black with Samsung doing so well with electronics, and possibly Fusion has a better chance of growing into a robust GPGPU platform.

Very impressive figures to go.
And I haven't heard from MJ Miller from a looong time (Ever since they dumped articles off PC Mag)

Socket OMFGAMDSAUCE with the new 3.0ghz KAWAIII (3 "i"s stand for generation 3) quadcore processor.
Yeah, I know, a lot of /b/s' childhood dreams.

Anyway, Slayer, what makes you confident that Penryn can push up to 4? Intel expected Netburst to achieve 11Ghz.
They stalled at a quater of it. Added with the fact that Intel quad procs like that might be bottlenecked if FSB doesn't go up again (and they do reportedly have problem pushing to 1600)

And Phenom hasn't even got its 45nm shrink yet. (2008Q3?) For Barcelona it's needed.


For Kuma (Dual) and RD790, 65nm should be their C2D.