PC Review


Reply
Thread Tools Rate Thread

AMD's 90nm 1-core CPUs: who's on first?

 
 
Felger Carbon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      3rd May 2005
The part ID # ends in BA, BP, or BN. All rated at 71C case (heat
spreader,
not die). Voltage is either 1.35 or 1.4V, and you can't tell which
until you
install and run the part (no joke)!

BA = Palermo. Has 256K L2 cache (or 128K for marketing reasons). 62W
TDP.

BP = Venice. Has 512K L2 cache. 3500+ and down, 67W TDP. 3800+ and
up, 89W
TDP.

BN = San Diego. Has 1M L2 cache.

TDP = Thermal Design Power aka "guaranteed never to exceed power". In
the
case of these newish 90nm CPUs, TDP has been _politically_ assigned,
not
technically. In every case, with no exceptions, the TDP exactly
equals the
TDP of the previous .13u CPU with the same performance rating.
Strictly
speaking, we can only be assured that the new 90nm parts will not have
_higher_ power dissipation than the previous .13u models. ;-)

<http://www.tongfamily.com/guide/pcs/...on_64_venice_a
rrives.html>


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
George Macdonald
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      4th May 2005
On Tue, 03 May 2005 17:10:09 GMT, "Felger Carbon" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>The part ID # ends in BA, BP, or BN. All rated at 71C case (heat
>spreader,
>not die). Voltage is either 1.35 or 1.4V, and you can't tell which
>until you
>install and run the part (no joke)!
>
>BA = Palermo. Has 256K L2 cache (or 128K for marketing reasons). 62W
>TDP.
>
>BP = Venice. Has 512K L2 cache. 3500+ and down, 67W TDP. 3800+ and
>up, 89W
>TDP.
>
>BN = San Diego. Has 1M L2 cache.
>
>TDP = Thermal Design Power aka "guaranteed never to exceed power". In
>the
>case of these newish 90nm CPUs, TDP has been _politically_ assigned,
>not
>technically. In every case, with no exceptions, the TDP exactly
>equals the
>TDP of the previous .13u CPU with the same performance rating.


Well, not really. Look at the 3500+s - Newcastle with TDP of 89W and the
Winchester & Venice with 67W.

>Strictly
>speaking, we can only be assured that the new 90nm parts will not have
>_higher_ power dissipation than the previous .13u models. ;-)


I can assure you that the Winchester 3500+ runs much cooler than a
Newcastle... nearly 10C cooler at full tilt with stock cooling and similar
case.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald
 
Reply With Quote
 
Felger Carbon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      4th May 2005
"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Tue, 03 May 2005 17:10:09 GMT, "Felger Carbon"

<(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
> >Strictly
> >speaking, we can only be assured that the new 90nm parts will not

have
> >_higher_ power dissipation than the previous .13u models. ;-)

>
> I can assure you that the Winchester 3500+ runs much cooler than a
> Newcastle... nearly 10C cooler at full tilt with stock cooling and

similar
> case.


I knew that George, hence the smiley face. I hear Venice is even
cooler than Winchester!


 
Reply With Quote
 
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      4th May 2005
Bitstring <PG_de.5372$(E-Mail Removed)>, from
the wonderful person Felger Carbon <(E-Mail Removed)> said
<snip>
>> I can assure you that the Winchester 3500+ runs much cooler than a
>> Newcastle... nearly 10C cooler at full tilt with stock cooling and

>similar
>> case.

>
>I knew that George, hence the smiley face. I hear Venice is even
>cooler than Winchester!


That'll be all the canals. 8>.

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Grumble
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      6th May 2005
Felger Carbon wrote:

> The part ID # ends in BA, BP, or BN. All rated at 71C case (heat
> spreader, not die). Voltage is either 1.35 or 1.4V, and you can't
> tell which until you install and run the part (no joke)!
>
> BA = Palermo.
> Has 256K L2 cache (or 128K for marketing reasons). 62W TDP.
>
> BP = Venice.
> Has 512K L2 cache. 3500+ and down, 67W TDP. 3800+ and up, 89W TDP.
>
> BN = San Diego. Has 1M L2 cache.


AMD's Thermal and Electrical Spec mentions BN and BP:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/cont...ec_Rev_ENG.pdf
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AMD Says Bulldozer Is 50% Faster than Core i7 CPUs V_R General 7 24th Jan 2011 09:20 PM
software problem with duo-core cpus Jeff Windows XP General 3 17th Sep 2006 02:13 PM
Are dual core CPUs worth it? Random Person Computer Hardware 21 2nd Sep 2005 09:10 PM
XP Pro and Dual Core CPUs =?Utf-8?B?RGFuaWVs?= Windows XP Hardware 1 8th Aug 2005 11:33 PM
Games that take advantage of 64 bit and/or dual core CPUs? boe ATI Video Cards 5 25th Apr 2005 06:58 PM


Features
 

Advertising
 

Newsgroups
 


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:53 AM.