Could the Athlon 64 be pushed into next year?

Advertisement (Why?)

EARLIER THIS YEAR some AMD partners believed that a September date for the Athlon64 was too optimistic, prompting some of them to suggest it might be pushed into the first quarter of next year.

Motherboard manufacturers have told us that higher clock speeds are something of a problem still for AMD, and cranking it much above 1.8GHz or 2GHz is still something of a problem.

Naturally, AMD would want the first Athlon64s to work at over 2GHz to compete with Intel's Pentium 3GHz and more microprocessors and the 800MHz front side bus they'll use. The Prescott successor to the Pentium 4, you'll remember, is now slated for a Q4 launch, although it was Q3 until quite recently.

View: The full story

News source: The Inq

Microsoft, in interviews, speak openly about Blackcomb and how it is likely to be the next server edition of Windows. There is no realistic time frame on when Blackcomb will arrive and what exactly its role will play with Microsoft's .NET innitiative.

Maybe we will see an update to Windows Server 2003 that will be able to cope with Longhorns new features and fully support its new file system. It's too early to tell at this point. What will be interesting in the coming months is how exactly Longhorn progresses and what happens in October at Microsoft's PDC. Microsoft is expected to demo a possible early beta version of Longhorn itself at PDC. And announce Yukon and some more .NET software. It is here where big announcements will be made and they may indeed shape the future of Longhorn itself.

(1 reply) #1 macrosslover on 30 Apr 2003 - 09:14

Prescott here i come...AMD you snooze you lose. all i know is when it comes time for me to upgrade in September, i'm choosing Prescott or Athlon64, whichever is the best performer regardless of price and whichever one is out.

#1.1 vacs on 30 Apr 2003 - 09:35

em, the Prescott won't be available until probably Nov-Dec this year. In any case it you won't purchase one in Sept-Oct.

(5 replies) #2 Xantos on 30 Apr 2003 - 09:23

well i think it will be out september and will whoop pentium

#2.1 vacs on 30 Apr 2003 - 09:32

yeah like the Opteron whooped the Xeon and P4 processors... oh I'm sorry, the Opteron didn't really whoop Xeons CPUs. Twice the price and just in a few task faster than the slower 2.8GHz Xeon. ah yeah, I forget: it's 64-bit! Whatever

#2.2 Xantos on 30 Apr 2003 - 10:20

Im not even going to bother......

#2.3 TranceSphere on 30 Apr 2003 - 11:18

none of the programs have been optimized for the Opteron yet. When they do, u will get a nice little performance boost

#2.4 alister on 30 Apr 2003 - 14:41

[neoquote=#2.1 by vacs]yeah like the Opteron whooped the Xeon and P4 processors... oh I'm sorry, the Opteron didn't really whoop Xeons CPUs. Twice the price and just in a few task faster than the slower 2.8GHz Xeon. ah yeah, I forget: it's 64-bit! Whatever[/neoquote] Yeah, but what speed was the Opreron. I believe that the Opteron is only a 1.4 and the Xeon is 2.8 (twice the speed) and if the Opteron beats it in any task it should be embarassing for Intel that a processor half the speed of it's own can out perform it in some tasks. Alister

#2.5 Tobbe on 30 Apr 2003 - 21:05

[neoquote=#2.3 by TranceSphere]none of the programs have been optimized for the Opteron yet. When they do, u will get a nice little performance boost[/neoquote] If you write an application for Itanium 2, then you'll get a nice little performance boost! DUH!

(4 replies) #3 BoondockSaint on 30 Apr 2003 - 13:28

Since the article comes from Inq, it should be taken with a bucket of salt

#3.1 AlienX1088 on 30 Apr 2003 - 20:16

Why EXACTLY is INQ seen as an unreliable source? Pretty much 90% of the information they post tends to be accurate.

#3.2 Tobbe on 30 Apr 2003 - 21:02

[neoquote=#3.1 by AlienX1088]Why EXACTLY is INQ seen as an unreliable source? Pretty much 90% of the information they post tends to be accurate. [/neoquote] This article is one of those 10%.

hehe, just kidding. But I've read some biased articles... and I got really mad at them!

#3.3 BoondockSaint on 01 May 2003 - 01:28

[neoquote=#3.1 by AlienX1088]Why EXACTLY is INQ seen as an unreliable source? Pretty much 90% of the information they post tends to be accurate. [/neoquote] I wouldnt necessarily say unreliable... Though they have a disturbing habit of hearding a rumour or whisper and then shouting it from the rooftops as 100% accurate. Its kinda like a tabloid

#3.4 macrosslover on 01 May 2003 - 10:29

[neoquote=#3.3 by BoondockSaint]I wouldnt necessarily say unreliable... Though they have a disturbing habit of hearding a rumour or whisper and then shouting it from the rooftops as 100% accurate. Its kinda like a tabloid

Its not the content, its the way they present it. For example, the A64 may well be delayed - but this could also be due to MS dragging its feet for WinXP64 (which apparently it is)... and AMD figures no point releasing a desktop 64 processor without a mainstream OS to go with it (yes I realise Linux64 is available, but I wouldnt call that a mainstream desktop OS)....[/neoquote] ok that's utter bs...let's blame MS for everything, give me a break. the athlon64 is not dependant on a 64 bit os for survival since it runs 32bit programs just fine, that's just an extra perk.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Neowin.net