AMD Thorton Core To Be Called AMD Athlon FX!

Discussion in 'News' started by Adrian Wong, Jul 8, 2003.

  1. Adrian Wong

    Adrian Wong Da Boss Staff Member

    Has anyone heard of the new AMD Athlon FX? No? That wouldn't be surprising since I have never heard of it until now!

    Athlon FX is apparently going to be AMD's official name for the new Athlon XP Thorton core!

    As you know, the Thorton core will be nothing more than a Barton core with half the L2 cache disabled. While the Barton is the successor of the Thoroughbred-B core, the Thorton looks set to be the new AMD Duron. However, since it's identical to the Barton (albeit with only half the L2 cache), it makes more sense for AMD to leverage the Thorton's similarity with the Athlon XP Barton core.

    Using the Athlon name would enable AMD to market the Thorton core as a mid-end value processor, rather than a low-end processor that the Duron was. This would naturally translate into better selling prices for the processors and greater profits for AMD.

    I'll try to confirm it with AMD and get more details so stay tuned! :)

    No news from AMD yet... but I have confirmation from my source that the new processor will called the AMD Athlon FX!
     
  2. goldfries

    goldfries www.goldfries.com

    first it was XP following M$
    now it's FX following nVidia
    later.....???
     
  3. Chai

    Chai Administrator Staff Member

    DX, BX, FX, follow Intel? :D
     
  4. Brian

    Brian Newbie

    XP was for Xtra Performance
    What about FX then? :think:
     
  5. c627627

    c627627 Newbie

    It seems you guys are credited by
    http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10385
    for breaking the news on the Athlon FX name.

    You say "Thorton core will be nothing more than a Barton core with half the L2 cache disabled,"
    I thought that instead of being disabled, the extra cache on the Thorton will not be there.

    So is the extra cache going to be missing or disabled?
    .
    .
     
  6. Adrian Wong

    Adrian Wong Da Boss Staff Member

    Wow... That's nice of them. :)

    Yes, we appear to be the first to break the news. Many other sites still do not believe us. Ahh.. well, time will tell. Heh...

    Regarding the Thorton, as far as I know, the Thorton is nothing more than a Barton with half the cache disabled.

    AMD is trying to simplify its production lines to improve yields and cut down on costs. Creating a new line for a mid-end value processor (Thorton) doesn't really make sense for them.

    The Barton and Thorton die should be the same, except that the Thorton die will have half the L2 cache disabled. Most of the Thortons will come from Bartons with defective cache bits. All they need to do is disable half the L2 cache and they will have a working Thorton.
     
  7. c627627

    c627627 Newbie

    The point Graphic67 in that overclockers thread was making was that Thorton will have original T-bred size L2 cache of 256KB.

    Just wondering, do you still stand by your opinion that at least some Thortons will have 512 cache but that half of it will be disabled?

    Reason for asking is Graphic67's contradicting argument:
    "To make a crippled Barton (one with some cache disabled) would be a waste of production wafer space, reduce output from the wafer, and make a Thorton just as expensive to produce as a full Barton. The microprocessor industry is all about improving yield percentages and wafer efficiency.

    Cache memory on the die is probably the least likely portion to fail in the production process, so the likelihood of flawed cache chips is very small...too small to market the mistakes as another core."


    You know what this is all about, don't you? The first thing that comes to overclocker's mind: mod to enable the rest of the cache that is supposedly there. It was shot down by an argument that it can't be done because there physically will be no extra cache on the Thorton.
     
  8. Adrian Wong

    Adrian Wong Da Boss Staff Member

    Hello c627627,

    A popular misconception of microprocessor manufacturing is that it is always cheaper to create a new line for different variants of the same processor, in order to squeeze in more chips per platter. Well, that's true, to some extent.

    However, the bulk of the cost of manufacturing a processor does not come from the wafer. The bulk of the cost comes from the machinery used to make the processors and the cost of running them! The wafer is chicken feed by comparison. That's something many fail to take into account.

    The cost of running a fab and the machinery is so high than the cost of manufacturing a Barton and a Thoroughbred is really not that much different. The Barton die is larger so it will be a little more expensive but not as much as people perceive.

    Look at what you are paying for processors. Do you think it costs AMD more to make 2GHz Athlon XPs compared to 1.7GHz Athlon XPs? No... Cause it's really the same chip! The value of microprocessor is always about perception, never about the actual cost of the chip.

    The same reason is why it makes more sense for AMD to make one single type of die (the Barton die) and use them to produce TWO different kinds of processors - the Barton and the Thorton. Because they are essentially the same processor, this gives AMD a lot of flexibility.

    They don't have to worry so much about reserving capacity at their fabs. They can just churn out all the Bartons they want! And then they can package the Barton dies as Barton processors or Thorton processors according to the market forces.

    Again, the cost of making a processor is NOT as expensive as you might expect. The bulk of the cost is in building and running the fabs. In short, the first chip costs millions to make. The rest are essentially free.

    Now, regarding cache failures... Let's not forget the cache is ON-DIE. It's not a separate cache chip or die that is integrated within the processor package. Cache takes up a lot of space. That's why the Barton die is bigger than the Thoroughbred's die.

    When a die is bigger, the yield naturally drops even though the defect density for the fab remains constant. The yield drops because of the larger die size. The larger the die, the more likely it is for contaminants to damage it. And due to its size, the Barton's large on-die cache is more susceptible to getting damaged by such contaminants.

    As a new core with a larger die, the Barton will naturally have a lower yield than the Thoroughbred. Many of these will be due to damage to the L2 cache. So, what would be the logical thing for AMD to do?

    Throw away the chips?

    Nah... They are smarter than that. All they need to do is disable half the L2 cache (naturally the defective half!) and they will have a bunch of working processors! Of course, this doesn't mean they can get all their defective chips running. But it does allow them to recover a large portion of their "defective" chips.

    And don't forget... Selling microprocessors is always about selling perception. If the market requires more Thortons, AMD is not going to say, "Sorry, we don't have any more defective Bartons to turn into Thortons." They will just disable half the cache of good dies to make them into Thortons.

    If you think that's a waste of money, well, that's because you perceive the cost of the processor to be extraordinarily high just because it's a working Barton core. Well, no. It's all about marketing and perception.

    If AMD gets to sell you one of their new cores as a Barton (at a higher cost), it would make them very happy. But they are just as happy to sell you a Thorton using the same core (or a defective one) at a lower profit to them. At the end of the day, profit is profit.

    Hope that helps you some! :)
     
  9. 2fast4u

    2fast4u Newbie

    :wall: The bartron is a tbred b with a larger die so they could fit double the cache, so why would they take half the cache back off and call it something else? Sounds like a stupid rummor to me!
     
  10. Adrian Wong

    Adrian Wong Da Boss Staff Member

    2fast4u,

    To make the Thorton, they are NOT taking away half the cache. They can't do that. They are just disabling half of it. The other half of the L2 cache is still there but it's just not available.

    Try running a search in Google for Thorton and you can verify the facts for yourself. Also, check out some of the new motherboard BIOS updates. You will note that they come with support for the AMD Thorton core.

    The fact is... AMD is going to announce the AMD Athlon FX soon. I asked my source again yesterday and he confirmed that it is the Athlon FX and NOT a typo-ed Athlon XP.

    As for the reasons why AMD would do such a thing... read my post above. :)
     
  11. Brian

    Brian Newbie

    the manufacturing process isn't perfect. so if you get defects in the cache, AMD just needs to disable that half of cache and then sell it. that's what Intel's doing with its Celerons
     
  12. goldfries

    goldfries www.goldfries.com

    the Barton is not just a T-bred B with larger die AFAIK. in fact the Barton is a new core, same architecture and with 2x L2 Cache. the Thornton will be based on the new core, but like T-bred B will have the usual 256kb cache.
     
  13. Adrian Wong

    Adrian Wong Da Boss Staff Member

    Looks like I missed this one! :D

    Well, it would be impossible to mod the processor to enable the extra cache. If it can be done, people would have modded their Celerons into Pentium IIIs!

    Even if you somehow managed to enable the extra cache, the processor would be unusable because the disabled cache is very likely to be defective! So, it's really a counter-productive idea.
     
  14. Chai

    Chai Administrator Staff Member

    It will be very similar to ATi's R300 core, for R9500 to R9700 Pro. R9500 has defective pipelines. Same thing applies here. Even if you mange to enable it, it may not work correctly.
     
  15. ZuePhok

    ZuePhok Just Started

    so you can basically say that barton is a 512 L2 cache version of Thoroughbred, of course with a larger die because of the extra 256 L2 cache. both cpu are being manufactured using 0.13micron process tech, so there is no way to "insert" an extra 256k of L2 cache into barton and make it has the same die as Thoroughbred has, so a larger core was "born".
    Thorton is a barton with only 256k L2-cache. so you can basically say that thorton is a Thoroughbred too :) except that thorton has the die size of a barton, which I think is a good thing for us as there will be a larger surface to be cooled by the heatsink/waterblock.

    Thorton does exist.
    Abit released some BIOSes for its k7 line mobo which added support for Thorton cpu few months back.
     
  16. peaz

    peaz ARP Webmaster Staff Member

    Seriously... this simply sounds like what Intel did for their Celerons... which is logical.

    Seems like you guys think AMD purposely disable the l2 cache to create a Thorton??? LOL nah. If the yeild was 100% perfect, there would never be a Thorton.

    Okok.. just early morning here.. a bit blur...
     
  17. Brian

    Brian Newbie

    agreed, but you would also have to remember that the cache is one of the biggest components of the cpu's die
     
  18. Gamer1

    Gamer1 Newbie

    FX = Effect

    I think it's great that amd plans to diversify, and salvage rejected chips. OEMs and brand names like HP and gateway would just eat it up.

    Celeron = Sell and Run :D

    and i hear that the thortons would have a 266 bus... that's just good news for people with old mobos, and if the performance will be the same as the thoroghbred, then amd has itself a winner...
     
  19. siddiq

    siddiq Newbie

    :lol: everyone is using XXXXXXX. fx , xp , mx. i think FX stands for fix performance.
     
  20. phatboydu

    phatboydu Newbie

    names

    man its ridiculous when one company starts using a name everyone follows suit. i wonder when we'll call our next feature the HyperThreading FX+!!! intel's marketing cracks me up
     

Share This Page