Server and Workstation Processors

Not much has changed in the server and workstation segment other than the actual launch and availability of the dual core Opterons. Here's what we have looking at the present and near future.

AMD Server/Workstation Roadmap
Processor Core Name Clock Speed Socket Launch Date
Opteron 875 Egypt 2.2 GHz 1MB Socket 940 Now
Opteron 870 Egypt 2.0 GHz 1MB Socket 940 Now
Opteron 865 Egypt 1.8 GHz 1MB Socket 940 Now
Opteron 865 HE Egypt 1.8 GHz 1MB Socket 940 Now
Opteron 860 HE Egypt 1.6 GHz 1MB Socket 940 Now
Opteron 854 Athens 2.8 GHz 1MB Socket 940 Q3'05
Opteron 275 Italy 2.2 GHz 1MB Socket 940 Now
Opteron 270 Italy 2.0 GHz 1MB Socket 940 Now
Opteron 265 Italy 1.8 GHz 1MB Socket 940 Now
Opteron 265 HE Italy 1.8 GHz 1MB Socket 940 Now
Opteron 260 HE Italy 1.6 GHz 1MB Socket 940 Now
Opteron 254 Troy 2.8 GHz 1MB Socket 940 Q3'05
Opteron 175 Denmark 2.2 GHz 1MB Socket 939 Now
Opteron 170 Denmark 2.0 GHz 1MB Socket 939 Now
Opteron 165 Denmark 1.8 GHz 1MB Socket 939 Now
Opteron 154 San Diego 2.8 GHz 1MB Socket 939 Q3'05
Opteron x52 Venus/Troy/Athens 2.6 GHz 1MB Socket 940 Now

We've separated the 8xx, 2xx, and 1xx Opteron models into their individual parts for a reason. While older Opterons all targeted socket 940, AMD is apparently moving the 1xx models towards socket 939. The most likely reason is for price/performance advantages of the platform, or perhaps that yields of the newer parts have reached the point where everything works in two socket or higher configurations. 152 is the last single socket Opteron appearing on the roadmap, though determined single socket 940 holdouts can always drop in the more expensive 2xx parts if they want.

Looking at the future, the only new Opterons coming out will be the single core x54 models. As we just mentioned, 154 will actually be a socket 939 part (along with the now available 165, 170, and 175). The switch to socket 939 also means that the 154 will use the San Diego core rather than the Venus core that previous 1xx 90nm parts have been based off. 254 and 854 will also exist, and we must admit we're a little surprised - several of us were surprised to see the x52 models. Almost any application that can take advantage of SMP will perform better on two 265 cores than on two 254 cores, but AMD apparently has received enough requests for another single core Opteron model that the x54 parts are being made. The price of the 254/854 parts is identical to that of the 265/865 parts, however, so the parts are essentially being rated as equivalent. Users that have applications that depend more on pure clock speed rather than multiple threads are the likely target of the x54 parts. The socket 939 154 part is priced the same as the FX-57, and actually costs more than the 254, so single socket 940 users shouldn't fret too much. The 939 152 is also priced the same as the FX-55, while the 940 152 is substantially cheaper.

Besides the various Opteron models most of you have probably seen before, we also included the HE models. HE stands for "High Efficiency" and the efficiency we're talking about is performance per Watt. Where the standard Opterons have a TDP of 95W, the HE models are only 55W. You basically give up two bins of performance for the lower TDP, however, so the 865 HE costs as much as the 875 and the 850 HE costs as much as the 865. They also max out at two levels below the fastest models, which isn't too surprising.

Looking to the future of Opterons, the current roadmap doesn't contain any information about what's planned. DDR2 is in the works for all the other markets, so it would make sense for Opteron to eventually move that way as well. However, there have been difficulties in the past with getting ECC and registered memory to work with DDR2, so perhaps Opterons will move to FB-DIMMs (Fully Buffered DIMMS) instead. We do know that AMD has something in the works called socket F, a 1207 pin socket for future Opterons, but we don't know what type of RAM is used. That transition is likely more than a year off, but we'll let you know as soon as we get any clearer picture of what AMD has planned.

Final Thoughts

Echoing what we said in our last AMD roadmap, there aren't a whole lot of speed increases showing up on the future roadmaps. FX-59 will add another 200 MHz to the fastest AMD processor in terms of clock speed, and we can guess that the X2 5000+ will do the same. Again there is another low clock X2 coming up that we can't talk about just now, but fortunately you won't have to wait too long for details on that processor to emerge. Rather than focusing on increasing raw clock speed, AMD and Intel have both shifted to improving the features of their various chips. Dual core was the first step in that direction, and quad core (or maybe tri core) is a likely evolution at some point. 65nm processors are also on the horizon, and likely AMD will begin releasing the first such processors just beyond the range of the present roadmap - i.e. in late 2006 or early 2007. The process shrink should bring improved clock speeds as well as more cores per die. The increasing numbers of mobile parts are another indication of the changing goals. We may not be able to get much faster without spending significant effort, but we can try to focus on making the current designs more portable at the very least. We'll take a look at the Intel roadmap in the near future, but the trends are similar to what we see with AMD.

Mobile and Transportable Processors
Comments Locked

51 Comments

View All Comments

  • Resh - Friday, July 22, 2005 - link

    Not another socket! Geez!
  • ViRGE - Friday, July 22, 2005 - link

    Jarred, on the front page, you have two statements that disagree with themselves:

    ---

    However, although the processors require a bump in the current, the power remains the same

    Unfortunately, expect massive increases in TDP. From the roadmap we expect the FX M2 processors to have a max TDP of 125W...

    ----
    If the "power"(which I interpret as wattage requirement) remains the same, then why is the TDP rising? Do you mean the voltage is staying the same(which with the higher amperage would cause the power drain in wattage to rise)? We have always assumed that TDP was roughly the same as the amount of power the chip draws.

    Oh, and AMD needs to come up with less names; my head's doing about 5K RPMs right now with all of this stuff. =P
  • Doormat - Thursday, July 21, 2005 - link

    Nothing about AMD integrating PCI-Express into their CPU? There was an article at TheInq about that...
  • ElJefe - Thursday, July 21, 2005 - link

    Er, great!!??

    DDR2 when its been shown that fast timings and ddr1 at 250mhz vs 200 shows less than 3% difference! yeah! thats what we need???

    I remember an anandtech article about a year ago that showed how less bandwidth in trade for severely low timings can actually boost some area's for performance.

    m2 = take your money like a mofo'in gangsta
    and more heat as a bonus!

    im going to be happy when i get my 4400 x2 i think. bah. cant wait again for something that sounds, er worse? maybe it would be better with that virtual crap. whatever that is.
    maybe it's like 3d now! when intel was doing great floating point calcs and amd was doing that on my k6-III getting no frames :(
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, July 21, 2005 - link

    6 - You might not even need the BIOS flash. I have no idea, though.

    5 - I'm a skeptic, I admit. AMD's official launch of 90nm SOI got pushed back quite a bit, IIRC. We're only *just now* hitting the point where AMD is 100% 90nm SOI. The ramp to a new process is almost always slow at first while the kinks get ironed out, and then there's a massive shift at the end. So with that mid-2006 to mid-2007 plot from Hector, I'd be inclined to say 75% of the shift will occur in 2Q'07. (/skeptic)

    The main point is that there is no talk in this roadmap of what lies ahead. Could that change in the next month or two? Of course. Sometimes big changes are kept off the roadmaps until 4-6 months prior to the launch, just to keep OEMs and everyone else focused on the current products rather than getting ahead of themselves. Intel isn't talking much about Merom and Conroe either, for example.
  • NightCrawler - Thursday, July 21, 2005 - link

    Athlon 64 4000+ Newark 2.6 GHz 1MB Socket 754 Q3'05

    Hmmm...I wonder if a bios flash on older 754 boards will allow the use of the newark cpu.
  • dougSF30 - Thursday, July 21, 2005 - link

    A few things:

    --- "Massive TDP increases" really amount to 20% for the FX, 17% for single core A64s and 0% for DC parts. Significant, okay. Massive? No.

    --- Turion & OEMs. 60 design wins and climbing.

    --- Pentium M TDP 22W : Well, actually the higher FSB PMs have a 27W TDP. And that doesn't include a memory controller. However, DDR2 is an advantage over DDR. OTOH, no 64b, which per Intel's own admission would bump up the power requirements for them significantly.

    --- AMD 65nm timing. Per AMD, production 65nm shipments in H106 (my guess is late Q2). Per Hector in June Technical Analyst Day Q&A, 65nm ramp is from mid-2006 to mid-2007 (100% 65nm). So I think your "late 2006, early 2007" estimate is too far in the future. Should be parts launching in early Q306, having been shipped in late Q206.

    --- Socket M2. You fixed the 1207 vs. 940 pin issue.

  • JarredWalton - Thursday, July 21, 2005 - link

    3 - Heh, that's a topic for another day. :) But yeah, there are several new chipsets being worked on by all the major parties for the AMD DDR2 transition.
  • SignalPST - Thursday, July 21, 2005 - link

    Is nForce5 arround the corner for these new socket changes?
  • Plifzig - Thursday, July 21, 2005 - link

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now