You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, <a href="/profile.php?mode=register">join our community today</a>!
Some number play: 100k 300mm wafers per Q in Fab 1 (GF slide), ~90% useable area (~64,000mm^2), 228mm^2 die size (Llano) ->280 die per wafer: 5% of all wafers for a 32nm ramp of Llano and some bad yields of 40%: 560k/Q 10% wafers for Llano, 50% yields: 1.4 mio/Q 20% wafers for Llano, 75% yields: 4.2 mio/Q
Which numbers would you pick?
I am pretty sure the figures were taken by you, as we called it in Russia, from "ceiling hand-book"("s potolkar") i.e. in vary free and relaxed way. Is not it?
You mix simple math with guessing The numbers in the first line are neither estimated nor guessed. Just the three scenarios below are and since we both don't know the exact numbers we can just judge by our gut feeling, which numbers seem more likely. Probability calculations, ne s potolkar
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:19 am Posts: 499 Location: Moscow, Russia
@Dresdenboy.
I spoke about yields first of all. Also we really don't know how many wafers dedicated to 32nm GloFo can (or wants) burn per each day.
BTW, GloFo formally has plenty well-matured 45nm resources. Have you seen Phenom-II-X4-980?
Quote:
softpedia: A little more than a month ago, on May 3 to be more precise, AMD unveiled its fastest Phenom II processors to date, the X4 980, but a month after its official release the CPU still isn't available for purchase from any on-line or brick and mortar retailer.
How can you rationally explain it? Did AMD know on the day of P.980 announcement that she won't can deliver it?
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:19 am Posts: 499 Location: Moscow, Russia
Somebody else has reached the same conclusion that i had done.
Quote:
hexus: Motherboard manufacturers have already starting wheeling out desktop Llano motherboards, showing us the brand-new FM1 socket. Word on the street is that these desktop chips, to be productised as AMD A4, A6, and A8, won't be available, in good quantity, until the middle of July - and even that availability prognostication seems bullish.
BTW, look at Llano image, the year of production is 2010! Why couldn't AMD had launched Llano much earlier, at least desktop parts?
I spoke about yields first of all. Also we really don't know how many wafers dedicated to 32nm GloFo can (or wants) burn per each day.
BTW, GloFo formally has plenty well-matured 45nm resources. Have you seen Phenom-II-X4-980?
Quote:
softpedia: A little more than a month ago, on May 3 to be more precise, AMD unveiled its fastest Phenom II processors to date, the X4 980, but a month after its official release the CPU still isn't available for purchase from any on-line or brick and mortar retailer.
How can you rationally explain it? Did AMD know on the day of P.980 announcement that she won't can deliver it?
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 2:04 pm Posts: 126 Location: Tampere, Finland
Llano is slight disappointment for me, because the cpu clocks are quite low and that makes cpu performance even worse than expected.. trying to think some reasons for that:
They got the idle power consumption to very good level with power gating, BUT the active power consumption of the cpu cores is still high because of the K7 legacy; old tomasulo-style OOE with almost symmetric execution units wasting lots of power, and it seems that their new 32nm manufacturing tech had only very slight slight improvement on power usage.
This means that they could not clock those cores to very high speeds without reaching the TDP wall, AND even when some cores are power gated off, they cannot clock the remaining cores very high because they would immediately start taking much more juice.
Using lower voltage would move TDP wall further, but then the critical paths inside the cores would become limiting for the clock speeds, limiting the maximum turbo mode speed. The mobile model however seems to use lower voltage than the desktop version.
I'm afraid the reason might be simpler: from what I've seen, Llano doesn't really overclock beyond 3.5~3.6 GHz, even with additional voltage.
Under such circumstances, Turbo can't be much help. Hopefully this situation will improve quickly as GloFo's 32nm matures and, perhaps, with further improvements coming from a base respin.
I agree too. It makes perfect sense since it seems AMD had mobile segment in mind when they designed Llano.Low idle power in mobile sector and good GPU perf. looks to be the prime goal for Llano.They are hitting the TDP ceiling fast with 3850 model when both CPU and GPU are under full load .
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
The numbers in the first line are neither estimated nor guessed. Just the three scenarios below are and since we both don't know the exact numbers we can just judge by our gut feeling, which numbers seem more likely. Probability calculations, ne s potolkar 
