AMD Pushes Back Fusion Processor Release
- Thread starter WC Annihilus
- Start date
Rastalovich
New member
If we pasted Intel`s version of the same thing, I tend to think that where it says DDR2 it`d say DDR3 and in the place of DDR3 it may sport a new DDR4 in 2011.. who knows. It`s not like DDR4 is new today, but DDR3 for the next 2 years atleast ? Perhaps they can only project over what`s imaginarily available atm. Intel could quite trump them with the X68/X78 by then that could handle such modules.
Even then, I would hope atleast that this crazy triple channel memory will be out the window and we`ll be on a more sensible quad channel.
U could argue that their core/cache usage would vary too, 2 to 4, 4 to 8 or 12, when u looked at Intel - but then do ofc handle on different levels.
Good thing is they kicked the tri-core into touch, computers work on the basis of binagraphical numbers, not stupid supplementary figures. I`m sure that was going to be an effort to make an advantage of triple channel memory in some bizarre way.
I know the architectures are different, which is why u can`t compare the 2 camps clock for clock, and in the same breath the way they handle cores and memory access differ, but times will move on by 2011 surely.
Even then, I would hope atleast that this crazy triple channel memory will be out the window and we`ll be on a more sensible quad channel.
U could argue that their core/cache usage would vary too, 2 to 4, 4 to 8 or 12, when u looked at Intel - but then do ofc handle on different levels.
Good thing is they kicked the tri-core into touch, computers work on the basis of binagraphical numbers, not stupid supplementary figures. I`m sure that was going to be an effort to make an advantage of triple channel memory in some bizarre way.
I know the architectures are different, which is why u can`t compare the 2 camps clock for clock, and in the same breath the way they handle cores and memory access differ, but times will move on by 2011 surely.
Similar threads
