AMD going to "Strike Back"?

With Intel Releasing it's new Core 2 Duo processor, does AMD have a plan to come back with a better processor to try and "keep up" with Intel?

 

Not that I know off, one thing for sure though, im going back to AMD after my Dual Core T2400 laptop goes bad.

 

For the notebook side, there hasn't been any news yet but for the desktop side, AMD is supposed to release their K8L architecture processor, the successor to the Athlon 64, sometime next summer as the first native quad core.

 

Yes there has and it's codenamed bulldozer. H1 2007 so it'll be up against the updated Merom in Intel's Santa Rosa platform.

 

quad core? Awesome.. DId they skip tri core?

 

Yeah, maybe they will skip pantegal core and hex core also.

My understanding is Quad core mostly for servers.

 

Im sticking with AMD unless I go mac where I will have no choice. I like macs but theres a compatibility issue with all my software and network.

 

Intel is miles ahead of AMD in terms of the mobile processor market. Not only does their Core Duo model embarrass the X2, but Intel is releasing the Core 2 Duo, hopefully in LV and ULV variations. At this point, AMD will need a mobile quad-core chip to get back in the game.

 

This is the buisness game in the mobile chip market. AMD fired first with there Athlon processors and Turion systems and Intel wasnt doing so well with the P4's and those processors as they were not meant for that. Now Intel has the advantage as they learned from there mistakes and developed now CoreDuo. AMD will most likely fire back in a strong fashion hopefully(Turion X2 was not it).

 

I have no idea why, but the amount of cores are being doubled as technology improves so that the number of cores will always be 2 to the x power. An odd number of cores is possible because the Cell processor in PS3 has 9 cores (1 central + 7 supporting cores + 1 disabled). I'm not 100 percent certain about this so somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Fairly simple. It's a lot easier to divide a square (or rectangle) into a power of two number of subsquares.

And it's a lot easier to design a roughly square core than other shapes (for one thing, you know that you never have to send a signal very far. A long thin core would mean lots of delay when sending a signal from one end to another)

Also with the Cell, note that it has 8 of the supporting cores. Again, a power of two. The 1 central core is bigger and more complex, and so wouldn't fit in anyway.

And yeah, AMD has lots of responses coming up. As said, they have this "Bulldozer" thing, they're about to transition to 65nm, and they already have one advantage in the on-die memory controller, since that means lower power consumption on the motherboard. But it seems it'll be at least half a year or so before they've got anything that can really compete again.