CPU Question

[Elvtin]

AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Winchester Integrated into Chip FSB Socket 939 Processor Model ADA3200BIBOX - Retail
Hyper-Transport Support: Yes
L1 Cache: 64KB+64KB
Manufacturer Warranty: 3-year warranty
Multimedia Instruction: MMX, SSE, SSE2, 3DNOW! Professional
Operating Frequency: 2.0GHz
Process: 90 nm
Series: Athlon 64
Voltage: 1.5V

AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Newcastle 800MHz FSB Socket 754 Processor Model ADA3200AXBOX - Retail
Hyper-Transport Support: Yes
L1 Cache: 64KB+64KB
Multimedia Instruction: MMX, SSE, SSE2, 3DNOW! Professional
Operating Frequency: 2.2GHz
Process: 0.13 µm
Series: Athlon 64
Voltage: 1.5V



My question is... Anyone know what the Process means?

[Murrie]

it should look something like this for comparison purposes:

Process: 90 nm

and

Process: 130 nm

Its the size of the 'die' or copper process on the chip, where in general smaller is better -

here ya go:
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2002feb/bch20020207010181.htm
Details on Texas Instruments' 90 nanometer (.09 micron) process leaked out earlier this week and they have now officially unveiled it. TI refers to the 90 nm process as an evolutionary change from their 130 nm process. This may be why the industry seems to be moving to it so quickly. 90 nm production will begin in Q3 2003. You can fit 200-400 million transistors on processor dies created at 90 nanometers. For comparison's sake, at 130 nm the P4 Northwood has 55 million transistors, and the Athlon XP has 37.5 million at 180 nm. Since I doubt AMD and Intel will develop huge amounts of logic to fill up those extra transistors, expect to see lots and lots of L2 cache on the chips. Intel upped the L2 cache on their P4 from 256 KB to 512 KB when moving from 180 to 130 nm. I expect AMD to do the same, and for both companies to up it to a full megabyte of L2 cache at 90/100 nanometer production. Intel's first fab to use the 90 nm process will be in Ireland in 2003. Thanks to Sander O. for the links.

The 90nm is the newer better technology, definately go for the 90nm unless theres a big price difference - both chips should perform about the same - but I would (and did) go with the Winchester if your considering buying one or the other

[spyder913]

yup murrie's right.

the rating is how big of a structure they can make on the silicon. The smaller, the better because they can fit more stuff in a area. The tradeoff is that smaller pathways can lead to more heat and other not so nice side effects.

[Elvtin]

Sweet!!!
I couldn't find an answer for it.. so THANKS! :D

[Rooster]

You should be more concerned with chipset/socket than process size.

[Elvtin]

Well I would be.. But I have never found any info on the AMD chipsets.. lol

What's the lowdown on socket? I thought that was only like pin count on the CPU or something like that..
Teach me oh wise ones. pweese! :)

[Rooster]

Features of the boards typically.

I'd have to dig up specifics, but the 939 is a newer, faster chipset than the 754's.

[Elvtin]

Oooohh :ooer: