AMD's Shanghai proffers 12 cores, HyperTransport 3.0

If your interest in processor speeds doesn't extend much beyond "is it fast?" then these juicy tidbits likely aren't for you. That said, AMD is certainly getting excited about its upcoming Barcelona successor: the 45nm Shanghai. The main points of interest out of the gate are HyperTransport 3.0, which was nixed late in the game on Barcelona, and six cores, which are meant to pit the chip up against Intel's upcoming six-core Dunnington chip. Where things get really exciting is a few months after Shanghai's late 2008 debut, when AMD plans do release a twin-die version, with 12 cores of happiness connected by HyperTransport 3.0. What does all that mean? Beats us, but we hope it's fast.

[Evan @ Apr 18th 2008 5:14PM]

=fast

[Thi mam(kris120890) @ Apr 18th 2008 5:28PM]

does that mean there will be two processers with 6 cores each

[Moo2 @ Apr 19th 2008 1:25AM]

yeah. the two processors will be stuck together making 1 processor

[Justin B @ Apr 18th 2008 5:16PM]

Hah! Take that you Intel bashing AMDers. AMD is mimicking Intel when they made their Core 2 Quads!

[Justin B @ Apr 18th 2008 5:16PM]

Hah! Take that you Intel bashing AMDers. AMD is mimicking Intel when they made their Core 2 Quads!

[phanbouy @ Apr 18th 2008 5:19PM]

more fanboyism and double posts please

[dmdallas @ Apr 18th 2008 5:46PM]

ok

[dmdallas @ Apr 18th 2008 5:46PM]

ok

[carbonrain @ Apr 18th 2008 5:17PM]

i wonder how crysis will run on this chip . .

[Lotzosushi. @ Apr 18th 2008 5:19PM]

It won't just run, it'll sprint! :D

[Justin B @ Apr 18th 2008 5:30PM]

Maximum Speed

[The Purveyor of Justice @ Apr 18th 2008 5:58PM]

Well, not necessarily any faster, since Crysis doesn't utilize anything beyond two cores.

[Darkest Daze @ Apr 19th 2008 3:19PM]

My vote is still on "Ludicrous Speed".

[Nagastolemybike @ Apr 18th 2008 5:20PM]

This should really be on ebay...
; )

[Ryan @ Apr 18th 2008 5:22PM]

Wasn't it AMD that dogged on Intel for using twin dies to acheive Quad Cores? Hmm.

[Chad @ Apr 18th 2008 5:33PM]

Yes, but Intel doesn't have a HyperTransport 3 to allow the cores to text each other faster than a gaggle of tweenies!

[0megapart!cle @ Apr 18th 2008 7:58PM]

No, they have QPI, which is rumored to be faster and more efficient than HyperTransport 3.0

[Benhur @ Apr 18th 2008 5:25PM]

12 cores?
Could that be just a little bit overkill? I mean, I caught my second core napping this afternoon.

[Irwin @ Apr 18th 2008 6:13PM]

yea man, is it worth it. i'm gonna be building a PC over the summer and was considering getting the Q9775, but these new ones from AMD and Intel sound leaps n bounds over the Q9770 and coming right around the corner.

oh man, so hard to decide.

[r60506j @ Apr 18th 2008 8:36PM]

the best today is not the best tomorrow.
if you need it just buy it.

[phanbouy @ Apr 18th 2008 5:31PM]

hmm looks like Ryan shut down the comments on the auction. how weird. it's funny how everyone was so quick to get their egos all involved. people who made rational arguments for why an online auction site (i.e. ebay) would be better suited were told by frothing cheerleaders to "STFU!!!111". ah well.

[UKNigel @ Apr 18th 2008 6:21PM]

They were auctioning this 12 core processor? [/sarcasm I know where you meant to post]

[Peter @ Apr 18th 2008 5:33PM]

To bad that HyperTransport 3.0 is already on amds current quad core....

[Thi mam(kris120890) @ Apr 18th 2008 5:42PM]

But its not used.
Hypertransport 3.0 was somehow included and fused down.

[Timmy @ Apr 18th 2008 5:33PM]

Each core will be 256k of processing power!

[KangMin @ Apr 18th 2008 5:41PM]

I don't know why, but I prefer AMD these days...
maybe it's the underdog thing....

[Shizno @ Apr 18th 2008 5:59PM]

I agree with you...
In my mind, you vote with your dollars, and so i vote for AMD, i know intel has better performance, the Q6600 is $40 more and you get about 10 frames per second more than the Phenom 9550... but either way we are talking maybe 30 frames on the Phenom and 40 on the Q6600.. either one is not a slouch by any means, and frames are very playable..... so i rather use my $40 difference and put it towars a motherboard
but thats just me.

[Matt @ Apr 19th 2008 4:56AM]

I'd rather support AMD just cause I know competition is good, about a 8 months - 1 year ago i probably wouldn't have said that based on their offerings.. they were pretty crappy. By now differences seem to be very minimal, so I think I'll support AMD just because competition = prices stay low like this and performance/innovation prospers. Everyone should really consider the long term view of buying from one or the other cause if AMD goes under, next time you want to upgrade I'll bet the price per performance goes up.

[Peter @ Apr 18th 2008 5:49PM]

HyperTransport 3.0 is being used completely in am2+. HyperTransport 3.0 is just a faster speed up from 1000mhz to 2600mhz.

[Toi @ Apr 25th 2008 1:30PM]

You should read the HT 3.0 spec, *sigh. Its not "just a faster speed up from 1000mhz to 2600mhz". There is more to HT3.0 than a speed increase - and the new features will be quite useful for multi-socketed servers. I guess if it doesn't apply to the gammer desktop, it doesn't exist?

[The2ndclory @ Apr 18th 2008 5:56PM]

Lets hope the included their couple month margin of error when they said late 2008.

[Ian @ Apr 18th 2008 6:13PM]

Rumor has it that Intel has plans to respond with an Ultra Low Power version of 12 Atom cores....... All equivalent to the power drain of One Pentium D..... In Press reports Intel's PR machine says these type of dozen core CPU's (there's a rumor of a baker's dozen as a top of the range machine) are perfect for nerds with multiple personality disorders who all need computing power at the same time. While being ecologically friendly to the environment in standby mode. In other words ideal for military war games computers.

[Richard Lai @ Apr 18th 2008 7:56PM]

I've never noticed how weird it is to have a CPU named after a city (Barcelona) until AMD named its successor after a city from my country - Shanghai.

I'd love to have a Bangkok in my laptop.

[WiiFTW @ Apr 19th 2008 10:36AM]

How about a Fucking in your laptop?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fucking%2C_Austria

How about Intercourse in your laptop?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercourse_pennsylvania

Proud to be a resident of Pennsylvania.

It could only get better...

[conor @ Apr 18th 2008 8:30PM]

i want ill pack my pc with 2 12 cores 24 cores total...

[BigD145 @ Apr 18th 2008 9:02PM]

This is worthless until the software catches up.

[LondonConsultant @ Apr 18th 2008 10:25PM]

Each key could be assigned a dedicated core, allowing more responsive keyboards...

[Catsceo @ Apr 18th 2008 9:07PM]

This will be great for folding@home :D

[Laughing Man @ Apr 18th 2008 9:55PM]

Big D is right. AMD and Intel are at each others throats and software is still running on 2 cores and under. So congrads on designing a chip that will slightly improve stuff we actually do and make our DVD's burn faster.

SOFTWARE PEOPLE LETS CATCH UP TO FRONT OF THE PACK HERE!

[Johnny Venom @ Apr 18th 2008 10:30PM]

This is all assuming that AMD is around by that time. Look, I'm all for competition and would like to see them succeed. But they ain't doing well and what if someone buys them out?

[intel352 @ Apr 18th 2008 10:32PM]

Hope you guys are more accurate on your reporting, than you are on your spelling...

>>>"sucessor"

[digitallysick @ Apr 18th 2008 11:26PM]

MOAR CORES! OM NOM NOM NOM

[Truth_Bringer @ Apr 19th 2008 2:51AM]

I'm amazed that engadget even bothers to parrot anything out of AMD's P.R. mouth anymore. At this point, why would anyone give a $hit what the latest AMD paper-announcement about a paper launch is? They should change their name to AVD: "American VAPOR Devices" ..

One day someone will write a book and detail what the hell happened in the processor wars: why AMD hit a stride for a few years and gained favor with enthusiasts and gamers for low cost/high perofrming CPU's, only to stumble beginning in the mid 2000's when Intel debuted multi-core processors followed by AMD never recovering.

The ONE seeming thing AMD finally learned was not to bother trying to guesstimate release timeframes for their supposed "upcoming products" anymore, since everyone knows where that's gotten them in the last few years (products that were late and over budget (and therefore noncompetetive with Intel), or simply cancelled altogether).

From the chief executes that are fleeing the AMD ship, to the stock price that's in the toilet, to the paper launches of late, I wouldn't dream of being a stock holder.

If I was head of AMD I would tell me public relations department (whoever hasn't quit yet) to STFU and then I'd tell R&D to develop a killer product in secrecy, not announcing the g-damn release until the DAY its actually available to distribution channels and OEM's.

Ofcourse they won't do that, so be my guest, AMD, continue to bleed out while we all watch and remember the golden years.

-An old AMD fan that had no choice but go Intel

[Cobra32 @ Apr 20th 2008 4:28AM]

Want to talk about paper launches Intels 45mm Chips now thats a paper Lanch. They launched in November and still no E8500's, Q9550's retail box chips. Reason we need AMD to succeed is because of the prices intel is charging. Who would have thought the top cpu would top $1500 and just a few months back it was $ 900+. Thats more than a 50% increase in price, thank you Intel. It amazes me that to play Crysis you have to spend over $1500 on a chip and atleast $1200 on Video cards and still cannot play it with all the eye candy on, what a reap off by both intel and nvidia. Amd better succeed so that things on the price front do not get out of hand. $4000 to play crysis is just too much and if it gets any worst computer hardware folks maybe pricing themselves out of the gaming market.

[Schfelzerberg @ Apr 19th 2008 3:17AM]

I'd rather take a stable 10 Ghz Core 2 Duo, Phenom or Athlon X2 than this 12 core non-sense. Until programmers actually start utilizing more than 2 or 4 cores at a time, this will be a commercial flop for the time being. Even with 12 cores, increase real-world performance using available applications will be negligible.

[ltemplin @ Apr 19th 2008 7:19PM]

A commercial flop you say ? Just look at the consumer digital photography market... you really think Joe needs 10 megapixels to shoot his holiday pictures ? # of cores is the new Mhz - I'm quite certain it will sell chips, whatever their actual meaning/usability is.

[tekdroid @ Apr 20th 2008 2:20AM]

With all due respect to Joe, whether he knows it or not he can print bigger-than-a4/letter-sized enlargements without obvious jaggies and loss of detail that he got with his 4MP when trying to do this without his new 10MP+ cam. Assuming he has bought a DSLR or equivalent with a half-decent sized CCD, which Joe is doing in droves these days. Among other benefits.

I'd say the 12 core deal ranks far lower in usefulness, but as we all know these things will drift down to mainstream at a sane pricepoint and will even have the much-desired usefulness at one point, even if it is just to start the latest Windows :p

There will be nobody forcing you into this, so it seems sane to just keep voting with your dollars.

(written on a *gasp* single core machine)

[考生 @ Apr 19th 2008 3:41AM]

Why not make ATI better？

[Truth_Bringer @ Apr 19th 2008 4:22AM]

That's like asking "why don't cars drive 500 miles per gallon?"

You CAN'T make ATI better, no matter how hard you try. They tapped out a long time ago. Nvidia yawns whenever ATI announces a new product, because it means they send an email to their P.R. department: "release the hounds" and what follows is the prompt release of a product that they've long developed but have been holding back for 12-18 months for lack of competition.

[smk @ Apr 19th 2008 5:01AM]

Because it isn't a Canadian company any more :P ATI should have never let AMD buy them out (they were doing good for a while... they had one card that actually beat NVidia in performance... and that was before the buyout).