Advanced Micro Devices has announced that it had begun shipments of AMD Turion 64 X2 processors made using new process technology to customers. While the world’s second largest x86 microprocessor maker did not release many details about the new chips, it indicated that 65nm process technology allowed the firm to push up chips’ clock-speed, which increases performance.
AMD indicated that the new microprocessors produced using 65nm process technology and shipping today are AMD Turion 64 X2 dual-core models TL-56, TL-58, TL-60 and TL-62. According to the company, AMD Turion 64 X2 model TL-66 will begin shipping in late May. The AMD dual-core mobile processor family ranges from $154-$354 in 1000 unit quantities.
Previously AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-series products featured thermal design power of 31W or 33W, however, so far AMD has not released any details concerning central processing units made using 65nm fabrication process. Earlier it was rumoured that specifications of AMD’s new 65nm-based Turion 64 X2 processors will be as follows:
- AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-56: 1.80GHz clock-speed, 1MB L2 cache (512KB per core);
- AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-58: 1.90GHz clock-speed, 1MB L2 cache (512KB per core);
- AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-60: 2.00GHz clock-speed, 1MB L2 cache (512KB per core);
- AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-64: 2.20GHz clock-speed, 1MB L2 cache (512KB per core);
- AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-66: 2.30GHz clock-speed, 1MB L2 cache (512KB per core).
All the new AMD Turion 64 X2 microprocessors are made for socket S1 platforms and feature dual-channel DDR2 memory support.
Besides announcing its first mobile processors made using 65nm process technology, AMD once again praised its “open-platform” strategy and “Better by Design” program, which allows original equipment manufacturers to choose whatever components they are interested in among certified by AMD.
“Our next generation mobile processors, combined with superior graphics and wireless technologies demonstrate our commitment to an open platform strategy, which enables our OEM customers to design the ultimate mobile platforms,” said Chris Cloran, vice president, AMD Mobile Division.
AMD’s “Better by Design” ecosystem includes ATI Radeon and Nvidia GeForce Go graphics chips and wireless solutions from Atheros, Broadcom, Marvell, Qualcomm and RealTek.
“PC users today expect more from their computers and the Better by Design program features the superior technologies and leading-edge performance buyers seek to meet the demands of their ever-expanding digital lifestyle,” Mr. Cloran said.
Comments currently: 12
Discussion started: 05/08/07 04:34:41 AM
Latest comment: 09/26/07 12:56:15 PM
Expand all threads |
Collapse all threads
[1-9]
1.
Low-end Yonah processors beat any Poorion there is.
How the heck can AMDs mobile line-up be SO weak?
[Posted by: 1234 | Date: 05/08/07 04:34:41 AM]
+ expand thread (2 answers)
- collapse thread
You have to look at the all platform not just the CPU, and overall the AMD platforms are much better, the IGP is at least 2X faster and 10X more compatible.
[Posted by: 4321 | Date: 05/09/07 03:31:39 AM]
OK, Im gonna look at the platform.
But... what? Intels lower speed IGP is still ahead of AMDs? I wonder how that can be. Maybe X2s are so slow that they bottleneck the IGPs performance, while Intels IGP still can outpace other IGPs when its bundled with the corresponding processor.
Oh and by the way, I was being sarcastic... in reality there are no Ifs and Maybes
[Posted by: 1234 | Date: 05/09/07 05:02:50 AM]
2.
I will say that desktop can be about preference, but there is no way I would waste my money on a Laptop powered by AMD. There mobile performance is pretty weak.
[Posted by: Awesomo | Date: 05/08/07 07:47:01 AM]
+ expand thread (1 answer)
- collapse thread
You have to look at the all platform not just the CPU, and overall the AMD platforms are much better, the IGP is at least 2X faster and 10X more compatible.
[Posted by: somoAwe | Date: 05/09/07 03:32:31 AM]
3.
What the fuck are you talking about?
The processors do not utilize more power than the intel ones, and most consumers do not care about performance. For a laptop, a 5% performance difference does not make any difference.
[Posted by: 31415 | Date: 05/08/07 11:40:25 AM]
4.
They will be faster than Yonah for sure, as Yonah is a pretty lame performer. I do agree that cpu-perfomance is NO bottleneck for laptops. The bottlenecks are batterylife, temperature, size, weight, harddisk-performance, display quality, graphics performance and ruggedness. If laptops powered by AMD improve in any of those areas, they are welcome.
[Posted by: Xeizo | Date: 05/08/07 12:47:01 PM]
5.
Intel has always dominated mobile space
the turions wont really bother the core 2 duo in terms of performance and battery life
but the real problem wud be price
the turions are really cheap compared to the core 2 duos and they perform on par or a bit slower than the C2D's
But anyway this is good for the consumer
And BTW,intels is always talkin abt desktop price cuts,when do mobile price cuts happen?
[Posted by: radicalx | Date: 05/08/07 07:47:45 PM]
6.
Any AMD laptop with integrated graphics is great, any Intel lap top with integrated graphics sucks.
Intel laptop with integrated graphics = crap
Intel laptop without integrated graphics = great
[Posted by: Real | Date: 05/09/07 03:35:01 AM]
7.
Turions are great chips. I know many people who are very satisfied with their Turion-based laptops. Intel's mobile platform may perform a bit better, but many people can't justify spending the extra beans just to have "the best" out at any given time. And since much of this technology is obsolete even before you unpack it, I can't really blame them.
As far as performance goes, it really isn't any surprise that Intel has enjoyed a bit of an advantage over AMD in the mobile space, since Intel has significantly greater resources for R&D. However, this may change when AMD's Fusion arrives. Time will tell.
[Posted by: RealityCheck | Date: 05/09/07 11:33:23 AM]
8.
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLLLL
[Posted by: Cindy | Date: 09/25/07 12:10:44 PM]
9.
in the first no 1.
[Posted by: first | Date: 09/26/07 12:56:15 PM]
[1-9]
Make Home Page
Add to Favorites
Print article
Send link to friend
Digg this
Post to del.icio.us
Post to Slashdot
