4 ms·
>FX-8350 is a 32nm part. My bad. >AMD part has 1.2B transistors on a 315mm^2 die and the Intel part has 1.16B transistors on a 216mm^2 die Yeah, I recently r
by cdi 14y ago
>FX-8350 is a 32nm part.
My bad.
>AMD part has 1.2B transistors on a 315mm^2 die and the Intel part has 1.16B transistors on a 216mm^2 die
Yeah, I recently read somewhere that AMD significantly improved die area and power consumption of next FX cpu by using tools from graphics division. So it looks like the difference is not only in Intel's process advantage.
- wtallis 14y agohttp://www.anandtech.com/show/6201/amd-details-its-3rd-gen-steamroller-architecture/2 http://www.anandtech.com/show/6201/amd-details-its-3rd-gen-s... Two generations away, but eventually we'll be seeing AMD processors that are denser and thus cheaper, but with potentially lower clock speeds. I suspect Intel's got the resources to do a much better job of laying out a chip, but it's hard to say whether that's a process advantage or a chip design advantage.