Chicago (IL) – According to a report published by the Inquirer, AMD will be introducing its first quad-core processor on September 10.

 

---

AMD Quad-Core "Barcelona": Technical details ...

---

 

If the Inquirer is right, then AMD is still keeping its latest promise to introduce the processor in Q3, while missing the original target of a mid-2007 launch. However, we were told by the company that at the time of the official announcement server vendors will actually be ready to ship Barcelona processors, which means that AMD is likely to be shipping the CPU for revenue right now.

Information received by the Inquirer indicates that Barcelona will ship as models 2348 (1.9 GHz) and 2350 (2.0 GHz) initially, with faster versions up to 2.4 GHz scheduled to follow in October.

Barcelona will be substantially cheaper than many may have expected – with prices of $320 for the 2348 and $390 for the 2350 – which is about in line with the current 2.4 and 2.6 GHz dual-core Rev-F Opterons. If we believe the Inquirer, then AMD will continue the price war with Intel, as the rival’s comparable quad-core Xeons are considerably more expensive at this time: The 1.86 GHz Xeon E5320 is priced at $455 and the 2.0 GHz E5335 at $690.

The October versions of Barcelona will go up in price sharply, according to the Inquirer. The 2352 (2.1 GHz) will be available for $450, the 2354 (2.2 GHz) for $610, the 2356 (2.3 GHz) for $795 and the 2358 (2.4 GHz) for $1180. AMD may also not be able to beat Intel’s quad-cores in terms of power consumption. The 2348 – 2356 are rated at a thermal design power of 95 watts, the 2358 at 120 watts, while Intel currently offers 50 watt, 80 watt and 120 watt versions of the 5300 series CPUs.

The launch date of Barcelona also sheds some light on the possible introduction of the Phenom desktop quad-core CPU. Sources told TG Daily that there will be a 60 to 90 day delay until Phenom will arrive – which means mid-November at the earliest and mid-December at the latest.

cheaper... cheaper .... cheaper....

Jun 28, 2007 12:21     

well, cheap is good... intel will probably do the same for tigertron... still, clocks are slower than what i expected first. phenom must logically perform less that their server cpu... i wonder if phenom will have a higher performance/clock compared to the full featured C2D
Da Tronics report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

About Damn Time!

Jun 28, 2007 12:25     

Now we'll see if these procs are worth the silicon they are pressed out of. . .
Get Some report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Weird numbering scheme...

Jun 28, 2007 13:28     

Seriously, 2348? I hope they don't do that with Agena's, or people will go to Intel for simplicities sake.
SEALBoy report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

My thoughts...

Jun 28, 2007 18:38     

AMD's quads will outperform intel's and "will" have lower power consumption becasue these processors were engineered with this main feaure in mind. Wolfgang Gruener is once again wrong about Barcelona being "hotter" than intel's offerings. AMD uses max TDP while intel uses an average to measure theirs. Anyhow, intel current offerings are hotter than AMD's 65nm dual cores and energy efficient ones.

eaca report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

amd numbering schemes

Jun 28, 2007 21:50     

this is getting stupid now. confusing numbering schemes these days are becoming more and more the norm the marketing teams should wake up to themselfs For me to stand there for a extra 30 mininutes with a customer explaning the difrence in cpu's numbering is dam painfull
trev report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

AMD uses the average.

Jun 28, 2007 23:15     

>AMD uses max TDP while intel uses an average to measure theirs. This is past glory.
信天翁 report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

sealboy wtf

Jun 29, 2007 05:59     

are you serious sealboy they will go with Intel for simplicity's sake, ill have some of what your smoking.
lee report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

evan

Jun 29, 2007 08:39     

TDP is defined diffrent ways by diffrent manufacturers.
evan report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

premature launch?

Jun 29, 2007 15:18     

It's too early. They are launching these CPUs only to keep their promise to consumers. These chips will probably be slower than expected, they're just too premature. But at least they will be cooler and cheaper... this should hold off consumers for a while, until they get everything ready for the real assault.
fastpunk report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

biased price comparison...

Jun 29, 2007 18:12     

"If we believe the Inquirer, then AMD will continue the price war with Intel, as the rival’s comparable quad-core Xeons are considerably more expensive at this time: The 1.86 GHz Xeon E5320 is priced at $455 and the 2.0 GHz E5335 at $690." Is it a joke to compare price of a september product with those of Intel at this time which will drop july 22 http://www.dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=7293&commentid=139334 E5320 256$ E5335 316$ Even L5320 with a 50W TDP will cost $320...

wolf report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Huh???

Jul 05, 2007 00:48     

Quote: ">AMD uses max TDP while intel uses an average to measure theirs. This is past glory." The last benchmark I saw with a C2D QX6800 and a FX-64, under load the Intel core used 25-30% less power and dissipated way less heat. But then again I might be crazy.
Jimmy report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0