Talk:AMD K9
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of Computing WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to computers and computing. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale |
Why are K8 updates listed on this page? Any reason they are here and not on the AMD_K8 page? --Yamla 18:38, 2005 Feb 25 (UTC)\
Well, to be honest, I (the writer of the article) don't know to much about it.
But since there was no article about the K9, I tried to do some research, and write an article about it, hoping someone else would improve it.
The reason it's not on the AMD_K8 page is, that's a good article, I don't want to change it too much. But in general terms, you're right. If you don't like the article, I invite you (and anyone!) to improve it. --sludink, Sun Mar 13 19:27:15 CET 2005--
Folks, AMD announced quite a while ago that they are no longer referring to CPU generations by K numbers. Furthermore, they said that there is no K9 (dual core K8's are just that) and that their next major core would have been K10.the1physicist 30 June 2005 03:38 (UTC)
What the1physicist said. Should this article be deleted, or heavily revised and just basically say "K9 was cancelled, shoo!"? SVI 01:23, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
I'm going to heavily edit this page. I'm basically aiming for the "K9 was renamed, shoo!" approach.the1physicist 02:00, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
Ki9 sounds too like canine ? And K10 is the kitten. Much better for top-level processor ?
I think the page should stay, because while K9 was an internal project, AMD's single design team spent much time on it. While admittedly not released as a product, the fact the K8 core was NOT developed by the primary design team at AMD due to K9 commitments, has now started to hurt AMD, as Intel catches up with the Conroe platform. The K9 is one of those interesting 'what ifs.' Had AMD developed K8L instead of K9, just how bad would things be for Intel in 2006? K9 probably cost AMD the best chance they will ever get to draw level with Intel. Its interesting, and I would argue significant, for that reason alone. Timharwoodx 12:25, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
What are you people talking about??? There is not a single main design team at AMD. They have the original x86 design team in Austin, TX (they did the K5, K7, K9, and Greyhound (aka Family 10h)). They have another design team in Sunnyvale, CA (corporate HQ) that was the Nexgen design team - these folks did the K6 and K8 (and working on the next major microarchiture that comes after Family 10h. They also have another team in Boston, MA (mostly ex-API and ex-Sun folks).
What was K9 was canceled do to a change in direction of what would be needed to compete with Intel post 4GHz NetBurst failure. The reusable parts of the design were put into Family 10h, but the same folks working on the K9. One could argue the Austin, TX folks are the failure... K5 was a disaster and lead to AMD buying Netgen to save their ass with the K6 - and these same folks saved AMD with the K8. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr unix (talk • contribs) 01:07, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
