Is There Reality Behind the Hype?

Continued from 'Turion 64 X2: A Credible Choice?'….

Like AMD's upcoming AM2-socketed desktop CPUs, Turion 64 X2 processors mate up to DDR2 SDRAM, at per-pin data rates up to 667 Mbps (PC2-5300) and in a dual-channel 128-bit arrangement. AMD's new S1 package is size-competitive with the Core Duo alternative (and remember, unlike Core Duo, it encompasses the DRAM controller). AMD has wrapped up the MMX and triple-generation SSE instruction sets, which predate Turion 64 X2, into the catchy 'Digital Media Xpress' marketing moniker. More generally, it's unclear to me just how unique the underlying silicon foundation of Turion 64 X2 is compared to, say, a mobile Athlon 64 X2 (or, for that matter, a desktop Athlon 64 X2). Turion 64 X2 employs a low power-tweaked manufacturing process and offers additional 'sleep' modes, but functionally it seems to be near-identical in all other respects.

AMD's seized the spotlight, at least for the moment, but remember: it's competing against an Intel CPU that was first publicly demonstrated nine months ago, went into production at the beginning of this year and is based on an architecture that was unveiled over three years ago. And, as AMD already intimately knows, the successor to Yonah, Merom (aka Core 2 Duo), is soon to arrive. At E3 last week, an Intel spokesperson parroted back to me the target production dates that Intel CEO Paul Otellini had recently shared with financial analysts: Woodcrest (workstations and servers) would ramp into production in June, followed by Conroe (desktops) in July and Merom in August.

Turion 64 X2 and Yonah both support hardware hooks for virtualization, as will Merom. As its name implies, Turion 64 X2 (unlike Yonah, but like Merom) will run 64-bit Windows XP; theoretically, this is a near-term advantage for AMD, but as a recent Sound on Sound article reiterates, 64-bit Windows XP remains a non-starter. By the time 64-bit Windows Vista appears, AMD and Intel will be on common ground in this respect.

I'm reminded of a recent column penned by InfoWorld's Tom Yager, which I read last night. In it, he points out that whereas a market dominated by a single player isn't healthy, nor is one with three or more players. My generalized conclusion, after pouring through numerous published studies over past months-to-years, is that to date Turion has not been competitive from a power-performance merged metric standpoint with its Pentium M counterpart, although AMD's aggressive pricing (along with the fact that mobile Sempron matches up much better against Celeron M) has kept the company in the game.

For the good of the entire electronics sector, as well as for consumers (and, in fact, for both AMD and Intel), I hope that with Turion 64 X2 and its follow-ons, AMD and its core logic partners ATI, Nvidia, SiS and Via are able to stretch beyond the hype and muster a sustainable competitive momentum to counterbalance the Centrino juggernaut. I've requested a review unit of a Turion 64 X2-based laptop; once it arrives I'll subject it to my battery of performance and power tests and report back my findings in this forum.

Make sure you pore through the links in this two-part blog post for screenshots of some of the foils AMD shared with me. Here are others for your inspection:
Presentation Highlights
Power Consumption Comparisons
More Power Consumption Comparisons
Speed/Spec Bins