<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Quad-Core AMD Opteron™ Processor Codenamed &quot;Suzuka&quot;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/</link>
	<description>AMD brings cutting-edge technology to your business with high-performance processor and graphics solution. Discover how AMD technology can take your business where you want to go.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:20:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gone Postal</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-2/#comment-65</link>
		<dc:creator>Gone Postal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Apr 2010 03:16:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-65</guid>
		<description>So, to give you a break from all the questions of trying to use an Opteron instead of a Phenom, who should we be pestering with Phenom questions? :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, to give you a break from all the questions of trying to use an Opteron instead of a Phenom, who should we be pestering with Phenom questions? <img src='http://blogs.amd.com/work/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Fruehe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-2/#comment-64</link>
		<dc:creator>John Fruehe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:21:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-64</guid>
		<description>Opteron is targeted at servers, Phenom is targeted at clients.  There are a host of reasons for this division, I plan to blog about it in the future as things calm down from the launch.

As to which is better for video editing (or any application), you are best off to check with your software vendor.  They will let you know if cores or clocks are going to be the advantage.  It is always very difficult to say one platform is always better than the other.  When the world changed from single core to multiple cores, there was no longer a single attribute (clock speed) on which to base decisions.  Multithreading capability became more important at that point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Opteron is targeted at servers, Phenom is targeted at clients.  There are a host of reasons for this division, I plan to blog about it in the future as things calm down from the launch.</p>
<p>As to which is better for video editing (or any application), you are best off to check with your software vendor.  They will let you know if cores or clocks are going to be the advantage.  It is always very difficult to say one platform is always better than the other.  When the world changed from single core to multiple cores, there was no longer a single attribute (clock speed) on which to base decisions.  Multithreading capability became more important at that point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gone Postal</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-2/#comment-63</link>
		<dc:creator>Gone Postal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 2010 00:33:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-63</guid>
		<description>After reading this thread, and seeing how there are systems out there for enthusiasts using the Xeon, why doesn&#039;t AMD offer the Opteron as an enthusiast part as well? People have used Opterons for home gaming systems before whether that was what they were meant for or not, why not sell a few more Opterons?

Also, I have another question. I&#039;ve noticed that every time a CPU gains more cores, the clock speed gets lowered (I&#039;m guessing due to heat), if you do a lot of video editing, sound encoding, etc., which is better in a work station? An Opteron 2393 SE (4 cores @ 3.1GHz), Opteron 2439 SE (6-cores @ 2.8GHz), Opteron 6136 (8-cores @ 2.4GHz) or the Opteron 6176 SE (12-cores @ 2.3GHz)?

Just curious as to the differences.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After reading this thread, and seeing how there are systems out there for enthusiasts using the Xeon, why doesn&#8217;t AMD offer the Opteron as an enthusiast part as well? People have used Opterons for home gaming systems before whether that was what they were meant for or not, why not sell a few more Opterons?</p>
<p>Also, I have another question. I&#8217;ve noticed that every time a CPU gains more cores, the clock speed gets lowered (I&#8217;m guessing due to heat), if you do a lot of video editing, sound encoding, etc., which is better in a work station? An Opteron 2393 SE (4 cores @ 3.1GHz), Opteron 2439 SE (6-cores @ 2.8GHz), Opteron 6136 (8-cores @ 2.4GHz) or the Opteron 6176 SE (12-cores @ 2.3GHz)?</p>
<p>Just curious as to the differences.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Fruehe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-62</link>
		<dc:creator>John Fruehe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 00:18:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-62</guid>
		<description>The Opteron processors are designed for server applications.  They do not support overclocking.  For your needs it sounds like you would be better off with a Phenom processor.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Opteron processors are designed for server applications.  They do not support overclocking.  For your needs it sounds like you would be better off with a Phenom processor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mani</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-61</link>
		<dc:creator>mani</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 21:43:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-61</guid>
		<description>Good article :)

Is the Opteron 1389 faster than a phenom II 965be in gaming and other applikations like benchmarking?

and how good is it for overclocking?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good article <img src='http://blogs.amd.com/work/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Is the Opteron 1389 faster than a phenom II 965be in gaming and other applikations like benchmarking?</p>
<p>and how good is it for overclocking?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Fruehe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-60</link>
		<dc:creator>John Fruehe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:54:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-60</guid>
		<description>Workstations tend to fall in the middle, but the key for them is the software certification.  Most workstation users focus on a single application. I would check with your applicaiton vendor about what workstations have been certified for that application.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Workstations tend to fall in the middle, but the key for them is the software certification.  Most workstation users focus on a single application. I would check with your applicaiton vendor about what workstations have been certified for that application.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-59</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:14:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-59</guid>
		<description>How about for a workstation environment? Would an Opteron or Phenom be more suited?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How about for a workstation environment? Would an Opteron or Phenom be more suited?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Fruehe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-58</link>
		<dc:creator>John Fruehe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2009 08:10:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-58</guid>
		<description>If you are using &quot;everyday&quot; applications then I recommend the Phenom products that are really optimized for productivity applications.  The Opteron products are targeted at server applications.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you are using &#8220;everyday&#8221; applications then I recommend the Phenom products that are really optimized for productivity applications.  The Opteron products are targeted at server applications.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-57</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 19:09:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-57</guid>
		<description>In everyday applications how would these compare with their Phenom II X4 counterparts? Also, do these lack the 3DNow! extension?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In everyday applications how would these compare with their Phenom II X4 counterparts? Also, do these lack the 3DNow! extension?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Fruehe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-56</link>
		<dc:creator>John Fruehe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 19:56:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-56</guid>
		<description>Typos always forgiven.  You should see me try to spell in German - I am a mess ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Typos always forgiven.  You should see me try to spell in German &#8211; I am a mess <img src='http://blogs.amd.com/work/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Fruehe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-55</link>
		<dc:creator>John Fruehe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 19:55:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-55</guid>
		<description>These products are focused on the server market, so they are going to have a higher price.  If you are looking for a server, then knowing that you have a product rated for high utilization in a 7x24x365 environment for multiple years is a big benefit.  As well as certification of server OS&#039;s and server-level support.  If you are using the system for productivity applicaitons, our Phenom processors will give you higher clock speed and lower price.

The server processors are not targeted at enthusiasts, so I do not believe that you will see desktop-class products based on these processors.  Especially due to the fact that most desktop workloads don&#039;t fully maximize the 4 cores that are available today, adding more cores (which will generally reduce the clock speed and increase the price) might not be the best solution for desktop customers - but will be welcome for server environments where having 24+ threads active at one time would be a big benefit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These products are focused on the server market, so they are going to have a higher price.  If you are looking for a server, then knowing that you have a product rated for high utilization in a 7x24x365 environment for multiple years is a big benefit.  As well as certification of server OS&#8217;s and server-level support.  If you are using the system for productivity applicaitons, our Phenom processors will give you higher clock speed and lower price.</p>
<p>The server processors are not targeted at enthusiasts, so I do not believe that you will see desktop-class products based on these processors.  Especially due to the fact that most desktop workloads don&#8217;t fully maximize the 4 cores that are available today, adding more cores (which will generally reduce the clock speed and increase the price) might not be the best solution for desktop customers &#8211; but will be welcome for server environments where having 24+ threads active at one time would be a big benefit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SocketMan</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-54</link>
		<dc:creator>SocketMan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Sep 2009 03:12:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-54</guid>
		<description>Forgive the typos pls. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Forgive the typos pls. <img src='http://blogs.amd.com/work/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SocketMan</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-53</link>
		<dc:creator>SocketMan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Sep 2009 03:06:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-53</guid>
		<description>Good news &amp; bad news:
Upon further investigation - these cpu&#039;s are
available for Special Order but the price tag is somewhat high  (in relation to the other AM3 cpus that come with higher operating frequencies)
 @189$ (on AMD&#039;s price list)/200 minimum at any r/e-tailor for the 1381 (lowest part).

There are also many 135x opterons
out there @ a much lower $. - basically competing
with 138x.

Now skipping forward to next year :)

Is there any hope for AMD enthusiasts world wide that there will be  dual c32/g34 motherboards made with their &quot;needs&quot;
(OC headroom,voltage/tweaking options,multiple PCIe slots etc.,) in mind ?


I realize that it (c32/g34) is a server platform,however why not kill 2 rabis with one shot?

There are many  interested in 2P solutions - espicially if it&#039;s priced competitively,besides the &quot;usual server people&quot; market.
The number of distributed computing projects (like folding at home) is increasing,so as the depend
for more CPU cores/PCIe slots per motherboard.

2P enthusiast systems with 2x6 (12 cores Lisbon) should be very competitive even VS the upcoming i9. An asymmetrical answer.

In other words will AMD bring back &quot;FASN8  v2&quot; ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good news &amp; bad news:<br />
Upon further investigation &#8211; these cpu&#8217;s are<br />
available for Special Order but the price tag is somewhat high  (in relation to the other AM3 cpus that come with higher operating frequencies)<br />
 @189$ (on AMD&#8217;s price list)/200 minimum at any r/e-tailor for the 1381 (lowest part).</p>
<p>There are also many 135x opterons<br />
out there @ a much lower $. &#8211; basically competing<br />
with 138x.</p>
<p>Now skipping forward to next year <img src='http://blogs.amd.com/work/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Is there any hope for AMD enthusiasts world wide that there will be  dual c32/g34 motherboards made with their &#8220;needs&#8221;<br />
(OC headroom,voltage/tweaking options,multiple PCIe slots etc.,) in mind ?</p>
<p>I realize that it (c32/g34) is a server platform,however why not kill 2 rabis with one shot?</p>
<p>There are many  interested in 2P solutions &#8211; espicially if it&#8217;s priced competitively,besides the &#8220;usual server people&#8221; market.<br />
The number of distributed computing projects (like folding at home) is increasing,so as the depend<br />
for more CPU cores/PCIe slots per motherboard.</p>
<p>2P enthusiast systems with 2&#215;6 (12 cores Lisbon) should be very competitive even VS the upcoming i9. An asymmetrical answer.</p>
<p>In other words will AMD bring back &#8220;FASN8  v2&#8243; ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Fruehe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-52</link>
		<dc:creator>John Fruehe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2009 20:59:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-52</guid>
		<description>The memory controller is very similar to the one the the Phenom processors as they share a common architecture. I can&#039;t say where the products are sold in Canada but I can say that our distributors should have full access, so if you do not see them at the places you normally buy server processors, be sure to ask, they should be able to easily order them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The memory controller is very similar to the one the the Phenom processors as they share a common architecture. I can&#8217;t say where the products are sold in Canada but I can say that our distributors should have full access, so if you do not see them at the places you normally buy server processors, be sure to ask, they should be able to easily order them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SocketMan</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-51</link>
		<dc:creator>SocketMan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2009 05:17:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-51</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s great news many thanks.
I&#039;ve been looking forward adding a 45nm Opteron to the other 2 (165 &amp; 1210).
Two questions please:
It&#039;s been 2 months since the launch,where can I buy a &quot;&quot;Suzuka&quot;&quot; Opty in Canada?
Have not seen any in retail.
Is IMC different (revision) from the one in
Phenoms? The NB frequency is 2200mhz up from
2000mhz</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s great news many thanks.<br />
I&#8217;ve been looking forward adding a 45nm Opteron to the other 2 (165 &amp; 1210).<br />
Two questions please:<br />
It&#8217;s been 2 months since the launch,where can I buy a &#8220;&#8221;Suzuka&#8221;" Opty in Canada?<br />
Have not seen any in retail.<br />
Is IMC different (revision) from the one in<br />
Phenoms? The NB frequency is 2200mhz up from<br />
2000mhz</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Fruehe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-50</link>
		<dc:creator>John Fruehe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:49:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-50</guid>
		<description>If you are only looking for the highest clock speed, the Phenom 965 has a 3.4GHz clock speed, butI know less about that processor because I deal with servers. It is a &quot;black edition&quot; which allows you to overclock as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you are only looking for the highest clock speed, the Phenom 965 has a 3.4GHz clock speed, butI know less about that processor because I deal with servers. It is a &#8220;black edition&#8221; which allows you to overclock as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Fruehe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-49</link>
		<dc:creator>John Fruehe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:47:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-49</guid>
		<description>ACP is Average CPU power. It is a different measurement than TDP.  For AMD, TDP = max power, ACP represents what the typical customer will see under heavy workloads.  This is different than our competitor; their TDP = a more typical load and there is a &quot;max power&quot; that they do not really publish to the market (I believe as a developer they will share it from you.)

That difference in how TDP is interpreted can be confusing for customers, so we took the customers&#039; suggestion and published ACP to show what a typical stressed environment would look like because few, if anyone,  gets close to seeing TDP consumption on AMD servers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ACP is Average CPU power. It is a different measurement than TDP.  For AMD, TDP = max power, ACP represents what the typical customer will see under heavy workloads.  This is different than our competitor; their TDP = a more typical load and there is a &#8220;max power&#8221; that they do not really publish to the market (I believe as a developer they will share it from you.)</p>
<p>That difference in how TDP is interpreted can be confusing for customers, so we took the customers&#8217; suggestion and published ACP to show what a typical stressed environment would look like because few, if anyone,  gets close to seeing TDP consumption on AMD servers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rod Brenzuela</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-48</link>
		<dc:creator>Rod Brenzuela</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 15:40:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-48</guid>
		<description>i mean, phenom x4s? or???</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i mean, phenom x4s? or???</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rod Brenzuela</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-47</link>
		<dc:creator>Rod Brenzuela</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 15:39:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-47</guid>
		<description>uh.. sir john. i have no idea what ACP is.. back to my question, what is the fastest AMD quad core processor?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>uh.. sir john. i have no idea what ACP is.. back to my question, what is the fastest AMD quad core processor?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Fruehe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-46</link>
		<dc:creator>John Fruehe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:25:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-46</guid>
		<description>The fastest 75W ACP parts are 2.9GHz.  The fastest 105W ACP parts are 3.1GHz.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The fastest 75W ACP parts are 2.9GHz.  The fastest 105W ACP parts are 3.1GHz.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rod Brenzuela</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-45</link>
		<dc:creator>Rod Brenzuela</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Jul 2009 19:10:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-45</guid>
		<description>Sir, what is fastest in AMD Quad Cores?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sir, what is fastest in AMD Quad Cores?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Fruehe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-44</link>
		<dc:creator>John Fruehe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:31:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-44</guid>
		<description>It can fit in either an AM2 or an AM3 socket.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It can fit in either an AM2 or an AM3 socket.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Fruehe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-43</link>
		<dc:creator>John Fruehe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:30:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-43</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the catch, I have updated the blog.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the catch, I have updated the blog.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marcos Elias</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-42</link>
		<dc:creator>Marcos Elias</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 14:29:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-42</guid>
		<description>The final version will use AM2 or AM3 socket?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The final version will use AM2 or AM3 socket?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hecgui</title>
		<link>http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/06/30/quad-core-amd-opteron%e2%84%a2-processor-codenamed-suzuka/comment-page-1/#comment-41</link>
		<dc:creator>Hecgui</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 05:57:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.amd.com/work/?p=407#comment-41</guid>
		<description>Good article, but I think that you meant &quot;2 MB&quot; instead of &quot;2 GB&quot; cache.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good article, but I think that you meant &#8220;2 MB&#8221; instead of &#8220;2 GB&#8221; cache.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

