Yeah, but they could butcher 45 nm like they did with 65 nm and the x2s. Unless Amd kept 90 nm chip around for a good reason which isn't really that likely.
would call it butchered, it alwase takes every company 1 steping/revision to get the kinks out of their new prosess size, intel isnt imune to this, remmber the first intel 65nm chips, people called them the "presHOT" for a reasion, damn things make a space heater more then a computer.
i can go back farther even since im an amd user by default.
remmber the tbredA, first gen of its prosess size, hot and didnt clock worth a damn, tbred-b the 2nd run of that proc size overclocked like mad and ran cool.
first 90nm chips the winchester cores SUCKED BALLZ for overclocking, but the venice and other 2nd/3rd run chips overclocked VERY VERY well.
the diffrance is it takes amd longer to move from revision to revision less fab space after all.
now this issue with the current k10's is a bad bad fuckup, but they arent being hurt in the linux market where there is an easy kernal fix for it, they are still selling to linux server makers in good numbers and demand is quite brisk.
b3 chips as stated fix the problems for windows users(most of us), i was in no huge rush to get a k10 anyway, wana see prices on tri and dual core units, quadcores really pointless for 99% of the home users out there.
