There was some debate as to whether Turions were simply undervolted A64 cores. The above info shows this is not the case.
Now I’m completely confused, not that this is unusual.
When you said, ‘This supports the notion that mobile chips are "cherrypicked" silicon’, I thought you meant that Turions were simply desktop chips that were chosen for their ability to run at lower voltages and power consumption. I now assume that you meant the opposite! Your choice of language was semantically confusing to me!
Your interpretation is odd in suggesting that the circuits are optimised for lower power rather than speed, as buzzlightyears experience suggests that no clock speed has been sacrificed to get the lower power; rather the opposite in fact, the overvolted Turion puts out less heat than the undervolted Opteron while operating at 540Mhz faster clock speed.
Oops, I didn’t make myself very clear at all. My understating is that the Turion was designed so that the trade off between ‘circuit switching speed’ and power consumption is more balanced towards lower power consumption than in the desktop chips. I wasn’t referring to clock speed, but the circuit switching speed, which I assume means that Turions have a lower IPC than desktop chips!
How this choice relates to the maximum possible clock speed of the Turion I don’t know. This could be more limited by AMD’s chosen power envelope for the Turion rather than a limitation of the actual design process.
In AMD’s own words:
‘More specifically, the process used to manufacture AMD Turion 64 mobile technology has been optimized for thermally efficient processor operation, enabling reduced power consumption during various system performance states and sleep states.’ See this URL:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/Pro ... html#95417