Tuesday, May 11th 2010

AMD Introduces Six New Athlon II Processor Models

AMD let loose no less than six new processor models in its value-mainstream Athlon II series. Spread across its dual-core (X2), triple-core (X3), and quad-core (X4) lines, the new models seek to displace existing ones from their price-points and hold key value market positions. Leading the pack is the Athlon II X4 640. Based on the 45 nm Propus die, the X4 640 has a clock speed of 3.00 GHz (15 x 200 MHz), with 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 4 GT/s HyperTransport 3.0 interface. Built on the AM3 package, the X4 640 supports DDR3 and DDR2 memory standards. It has a TDP of 95W. This chip is priced at $122. The second quad-core model is the energy-efficient Athlon II X4 610e. With a clock speed of 2.40 GHz (12 x 200 MHz), the X4 610e comes with half the TDP of standard models, just 45W. Energy efficiency comes at a small premium, with the X4 610e going for $145 a piece.

The triple-core Athlon II X3 series also gets two additions, with the X3 445 and X3 415e. The X3 445 is based on the Rana die (Propus with one core disabled), and has L2 cache of 512 KB per core. It is clocked at 3.10 GHz (15.5 x 200 MHz), and has a TDP of 95W. It is priced at $87. The energy-efficient X3 415e is clocked at 2.50 GHz (12.5 x 200 MHz), has 45W TDP, and is priced at $102. Dual-core Athlon II X2 chips get the same treatment, with a new fast and energy-efficient model, each. Based on the 45 nm Regor die, the Athlon II X2 has two physical cores with 1 MB of L2 cache per core. The Athlon II X2 260 introduced now, has a clock speed of 3.20 GHz (16 x 200 MHz), 65W TDP, and is priced at $76. The energy-efficient X2 245e is clocked at 2.90 GHz (14.5 x 200 MHz), and has a TDP of 45W. This one goes for $77. All prices are per unit in 1000-unit tray quantities.
Add your own comment

25 Comments on AMD Introduces Six New Athlon II Processor Models

#1
DaJMasta
More 45W quads are always good, but I was really hoping for a Thuban based Athlon II X6 :)
Posted on Reply
#2
hat
Enthusiast
A 45w quad core... interesting.

I was hoping to see something about a 6 core Athlon II though...
Posted on Reply
#3
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
No Athlon II X6 any time this year.
Posted on Reply
#4
Kitkat
nah theres not gonna be any of that sorry lol i think the most ppl will go for and most anticipated is on phenom side 95w 955 should be a real star WHEN it comes already
Posted on Reply
#5
_Zod_
These 45 watt quads are a media centers wet dream :)
Posted on Reply
#6
Mussels
Moderprator
45W quads are awesome... but seriously, AMD overrate their chips so bad.


Every Athlon II i've had was running way above voltage it needed (1.35/1.4v stock when they run stable at 1.0-1.15v) - meaning any joe who can undervolt, can get a 45W quad.
Posted on Reply
#7
TIGR
Decent prices, and I am looking forward to seeing how low one can go with a 610e! Must be an efficient little devil.
Posted on Reply
#8
my_name_is_earl
Too bad they didn't have these goods earlier. Otherwise I have no problem choosing AMD over Intel because of price. Got me a i7 lappy already although I would like to see more choices for quad core.:nutkick:
Posted on Reply
#9
Baum
the cheap 245e is good for average pc useres it should crush all old athlons xp and new atoms but stay fairly "cold" for it's price


hope it doesn't vanish too fast as most people don't look on the "e" ending and don't buy a cpu at a premium for nothing they can see/understand.......

are those "E" good overclocker that the premium is reasonable?
Posted on Reply
#10
Necrofire
by: Mussels
45W quads are awesome... but seriously, AMD overrate their chips so bad.


Every Athlon II i've had was running way above voltage it needed (1.35/1.4v stock when they run stable at 1.0-1.15v) - meaning any joe who can undervolt, can get a 45W quad.
I could not agree more.
Even the powersave modes are extremely high (1.1V in power save mode, wtf?)

On every AMD system I build, I install PhenomMsrTweaker, put powersave mode as a 4x multi and whatever the lowest voltage is (0.77 I think). Then I put regular mode at stock clocks, and drop the voltage down a few (at least below 1.2V).
Posted on Reply
#11
Delta6326
DANG IT!! i read title wrong i got all happy about a Athlon II x6 darn it! but these are nice
Posted on Reply
#12
Cheeseball
I'd like an Athlon II 260. :) Such a nice multiplier.
Posted on Reply
#13
Fourstaff
I wonder how much does voltage affect power draw. I mean, Power=Current*Voltage (well known equation), so even if the voltage drops from 1.4 to 1.1, and if the current increases just as much, then there will not be any significant savings, will they?
Posted on Reply
#14
Mussels
Moderprator
by: Fourstaff
I wonder how much does voltage affect power draw. I mean, Power=Current*Voltage (well known equation), so even if the voltage drops from 1.4 to 1.1, and if the current increases just as much, then there will not be any significant savings, will they?
there is mucho savingso.

http://newstuff.orconhosting.net.nz/wCalc.html




65W CPU suddenly becomes 45W CPU
Posted on Reply
#16
Mussels
Moderprator
by: suraswami
That will give a rough estimate, but best thing is Kill-A-Watt or the software that is used when connected to a UPS.

hmm so these might not be a cut down Thuban? May be somebody will find it out.

But these are C3 chips and might clock even better (my thought).

:toast:
click the link for my media PC. i have one of those power meters, and it does indeed help. while i dont cover it in detail, i got the system in my sig pic down to 50W idle.
Posted on Reply
#18
suraswami
by: Mussels
click the link for my media PC. i have one of those power meters, and it does indeed help. while i dont cover it in detail, i got the system in my sig pic down to 50W idle.
I too undervolted my 45w x2 2400BE and the server is running @52w low to medium load.

by: cdawall
even my old 65w phenom 9150e got down to 35w staying stable had it running at .8v which is the minum the board would allow. those were a great HTPC back when they were getting thrown out for almost no cost
I did the same thing on my main server with 9550 idling at .775v, runs so cool to the point the fans almost will stop.
Posted on Reply
#19
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
by: suraswami
I too undervolted my 45w x2 2400BE and the server is running @52w low to medium load.



I did the same thing on my main server with 9550 idling at .775v, runs so cool to the point the fans almost will stop.
fans shut off on my HTPC and it still says under 40C
Posted on Reply
#20
xtremesv
by: my_name_is_earl
Too bad they didn't have these goods earlier. Otherwise I have no problem choosing AMD over Intel because of price. Got me a i7 lappy already although I would like to see more choices for quad core.:nutkick:
The market targets are different. From my perspective:

Athlon X2 vs. Pentium (Dual Core)
Athlon X3 & Phenom X2 vs. Core2Duo
Athlon X4 & Phenom X3 vs. i3
Phenom X4 vs. i5
Phenom X6 vs. entry i7

AMD hasn't been able to compete against Intel's crème de la crème but perhaps they don't want to bother. Right now, AMD is offering good products with a very compelling price/performance ratio and they're comfortably hitting the market segment that buys the most (not the most tech educated though).
Posted on Reply
#21
vagxtr
by: Mussels
45W quads are awesome... but seriously, AMD overrate their chips so bad.


Every Athlon II i've had was running way above voltage it needed (1.35/1.4v stock when they run stable at 1.0-1.15v) - meaning any joe who can undervolt, can get a 45W quad.
Thankfully for amd that J.A. occurance is in ppm measures :D. My x2 240 run 3.25GHz @1.200 (board OV some +0.04) but then even stock 1.325 wont help him stretch much above 3.6 or 3.8V at any i-diot overvoltage stunt (1.45V) .... so it's AMDs default useless overvolting just to milk some more money on people that have somthing better to do than crappy proc tweaking :p ... and to burn down old am2 boards 3x quicker (3yrs instead 10yrs period)

by: Mussels
65W CPU suddenly becomes 45W CPU
Thanks for wattage calculator :toast:

But you should reconsider this as just quick calc cause it's for Thunderbirds :D and they were 180nm, Al-interconnects, Si .... even Tbreds/Bartons 130nm Si had Cu IC, and lower process bigger leakage ... in fact even if this calc comes from AMd K10 RevC/D/E datasheet i would took it with care


btw. so my 1.325V TDP65W would have so lower power savings than yours X2 245 :pimp:
Posted on Reply
#22
vagxtr
by: DaJMasta
More 45W quads are always good, but I was really hoping for a Thuban based Athlon II X6 :)
Yay right ... That would be extra bang for buck for us :D:D And damn would loose money 70% per every sold underpriced 100USD athlon

by: btarunr
No Athlon II X6 any time this year.
There wont be K10 Athlons X6 nor two years after :D. Are they going to plunge Athlon/sempron brand to better copycat intel i3/i5/i7 scheme next year on anticipated Bulldozer intro.

If amd's RnD job would be as near as they PR stunts :rolleyes:

by: xtremesv
The market targets are different. From my perspective:

Athlon X4 & Phenom X3 vs. i3
Phenom X4 vs. i5
Phenom X6 vs. entry i7
You're pretty wrong cause any pii x4 is way better than any i5 on same clock (disregard better OC of 32nm intel CPUs) except i5 650 for special apps :D
And pii x6 kills any virtual 8-core i7 on same clock. The only advantage i7 has are X58/s1366 boards with extremely low latency and high memory bandwidth.

And i3 is somethinfg that even AthlonII X3 could overun .... the only bad thing is intel larger volumes and 32nm node that amd lacks as usual.

--edit--
i'm easy on zeroes please pardon me ..... in fact "special apps" includes whole i5 600 series i stand corrected :D
Posted on Reply
#23
xtremesv
by: vagxtr
You're pretty wrong cause any pii x4 is way better than any i5 on same clock (disregard better OC of 32nm intel CPUs) except i5 6500 for special apps :D
And pii x6 kills any virtual 8-core i7 on same clock. The only advantage i7 has are X58/s1366 boards with extremely low latency and high memory bandwidth.

And i3 is somethinfg that even AthlonII X3 could overun .... the only bad thing is intel larger volumes and 32nm node that amd lacks as usual.
i5 6500:confused: Probably you meant the popular i5 750 which, w/o OC (2.66GHz), is better than any PII X4 (mine included @3.4GHz).

PII X6 are very good CPU's but certainly not superior to i7 9xx, according to benchs they're on par and it's difficult to determine a clear winner cause it depends on the application so I think the word 'kill' is misused in this case.
Posted on Reply
#24
vagxtr
by: xtremesv
Probably you meant the popular i5 750 which, w/o OC (2.66GHz), is better than any PII X4 (mine included @3.4GHz).
i5 750 is nothing special ;) (waste of money and power imho comparing it to s1366 i7 or older c2q e9050 series) And yes Nehalems are way better OCers than any PhenomII but that wasnt my point.

by: xtremesv
PII X6 are very good CPU's but certainly not superior to i7 9xx, according to benchs they're on par and it's difficult to determine a clear winner cause it depends on the application so I think the word 'kill' is misused in this case.
Which is better depends on personal preference :D But for properly threaded apps, which doesnt prefer any particular cpuid, more real cores is always better than software tweaks. Especially if all that comes at lower price and with non rigged tdp rating. i7 900 is overclockers dream but that came at hefty price ;)
Posted on Reply
#25
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
by: vagxtr
i5 750 is nothing special ;) (waste of money and power imho comparing it to s1366 i7 or older c2q e9050 series) And yes Nehalems are way better OCers than any PhenomII but that wasnt my point.
Using the same logic, Phenom II X4 is waste of power and money compared to Core i5 750. The 750 can beat X4 965 any day, with significantly lower power draw, higher performance at stock clock, higher performance per MHz.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment