Wednesday, June 1st 2011

AMD Paves the Way for the Next Gen. of Supercharged Desktop PCs with 9-Series Chipset

AMD today launched its 9-Series chipset line-up today, helping PC builders to develop next generation high performance desktop platforms. The company also unveiled its 2011 HD Tablet Platform, based on the AMD Z-Series Accelerated Processing Unit (APU), enabling vivid media display and content creation capabilities for the fast-growing market of Microsoft Windows-based tablets. These new AMD products are designed to enable more immersive digital experiences for the PC and tablet markets.

“As consumer appetites for more compelling, lifelike visual experiences increase, there is greater need for high performance, smooth, vibrant graphics as well as unparalleled computing power,” said John Taylor, product marketing director, AMD. “From tablets to desktops, AMD is making powerful computing accessible to everyone.”

Desktops Get Supercharged with AMD 9-Series Chipset
AMD’s 9-Series chipset provides the foundation for unlocking the highest-octane AMD desktop experience. The chipset is a key component of AMD’s next generation “Scorpius” desktop platform, which will also feature the 8-core “Zambezi” processor and AMD Radeon™ HD6000 series discrete graphics cards for immersive HD entertainment and gaming experiences, extreme multitasking, tweaking, and overclocking.

The 9-Series chipsets are the first to support the AMD AM3+ socket processors, while incorporating AM3 socket backwards compatibility. These boards enable blazing fast performance with support for AMD CrossFireX technology, which allows up to four AMD Radeon GPUs to co-process for incredible graphics uplift. In addition, these chipsets support clock rate management through AMD OverDrive software. Additionally, the 9-series chipset line-up features up to six SATA 3.0 6Gbps hard drive interface ports, Gigabit Ethernet, HyperTransport 3.0 technology, and PCI Express Generation 2.0 for an extreme computing experience at work and play.

The 9-Series line of chipsets will be available from a variety of device manufacturers, including ASRock, ASUS, Biostar, ECS, Foxconn Technology GIGABYTE Technology, Jetway and MSI.

Windows Tablets get AMD Graphics Boost
By 2015, Gartner expects the tablet market to exceed $200 million and, as the market matures, AMD will continue to expand its APU options, providing powerful discrete-level graphics on die for tablet computers and other mobile form factors. In addition to its deep integration with operating systems like Windows, the AMD 2011 HD Tablet Platform offers support for HTML 5, Adobe Flash 10.2 and external monitors, enabling crisp graphics for gaming, streaming video and other entertainment that enhances the end-user’s experience. It also offers enterprise-level security, allowing IT policy makers to offer the convenience of tablets to an increasingly mobile workforce.

VISION Technology from AMD
VISION Technology aligns closely to the evolving PC purchasing process by minimizing the use of technical jargon and specifications to help consumers choose the best PC for their needs. To ensure customer clarity on offerings when choosing the right PC, AMD has moved to a new numbered tier system. Notebooks and desktops powered by the latest AMD Fusion APUs align with the following experiences:
  • VISION A8 Series PCs will enable Brilliant HD Performance, for consumers who want extreme multi-tasking, online gaming and video editing.
  • VISION A6 Series PCs will enable Brilliant HD Entertainment, great for advanced multi-tasking, photo editing and HD video playback.
  • VISION A4 Series PCs will enable Brilliant HD Every day, perfect for Web browsing, basic multi-tasking and staying in touch with family and friends.
  • VISION E2 Series PCs will enable Smart HD with smooth 1080p HD video playback with the AMD Video Accelerator.
  • AMD HD Internet Series will enable vivid, on-the-go computing experiences on mobile devices like ultrathins and netbooks.
AMD also introduced a new identity for VISION to align with the new tiers. This new identity specifies graphics and core features of notebooks and desktops based on the AMD Fusion Family of APUs for consumers seeking more technical specifications.

At COMPUTEX on June 2, Manju Hegde, corporate vice president of AMD’s Fusion Experience Program will present “Unleashing the Full Power of the PC – Software Development for AMD Fusion APUs.” Get details on the 9-Series chipsets here.

9-Series Chipset Partner Quotes
  • “We’re happy to provide an optimal solution that delivers the ultimate in visual entertainment and maximum performance with overclocking in a highly scalable system.” – LL Shiu, COO, AsRock
  • “ASUS is excited to partner with AMD and be the first to launch the next generation 9-Series based motherboards, the M5A99/97 Series, while also introducing industry firsts DIGI+VRM and UEFI BIOS controls. Customers can look forward to the exciting new technologies that 9-Series brings while still enjoying full backward compatibility with AMD AM3 processors.” – Joe Hsieh, Corporate Vice President, ASUS
  • “Our 9-Series chipset motherboards are designed to extract maximum AM3+ CPU performance without any waste.” – Vincent Lin, Senior Product Manager, Biostar
  • "We are excited to provide Foxconn A97A users with the new, sensational 9-Series AMD platform.” – Dennis Lin, Channel Service Division General Manager, Foxconn Technology Group
  • “We are very pleased and excited to provide such an impressive AMD platform. We’d like everyone to enjoy the colors of tech life with the ECS Black Extreme 9-Series motherboard, the next extreme gaming generation.” – David Chien, Vice President of Channel Business Unit, ECS
  • “We are excited to offer our customers a range of motherboards to help them prepare for the next generation of AMD desktop technology. With our 9-Series
  • motherboards, customers are ready for the future, while enjoying full backward compatibility with AMD AM3 processors.” – Richard Chen, Vice President of Worldwide Sales and Marketing, GIGABYTE
  • “Jetway looks forward to offering customers unlocked native 8-core AMD desktop processor performance with motherboards based on the 9-Series chipset.” – Allen Yang, President, Jetway
  • “MSI is excited about utilizing AMD's next generation AMD 9-Series chipsets and will, thanks to a broad chipset lineup, provide a total solution from entry-level to high-end products. MSI’s AMD 9-Series mainboards offer exhilarating new levels of performance and brand new possibilities and will undoubtedly satisfy the needs of our customers.” – Scott Yang, Vice President, MSI
Add your own comment

46 Comments on AMD Paves the Way for the Next Gen. of Supercharged Desktop PCs with 9-Series Chipset

#1
dirtyferret
anyone else worried how AMD keeps pushing eight core CPUs as "gaming CPUs". they did the same crap with their fraud Phenom II six core units which routinely had the same FPS as their four core alternatives and both where spanked by Intel's new SB dual core CPUs. I would like to upgrade to a new BD CPU in the future but not if AMD's sales pitch is "more cores for your money..." instead of "we have a CPU that can compete with Intel's SB core for core (or at least be in the same ballpark" :shadedshu
Posted on Reply
#2
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Each of those 8 cores has 200% IPC improvement over Phenom II.
Posted on Reply
#3
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
by: dirtyferret
anyone else worried how AMD keeps pushing eight core CPUs as "gaming CPUs".
No, they're going with a new design for their chips this time around so we should be seeing a good performance increase.

by: dirtyferret
they did the same crap with their fraud Phenom II six core units which routinely had the same FPS as their four core alternatives and both where spanked by Intel's new SB dual core CPUs.
The majority of games coming out still don't utilize multiple cores/threads, hence you see a small or even non exist performance difference in CPU's with different core counts. Now when software that does take advantage of multiple cores and threads it is true that Sandy Bridge and the Core i7 line does generally beat out AMD's line of chips, but it's because there architecture can push out more per cycle. But AMD's chips are more then sufficient for gaming and they generally hit the price for performance sweet spot, so there is nothing wrong with advertising their CPU's as gaming CPU's.
Posted on Reply
#4
devguy
by: btarunr
Each of those 8 cores has 200% IPC improvement over Phenom II.
lolwut?
Posted on Reply
#5
wiak
by: dirtyferret
anyone else worried how AMD keeps pushing eight core CPUs as "gaming CPUs". they did the same crap with their fraud Phenom II six core units which routinely had the same FPS as their four core alternatives
thats the game devs foult for not coding their games to support more than 4 cores
Posted on Reply
#6
dirtyferret
by: CDdude55
No, they're going with a new design for their chips this time around so we should be seeing a good performance increase.



The majority of games coming out still don't utilize multiple cores/threads, hence you see a small or even non exist performance difference in CPU's with different core counts. Now when software that does take advantage of multiple cores and threads it is true that Sandy Bridge and the Core i7 line does generally beat out AMD's line of chips, but it's because there architecture can push out more per cycle. But AMD's chips are more then sufficient for gaming and they generally hit the price for performance sweet spot, so there is nothing wrong with advertising their CPU's as gaming CPU's.
I know and agree that AMD CPUs are sufficient for gaming but that doesn't mean I wouln't like a more competitive CPU to Intel offering.
Posted on Reply
#7
NC37
Well it isn't any different than Intel's Mhz is better pushing that they used to do. Consumer will always be swayed with more is better. They don't know anything about what apps will or will not benefit from more cores/etc. In the future I can see more things taking advantage of 8+ cores but right now gaming is hindered by the consoles and those are triple cores with 7900/X1900 level graphics. Unless they take the time to code for more on PC, we'll still be getting games in the dual to quad core range.
Posted on Reply
#8
Bundy
by: dirtyferret
anyone else worried how AMD keeps pushing eight core CPUs as "gaming CPUs". they did the same crap with their fraud Phenom II six core units which routinely had the same FPS as their four core alternatives and both where spanked by Intel's new SB dual core CPUs. I would like to upgrade to a new BD CPU in the future but not if AMD's sales pitch is "more cores for your money..." instead of "we have a CPU that can compete with Intel's SB core for core (or at least be in the same ballpark" :shadedshu
It doesn't worry me because I didn't buy one. IMO AMD have been exagerating their CPU performance to their own detriment. I'm sure I'm not the only person who doesn't trust their claims.
Posted on Reply
#9
Undead46
by: dirtyferret
anyone else worried how AMD keeps pushing eight core CPUs as "gaming CPUs". they did the same crap with their fraud Phenom II six core units which routinely had the same FPS as their four core alternatives and both where spanked by Intel's new SB dual core CPUs. I would like to upgrade to a new BD CPU in the future but not if AMD's sales pitch is "more cores for your money..." instead of "we have a CPU that can compete with Intel's SB core for core (or at least be in the same ballpark" :shadedshu
This has been my thought ever since I heard about BD focusing on 8-core CPU's.

People think BD is supposed to surpass SB easily, but did they ever think why and how would AMD be able to produce a CPU that has more cores AND more performance at a similar or cheaper cost than Intel?

Doesn't make sense to me. :/
Posted on Reply
#10
erocker
by: Undead46
This has been my thought ever since I heard about BD focusing on 8-core CPU's.

People think BD is supposed to surpass SB easily, but did they ever think why and how would AMD be able to produce a CPU that has more cores AND more performance at a similar or cheaper cost than Intel?

Doesn't make sense to me. :/
Cost doesn't reflect consumer price, competition does.
Posted on Reply
#11
mechtech
by: dirtyferret
anyone else worried how AMD keeps pushing eight core CPUs as "gaming CPUs". they did the same crap with their fraud Phenom II six core units which routinely had the same FPS as their four core alternatives and both where spanked by Intel's new SB dual core CPUs. I would like to upgrade to a new BD CPU in the future but not if AMD's sales pitch is "more cores for your money..." instead of "we have a CPU that can compete with Intel's SB core for core (or at least be in the same ballpark" :shadedshu
Which just goes to show you how most games are still pathetically designed for single (core/thread) along with most of the other software that is out there.

Development of native 64 bit programs and programs that take advantage of at least 4 (cores/threads) is utterly slow.
Posted on Reply
#12
mechtech
by: dirtyferret
I know and agree that AMD CPUs are sufficient for gaming but that doesn't mean I wouldn't like a more competitive CPU to Intel offering.
Well it's David vs Goliath. Intel's R&D budget and manpower is probably greater than AMD's entire company. Having an 85% market share helps.

It amazes me that people think AMD should be able to beat Intel or be on par with them with 1/100 the income.

Could you build a better house on your budget vs Bill Gates budget?

And then people complain about competition. Well if no one helps out the little guy how is he ever supposed to get better?

Sigh.
Posted on Reply
#13
Thatguy
by: mechtech
Well it's David vs Goliath. Intel's R&D budget and manpower is probably greater than AMD's entire company. Having an 85% market share helps.

It amazes me that people think AMD should be able to beat Intel or be on par with them with 1/100 the income.

Could you build a better house on your budget vs Bill Gates budget?

And then people complain about competition. Well if no one helps out the little guy how is he ever supposed to get better?

Sigh.
Actually yes you could.Define better !
Posted on Reply
#14
D4S4
by: devguy
lolwut?
me wants to know where that number came from too.
Posted on Reply
#15
suraswami
by: btarunr
Each of those 8 cores has 200% IPC improvement over Phenom II.
any links, articles, discussions please.

dilemma to pick up the 1090T sale on egg or wait few more months to really see if AMD has really worked hard.
Posted on Reply
#16
Black Haru
by: mechtech
Which just goes to show you how most games are still pathetically designed for single (core/thread) along with most of the other software that is out there.

.
false. just false. it has been a long time since I have played a game that didn't take advantage of at least 4 threads. games like battlefield use all 8. I see plenty of market for more cores.
Posted on Reply
#17
kciaccio
Intel is to apple like AMD is to PC. Might be a little better but at twice the price.
Posted on Reply
#18
dirtyferret
by: mechtech
Well it's David vs Goliath. Intel's R&D budget and manpower is probably greater than AMD's entire company. Having an 85% market share helps.

It amazes me that people think AMD should be able to beat Intel or be on par with them with 1/100 the income.

Could you build a better house on your budget vs Bill Gates budget?

And then people complain about competition. Well if no one helps out the little guy how is he ever supposed to get better?

Sigh.
no one asks or expects AMD to be equal with Intel but being in the same ballpark is not too much to ask. What no one wants is AMD to release six-eight core CPUs and then state "look how well it does on synthetic benchmarks" meanwhile Intel dual core CPUs are running past them with ease in every game benchmark. Is a good quad core CPU from AMD that can compete with Intel SB i5 quads (i5-2300 -2400) in real world benchmarks too much to ask? I would think even Intel fan boys would like to see that since competition brings down prices.
Posted on Reply
#19
techtard
It's not AMD or Intel's fault that we are still mostly using games that are designed for single or dual core CPUs.
It's the gamedevs who don't want to go back and re-learn how to program in order to utilize more than 2 cores.
And the game Publishers who insist on making games Xb0x360 compatible, then porting to PC.
Until Xbox dies(or is refreshed to 64-bit, quad-plus core), we're stuck with 32 bit, dx9, dual core, buggy console ports.

Also the AMD quad and hexa cores do okay in the few games that actually use quad-plus cores. But the Intel quad and hexa cores do out perform them.

And, some people do expect AMD to deliver a competitive product. Sadly, they are still living in the Athlon glory days.

It would be nice if they could leverage something to get back on even footing, but it seems like they are stuck 1 generation behind Intel at this point.
I expect Bulldozer to be roughly original i7 series in terms of performance, just like the Phenom line was like the Core2 series.

If they can do better, then I will be pleasantly surprised.
Posted on Reply
#20
Thefumigator
I am the only lucky guy who doesn't use the CPU for gaming purposes?

so my options broadens a lot. More cores are better for my purposes. hopefully with the A8, six core intels will be more affordable. Maybe, I will even have a hard time deciding which one to get. One is already available but has a non-serious GPU inside. C'mon on.... no matter what, its not a serious GPU. The A8 is a complete mystery but we can expect better integrated GPU. Nice for some gaming when you are bored on sundays. But I expect more of it on the open GL optimization for video effects and rendering. Oh and it has to be affordable. I won't be buying a video card, to the contrary, I will be selling mine. But I wouldn't go for A8 APU if that thing costs more than 300$... no way.
Posted on Reply
#21
Damn_Smooth
by: techtard
And, some people do expect AMD to deliver a competitive product. Sadly, they are still living in the Athlon glory days.

It would be nice if they could leverage something to get back on even footing, but it seems like they are stuck 1 generation behind Intel at this point.
I expect Bulldozer to be roughly original i7 series in terms of performance, just like the Phenom line was like the Core2 series.

If they can do better, then I will be pleasantly surprised.
I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you on this Sir.

The last time AMD released a completely new architecture was the glory days of the Athlon.

If they can do as well as they have by using the same basic architecture since then, I think that they will be able to pull off something really special with a completely new one.

Of course, that is just my opinion, and I could very well be wrong. Hopefully the wait to find out won't be too long.
Posted on Reply
#22
Isenstaedt
by: kciaccio
Intel is to apple like AMD is to PC. Might be a little better but at twice the price.
Apple better than PC?
Posted on Reply
#23
NC37
by: Undead46
This has been my thought ever since I heard about BD focusing on 8-core CPU's.

People think BD is supposed to surpass SB easily, but did they ever think why and how would AMD be able to produce a CPU that has more cores AND more performance at a similar or cheaper cost than Intel?

Doesn't make sense to me. :/
Actually it does when you consider you are buying the Intel name. I don't buy into it but they have created this perception of brand name that I guess people buy. Course I grew up with RISC Macs and I never saw Intel as a prestige title. Then when I switched to PC building, I didn't like the premium that came with Intel, so I bought AMD instead.

I really doubt their CPUs are that much more costly than AMD when it all comes down to it at the manufacturing level.
Posted on Reply
#24
adrianx
hello to all

the problem is software.... even if you have a server bord with 4 cpu (16 or more core) the software will not give you an increase of performance that will be at least egual with the number of core

like many I go from x4 to x6 but for the number of cores. more core in this day dont give you a UBER performance... it only give you the real possibility of multitasking, the possibility to run more programs with same performance in one system

the big number of core will give you a bust in any software that need multi processing power or parallel processing. for that the software must be optimized

there are also can be say same words about the design of the core (one core) in phenom II /Phenom 1 and the Bulldozer core, same performance will come from the design

so from were the cpu give as the performance/power .... let see:

- the design of the core....(and of the cpu)
- the power rise from the number of core
- the power rise from the speed of the cpu (of the cores)
- and not in last place the power rise from interconnectivity of the cpu to the system (at this point enter also the memory, the chipset(s),)

Best regards
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment