Thursday, September 1st 2011

Gigabyte Website Lists out FX Series Processors in Support Lists

The CPU support list in the product page of Gigabyte's top of the line socket AM3+ motherboard, the GA-990FXA-UD7, spilled out details of upcoming AMD FX series processors, days ahead of actual product launches. Tables listing out specs of FX processors aren't new, but in older occasions, they were posted by the media citing sources. This table comes from a leading motherboard manufacturer. In this case, the 990FXA-UD7 will support FX series processors from BIOS version F4.

The table lists out FX 8000 series 8-core processors, and one each of FX 6000 and FX 4000 series 6-core and 4-core chips. A new detail emerging with this table is the system interface speed, which has been bumped all the way up to 5200 MT/s, up from 4000 MT/s of the previous generation. The faster 8-core chips have TDP rated at 125W, while every other FX series chip is rated at 95W. FX 8000 series chips include the 3.60 GHz FX-8150, the 3.10 GHZ FX-8120, 2.80 GHz FX-8100; FX 6000 series includes the 3.30 GHz FX-6100; while the quad-core FX 4000 series includes the 3.60 GHz FX-4100. The FX series is expected to launch in this month.

Source: VR-Zone
Add your own comment

40 Comments on Gigabyte Website Lists out FX Series Processors in Support Lists

#1
Melvis
Not long now boys!
Posted on Reply
#2
BraveSoul
im sure many have given up waiting ,like me,,release it already
Posted on Reply
#3
caleb
Too bad gigabyte didn't post prices.
Posted on Reply
#4
1Kurgan1
The Knife in your Back
Interesting that 2 of them share same frequency and different wattages (different turbo core clocks?). Also interesting that there is a 500mhz gap between top dog and 2nd rung.
Posted on Reply
#5
NC37
Hurry up and release it AMD so we can wait for Piledriver :D.
Posted on Reply
#6
H82LUZ73
by: 1Kurgan1
Interesting that 2 of them share same frequency and different wattages (different turbo core clocks?). Also interesting that there is a 500mhz gap between top dog and 2nd rung.
6 and 8 mb cache speeds too.they only get 3.6ghz as highest speed also,Looks to me like the chips will be locked multiplier and unlocked multiplier.
Posted on Reply
#7
DrunkenMafia
Come on already!! I am about to install my 990fx-ud5 but have no processor to plug in. What is it like 2 weeks to go or something, I am surprized more reviews aren't popping up on the net, usually someone has early samples.
Posted on Reply
#8
shrivan
by: H82LUZ73
6 and 8 mb cache speeds too.they only get 3.6ghz as highest speed also,Looks to me like the chips will be locked multiplier and unlocked multiplier.
What do you mean by that? If I understood correctly all "FX" chips will be unlocked anyways, so what kind of "locked" multiplier are you referring to?
Posted on Reply
#9
1Kurgan1
The Knife in your Back
by: H82LUZ73
6 and 8 mb cache speeds too.they only get 3.6ghz as highest speed also,Looks to me like the chips will be locked multiplier and unlocked multiplier.
I don't see 2 different cache values. I see 2x 8120 processors, only difference is wattage.
Posted on Reply
#10
H82LUZ73
by: 1Kurgan1
I don't see 2 different cache values. I see 2x 8120 processors, only difference is wattage.
lets see did you guys look at the last 3 chips on that list ? 1x4 1x6 l2 by 8mb l3 also i think the 95watt ones will be locked but that's just me.The top 2 looks like a unlocked 125watter ,Must be for the volt bleed.
Posted on Reply
#11
theoneandonlymrk
all b2 at least eh, cant wait for some genuine benches so i can finallly make me mind up, my mates just upped to an i7 750 and dual 460,s and is doin my head in with his braggin, specially since hes a mong and paid over odds for ol stut, wanna up Now.
Posted on Reply
#12
caleb
by: theoneandonlymrk
specially since hes a mong and paid over odds for ol stut, wanna up Now.
huh?
Posted on Reply
#13
theoneandonlymrk
by: caleb
Quote:
Originally Posted by theoneandonlymrk
specially since hes a mong and paid over odds for ol stut, wanna up Now.

huh?
too long a tale he paid a lot though and wanna up as in upgrade( but lazy) NOW:)
Posted on Reply
#14
TheLaughingMan
by: H82LUZ73
lets see did you guys look at the last 3 chips on that list ? 1x4 1x6 l2 by 8mb l3 also i think the 95watt ones will be locked but that's just me.The top 2 looks like a unlocked 125watter ,Must be for the volt bleed.
by: H82LUZ73
6 and 8 mb cache speeds too.they only get 3.6ghz as highest speed also,Looks to me like the chips will be locked multiplier and unlocked multiplier.
by: 1Kurgan1
I don't see 2 different cache values. I see 2x 8120 processors, only difference is wattage.
All FX chips will have unlocked multipliers. And 3.6 is not the top speed as this chart does not list the turbo speeds. Without confirmation the 125W FX-8120 will have a higher Turbo and use it more often since it has a more TDP to play with. If I recall, the rumor is 125W FX-8120 will have a turbo of 4.0 Ghz and the 95W will only go up to 3.6 Ghz. But I have no confirmation from AMD about this, just rumors. It could end up being a case where processors get listed as supported but never released or those will be for used for Dell, HP, and other desktop makers who use crappy coolers.
Posted on Reply
#15
1Kurgan1
The Knife in your Back
by: TheLaughingMan
All FX chips will have unlocked multipliers. And 3.6 is not the top speed as this chart does not list the turbo speeds. Without confirmation the 125W FX-8120 will have a higher Turbo and use it more often since it has a more TDP to play with. If I recall, the rumor is 125W FX-8120 will have a turbo of 4.0 Ghz and the 95W will only go up to 3.6 Ghz. But I have no confirmation from AMD about this, just rumors. It could end up being a case where processors get listed as supported but never released or those will be for used for Dell, HP, and other desktop makers who use crappy coolers.
I'm assuming the goal will be to make the 125W the better binned chips, but if demand is high on the 95W then they will have to use some of those. I don't use Turbo core anyways, lets hope they clock like the x6's, because I love how my 1055 has always clocked like it's big brothers.
Posted on Reply
#16
TheLaughingMan
by: 1Kurgan1
I'm assuming the goal will be to make the 125W the better binned chips, but if demand is high on the 95W then they will have to use some of those. I don't use Turbo core anyways, lets hope they clock like the x6's, because I love how my 1055 has always clocked like it's big brothers.
I hope the rumored turbo clocks are accurate. Even if you don't use the Turbo mode, it would dictate the processor will run at Turbo speed at stock voltage with just a multipler bump (since that is how they do it) if you can keep the temperature in check. This means the FX-8150 should get up to 4.2 GHz and the FX-8120 up to 4.0 GHz without breaking a sweat. I am sure it will go further, but I like to think of that as kinda of a factory OC guarantee.

I personally don't mind the power throttling and turbo clocks but I will disable the former during testing of these chips.
Posted on Reply
#18
cadaveca
My name is Dave
by: [H]@RD5TUFF
how is this news :wtf:
Because it's the first actual confirmation of Bulldozer info, from a real and verifiable source?;)
Posted on Reply
#19
[H]@RD5TUFF
by: cadaveca
Because it's the first actual confirmation of Bulldozer info, from a real and verifiable source?;)
Yay confirmation of stuff we already knew . . . reviews please!
Posted on Reply
#20
TheLaughingMan
by: [H]@RD5TUFF
Yay confirmation of stuff we already knew . . . reviews please!
It is much much faster than your Core 2 Quad in your rig description.
Posted on Reply
#21
[H]@RD5TUFF
by: TheLaughingMan
It is much much faster than your Core 2 Quad in your rig description.
Is it now source ?:shadedshu obvious troll is obvious
Posted on Reply
#22
bear jesus
by: [H]@RD5TUFF
Is it now source ?:shadedshu obvious troll is obvious
Come on, surly they will beat the core 2 quads.... if not then AMD is pretty screwed and failed very hard :laugh: but yes a pointless statement until there is some proof either way.
Posted on Reply
#23
[H]@RD5TUFF
by: bear jesus
Come on, surly they will beat the core 2 quads.... if not then AMD is pretty screwed and failed very hard :laugh: but yes a pointless statement until there is some proof either way.
I would hope it was but AMD never misses a chance to fail, so I am taking the view of proof or it's not true.
Posted on Reply
#24
bear jesus
by: [H]@RD5TUFF
I would hope it was but AMD never misses a chance to fail, so I am taking the view of proof or it's not true.
If bulldozer can't beat the core 2 quads then it would make perfect sense that the delay was AMD trying to clock them higher and explains the idea of adding in water coolers as they had to clock so high the stock cooler would always fail... i could see it happening :laugh:

Honestly i expect bulldozer to just make me give my money to Intel but i agree with the proof, only reviews from respected sites will allow me to part with my money no matter who the money is going to.
Posted on Reply
#25
[H]@RD5TUFF
by: bear jesus
If bulldozer can't beat the core 2 quads then it would make perfect sense that the delay was AMD trying to clock them higher and explains the idea of adding in water coolers as they had to clock so high the stock cooler would always fail... i could see it happening :laugh:

Honestly i expect bulldozer to just make me give my money to Intel but i agree with the proof, only reviews from respected sites will allow me to part with my money no matter who the money is going to.
That's how I see it.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment