Wednesday, January 30th 2013

AMD Releases FX-4130 "Vishera" Quad-Core Processor

AMD introduced the FX-4130 value quad-core processor. Although slotted in the 4100 series, which suggests it being based on the older "Zambezi" silicon, the new FX-4130 is in fact based on the newer "Vishera" silicon, and the "Piledriver" micro-architecture. AMD is following a competitive (price-performance) approach to its CPU lineup, rather than a pure-performance one, and the FX-4130 is pitted by the company against the similarly priced Intel Core i3-2100.

The FX-4130 features four cores spread across two "Piledriver" modules, 3.80 GHz nominal clock speed with 3.90 GHz Turbo Core frequency, 2 MB L2 cache per module, 4 MB shared L3 cache, and an up to date instruction-set that includes AVX, AES-NI, SSE4.2, FMA, and XOP. Similarly priced Intel chips lack some of these instruction sets. With the FX-4130, AMD is packing a chunkier stock fan-heatsink than older FX-4000 series chips, which spins at lower speeds to keep the chip cool, and is hence less noisy. The new FX-4130 is priced at $99.99.


Source: X-bit Labs
Add your own comment

60 Comments on AMD Releases FX-4130 "Vishera" Quad-Core Processor

#2
Cataclysm_ZA
I've actually been wondering how long it would take until someone else would catch on that this is still a Zambezi chip, not Vishera. Its ridiculous to think that a quad-core Piledriver would have a TDP of 125W when the FX-4300 has a 95W TDP.

Sadly, other publications on the internet that I've contacted refuse to change the article to reflect that this is a price drop, not a new processor release. The FX-4130 has been around since late August last year.
Posted on Reply
#3
eidairaman1
if you truly want to know the difference between chips check the effin OPN and Stepping
Posted on Reply
#4
micropage7

come on, i wait for power and performance ratio
200 watts? too bad..
Posted on Reply
#5
tacosRcool
The name is very misleading since its Piledriver vs Bulldozer
Posted on Reply
#6
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
If AMD was smart (and could scrounge up the money,) moving their CPUs to a smaller process would help with the power consumption issue and at the same time will improve clock speeds and performance. I feel AMD is just beating around the bush every time they release another 32nm chip.
Posted on Reply
#7
Norton
WCG-TPU Team Captain
by: Aquinus
If AMD was smart (and could scrounge up the money,) moving their CPUs to a smaller process would help with the power consumption issue and at the same time will improve clock speeds and performance. I feel AMD is just beating around the bush every time they release another 32nm chip.
iirc AMD is bringing their CPU's down to 28nm to match the GPU side first in order to utilize a common process. The upcoming generation of APU's should be this way.

After that? Who knows....
Posted on Reply
#8
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: micropage7
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=49899&stc=1&d=1359712065
come on, i wait for power and performance ratio
200 watts? too bad..
That is entire system power draw, not just the processor.

by: Cataclysm_ZA
I've actually been wondering how long it would take until someone else would catch on that this is still a Zambezi chip, not Vishera. Its ridiculous to think that a quad-core Piledriver would have a TDP of 125W when the FX-4300 has a 95W TDP.

Sadly, other publications on the internet that I've contacted refuse to change the article to reflect that this is a price drop, not a new processor release. The FX-4130 has been around since late August last year.
It is probably going to take a pretty long while since this isn't a Zambezi chip. The Zambezi FX-4130 has an OPN of FD4130FRGUBOX, the new Vishera FX-4130's OPN is FD4130WMHKBOX.

What I find odd is that AMD is acting like the Zambezi FX-4130 never existed. They are comparing the new FX-4130 to the FX-4100. I'm guessing that is because if they compared it to the old FX-4130 the improvements would be non-existent...
Posted on Reply
#9
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
by: micropage7
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=49899&stc=1&d=1359712065
come on, i wait for power and performance ratio
200 watts? too bad..
I think there is other information we need before this graph really means much of anything. What about the rest of the platform? As far as we know the platform isn't consistant between CPUs.

Also, people bash AMD because they consume they "consume a lot of power," but you know AMD processors release less of its total consumed power as heat as opposed to Intel. So an Intel chip with the same power draw as an AMD CPU will release more of that energy as heat. Just some food for thought. I suspect this is a SOI vs HKMG difference.
Posted on Reply
#10
Cataclysm_ZA
by: newtekie1
It is probably going to take a pretty long while since this isn't a Zambezi chip. The Zambezi FX-4130 has an OPN of FD4130FRGUBOX, the new Vishera FX-4130's OPN is FD4130WMHKBOX.
Have you taken into account that the change in the OPN numbers could be because they're shipping a different cooler in the box? Because that's all that's really changed, in addition to the price drop.

by: newtekie1
What I find odd is that AMD is acting like the Zambezi FX-4130 never existed. They are comparing the new FX-4130 to the FX-4100. I'm guessing that is because if they compared it to the old FX-4130 the improvements would be non-existent...
Still doesn't make sense, AMD would never release a chip from the Vishera family to market with the same naming convention as Bulldozer - their entire philosophy now is simplifying their chip lineup, not expanding it to the absurdity that we see with Intel. The FX-4300 starts off with the same default clocks and a higher boost speed but consumes less power and produces less heat - that's a Piledriver chip, unlike the FX-4130 which was released last year.
Posted on Reply