Wednesday, February 6th 2013

AMD Rolls Out Athlon II X2 280 Value Dual-Core Processor

It's not retirement time for AMD's 45 nm "Regor" silicon just yet, with the company announcing the Athlon II X2 280 value dual-core processor. Built in the socket AM3 package (compatible with AM2/AM2+/AM3/AM3+ motherboards), and based on the company's K10.5 micro-architecture, the chip features two x86-64 cores clocked at 3.60 GHz, 1 MB of L2 cache per core (2 MB total), an instruction set that includes SSE3 and SSE4A, and a dual-channel integrated memory controller that supports both DDR2 and DDR3 memory types. The chip can take advantage of HyperTransport 3.0 interface, with a maximum data-rate of 4.0 GT/s. It features a rated TDP of 65W, and is designed for entry-level desktops. It is priced at US $49.99.
Add your own comment

64 Comments on AMD Rolls Out Athlon II X2 280 Value Dual-Core Processor

#1
Fourstaff
by: cdawall
You would be surprised how many people would see an improvement with the fx chips. Video encoding with a proper encoder, transcoding while playing the game you are recording, new games that use all 8 threads, etc.
Most of the people I know don't really encode and transcode while playing games, yours might be different. At any rate you wouldn't do that if you are running low end processors while playing games.

I don't know about the advantage of 8 cores over 4, in 2 years time, but what I know is that we had this discussion when Phenom II x6 was released and it turned out that the extra 2 cores were not really useful compared to better 4 cores for most people. So given the current trend, I tend to recommend better 4 cores over 8 cores. You can call me shortsighted, but when I do need 8 cores I will go for 3770(K) rather than 8350 due to my set of circumstances.
Posted on Reply
#2
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
by: Fourstaff
Most of the people I know don't really encode and transcode while playing games, yours might be different. At any rate you wouldn't do that if you are running low end processors.

I don't know about the advantage of 8 cores over 4, in 2 years time, but what I know is that we had this discussion when Phenom II x6 was released and it turned out that the extra 2 cores were not really useful compared to better 4 cores for most people. So given the current trend, I tend to recommend better 4 cores over 8 cores. You can call me shortsighted, but when I do need 8 cores I will go for 3770(K) rather than 8350 due to my set of circumstances.
The thing is most programs don't need all those cores, so I totally agree with you there. Multithreading is coming more and more though, especially in the mobile space, but you're right that most people don't need it anyway.
Posted on Reply
#3
jagd
Factory capacity ; phenom/thuban /regor chips are 45nm piledriver is 32 nm . AMD had to stop 45nm production line ( until they updated to 32nm ) and use 32nm product line for 1core /2thread piledriver than .
We will see piledriver/steamroller 1module/2thread cpus eventually in production when fab process updated or high end moved to lower process (28-22 nm )

by: Fourstaff
Also, why not produce 1 module Piledriver for the budget crowd?
Posted on Reply
#4
xvi
by: blibba
It was definitely possible to unlock Phenom II X2s, in fact I've never known anyone try this and fail.
My Phenom II X2 550 BE did not unlock. I remember the unlock success rate being decently good, but not great.
Posted on Reply
#5
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
by: Fourstaff
Most of the people I know don't really encode and transcode while playing games, yours might be different. At any rate you wouldn't do that if you are running low end processors while playing games.
Youtube is full of video game videos obviously someone is transcoding/encoding while playing games.

by: Fourstaff
I don't know about the advantage of 8 cores over 4, in 2 years time, but what I know is that we had this discussion when Phenom II x6 was released and it turned out that the extra 2 cores were not really useful compared to better 4 cores for most people. So given the current trend, I tend to recommend better 4 cores over 8 cores. You can call me shortsighted, but when I do need 8 cores I will go for 3770(K) rather than 8350 due to my set of circumstances.
I do see you as being short sighted. Honestly in applications that take advantage of the 8 cores the 3770K doesn't normally do any better than the 3570K. All hyperthreading can do is keep the pipes loaded down, if they are already loaded down it does nothing but hurt.

This is also a forum about pushing the bleeding edge we are not "most people." Most people don't need more than a dual core like the one listed in this thread. There are no games it cannot handle and no internet browser it cannot run. My tablet and phone both have four cores if you think things are not getting more multithreaded...:rolleyes: Might want to think that one through again.
Posted on Reply
#6
Fourstaff
by: cdawall
Youtube is full of video game videos obviously someone is transcoding/encoding while playing games.
And to do that you need a very powerful PC, not a cheap dual core. See the streamers thread in the clubhouse forums.

by: cdawall
My tablet and phone both have four cores if you think things are not getting more multithreaded...:rolleyes: Might want to think that one through again.
I will re-evaluate my position in a years time, don't worry. For the past few years since the first gen i7 came out it has always been "strong single core performance after 2 threads, get the faster of the two if equal". It has become "strong single core performance after 4 threads", which is where the FX 4xxx chips becomes very potent in my eyes, while the FX6xxx "has no aim", the 8320 is cheap enough to completely skip the 6 cores. Given the average casual workload (ie not much demands like streaming etc.), my current rule of thumb it will be G540, G860, FX4300/ i3 3225 for those who doesn't need external graphics, then 3570K. For those who needs much more horsepower there is the 8320 right after 4300, and then 8350 for those willing to pay more. Those looking for upgrading will be considered case by case. Feel free to comment on my "go to" processor list, and explain why other choices (if you think so) is superior :toast:
Posted on Reply
#7
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
by: cdawall
Youtube is full of video game videos obviously someone is transcoding/encoding while playing games.
It doesn't mean that they have drives with fast I/O storing uncompressed video and doing it after the fact. On the fly encoding is the hardest on the CPU even for a quad core because you have to encode it in real time and still be able to process the game.

Doing this well in HD on a dual-core might be a stretch though. There are cases where even my 3820 struggles a little bit with it. There is a big difference recording 24p video and 60p video at 1080p though.
Posted on Reply
#8
GoFigureItOut
Could a Celeron G550 or G540 be used for a hackintosh build? I've the feeling the CPU does not have enough power for that OS.
Posted on Reply
#9
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
by: Fourstaff
And to do that you need a very powerful PC, not a cheap dual core. See the streamers thread in the clubhouse forums.
Never said the dual core in this thread could handle it. That being said it would outperform a hyperthreaded single core hands down. As for the streamers as I said earlier the FX series performs very well at that better than any of the current more budget minded Intel performance chips available (3570K, 3770K and 3820).

by: Fourstaff
I will re-evaluate my position in a years time, don't worry. For the past few years since the first gen i7 came out it has always been "strong single core performance after 2 threads, get the faster of the two if equal". It has become "strong single core performance after 4 threads", which is where the FX 4xxx chips becomes very potent in my eyes, while the FX6xxx "has no aim", the 8320 is cheap enough to completely skip the 6 cores. Given the average casual workload (ie not much demands like streaming etc.), my current rule of thumb it will be G540, G860, FX4300/ i3 3225 for those who doesn't need external graphics, then 3570K. For those who needs much more horsepower there is the 8320 right after 4300, and then 8350 for those willing to pay more. Those looking for upgrading will be considered case by case. Feel free to comment on my "go to" processor list, and explain why other choices (if you think so) is superior :toast:
Only thing I would toss in would be an APU depending on budget and need for better video. Other than that I have no issues with your list.

by: GoFigureItOut
Could a Celeron G550 or G540 be used for a hackintosh build? I've the feeling the CPU does not have enough power for that OS.
Umm...they do lets just leave it at that.
Posted on Reply
#10
Fourstaff
by: cdawall
Never said the dual core in this thread could handle it. That being said it would outperform a hyperthreaded single core hands down. As for the streamers as I said earlier the FX series performs very well at that better than any of the current more budget minded Intel performance chips available (3570K, 3770K and 3820).
Yeah I was assuming that we are focusing on cheap ass stuff, opps :o

There is no denying that FX is quite decently priced for streamers but from my experiences streamers are the minority which require special attention rather than the majority.

by: cdawall
Only thing I would toss in would be an APU depending on budget and need for better video. Other than that I have no issues with your list.
Forgot about those, but it should come after the G860 for people who can't afford graphics.
Posted on Reply
#11
tokyoduong
My X3 720 did unlock but had to run it at 2.1 ghz to be stable :(

I had a toss up between 3570k and 8350 black also. In the end, i ended up going intel simply because of better single thread performance(something i can use now!) and micro center had a bundle deal 3570k+asrock z77 extreme4 for ~220. Also power difference, I only had a Corsair CX430 to work with at that time.
Now i got a Corsair HX650 and my pc sounds like a bird cage.
Posted on Reply
#12
Ravenas
by: btarunr
(compatible with AM2/AM2+/AM3/AM3+ motherboards)
That is unbelieveable. I love AMD.
Posted on Reply
#13
soryuuha
im using old AM2 socket with Athlon 4400+...can I buy this and replace my old 4400+?
Posted on Reply
#14
eidairaman1
by: soryuuha
im using old AM2 socket with Athlon 4400+...can I buy this and replace my old 4400+?
depends if that motherboard will support the CPU, and if the board maker has launched a bios update for it.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment