| Wednesday, August 27 2008 |
The transition of the K10 architecture by AMD to the 45nm silicon fabrication process is stirring up interesting revelations these days. First, it was about surprisingly low power consumption of the quad-core Phenom parts, and then about the overclocking headroom those 45nm parts provided, at least the engineering samples did so far. And now, news coming in that AMD could be resurrecting the "FX" series of extreme performance products. Over the past three or so years, the performance trail AMD products had over Intel's made it close to impossible for AMD to sell parts that provide performance tuning advantages such as unlocked FSB multiplier settings for a premium, like it did back when K8 reigned the performance segment. "Black Edition" chips made up for that deficit by providing consumers overclocking advantages while not charging a significant premium and at the same time, safeguarding the "FX" title, not letting it dilute.
Come AMD Deneb core and lot seems to be on offer. To begin with, unlike the Windsor core that had a maximum FSB multiplier of 16.0x, initial reports suggest the Deneb to sport a maximum 25.0x multiplier, 200 MHz x 25 = 5.00 GHz, with the FSB left to play with. Considering at 2.30 GHz the Deneb draws in 57.3 W (according to findings), it should still leave enough room for AMD to sell premium products clocked at high frequencies.
From Reviewage's findings, there seem to be two Phenom FX processors in the making. The numbering seems to take off where it last left at the Athlon64 FX 74. The two chips, Phenom FX 80 and Phenom FX 82 could be clocked at 4.00 GHz and 4.40 GHz respectively (stock speeds). An interesting statement is that at 4.00 GHz, the Phenom FX 80 should outperform an Intel Kentsfield core clocked at 5.00 GHz, implies it has to be faster than the Kentsfield on a clock-to-clock basis. This opens up an interesting debate on how these parts compare to the succeeding Yorkfield chips. This should also open gates for several models to enter the market at various clock speeds.
Source: Reviewage
Come AMD Deneb core and lot seems to be on offer. To begin with, unlike the Windsor core that had a maximum FSB multiplier of 16.0x, initial reports suggest the Deneb to sport a maximum 25.0x multiplier, 200 MHz x 25 = 5.00 GHz, with the FSB left to play with. Considering at 2.30 GHz the Deneb draws in 57.3 W (according to findings), it should still leave enough room for AMD to sell premium products clocked at high frequencies.
From Reviewage's findings, there seem to be two Phenom FX processors in the making. The numbering seems to take off where it last left at the Athlon64 FX 74. The two chips, Phenom FX 80 and Phenom FX 82 could be clocked at 4.00 GHz and 4.40 GHz respectively (stock speeds). An interesting statement is that at 4.00 GHz, the Phenom FX 80 should outperform an Intel Kentsfield core clocked at 5.00 GHz, implies it has to be faster than the Kentsfield on a clock-to-clock basis. This opens up an interesting debate on how these parts compare to the succeeding Yorkfield chips. This should also open gates for several models to enter the market at various clock speeds.
Source: Reviewage
User comments
IF these truly are at stock then i am buying one or sure. I guess there isn't any word on a release date yet?
And also the heat generated must need a good cooler. I REALLY hope this isn't all smoke and mirrors.
And also the heat generated must need a good cooler. I REALLY hope this isn't all smoke and mirrors.
by: PVTCaboose1337
Bad choice AMD. Skip this generation, and go for better than Nahalem.
could it be possible that amd is pulling a fast one...atleast i can hope thats the way they're going...after all remember the 4800s being compared to the g92s...when in actuality they were much better...another aim low but actually high....kind of deceptive but i can respect that...
and for all you nehalem fanboi's nehalem is really a multithreaded beast i want it, but i am tired of changing intel boards....i only have one/two amd leftover board and that is the k7n2 delta series from msi, and the k8neo plat for 939...with intel however i have 4 socket 775 boards....it just sucks that a same socket board cant support a cpu with the same structure layout.
back to topic, the 4850 especially did a killing and now its just a matter of time before the 4850 x2 does the same, so my question to those who dont think it can be done.....
why cant it? last i check the p4s were high clocked resource hogs(power) with diminishing returns....
:rockout: This will be part of my next build for sure. :respect: FX
I do actually have to say - this is the first time i am actually looking forward to something. Sure i've wanted to see to how things perform but this time - I actually WANT to see how it performs!
I want this chip!
Man i feel so sad.
I want this chip!
Man i feel so sad.
Lets hope AMD can deliver, not just for our sake but for theirs.
by: springs113thats kinda an odd argument
could it be possible that amd is pulling a fast one...atleast i can hope thats the way they're going...after all remember the 4800s being compared to the g92s...when in actuality they were much better...another aim low but actually high....kind of deceptive but i can respect that...
and for all you nehalem fanboi's nehalem is really a multithreaded beast i want it, but i am tired of changing intel boards....i only have one/two amd leftover board and that is the k7n2 delta series from msi, and the k8neo plat for 939...with intel however i have 4 socket 775 boards....it just sucks that a same socket board cant support a cpu with the same structure layout.
back to topic, the 4850 especially did a killing and now its just a matter of time before the 4850 x2 does the same, so my question to those who dont think it can be done.....
why cant it? last i check the p4s were high clocked resource hogs(power) with diminishing returns....
2000-2000 Socket A 100mhz
2000-2002 Socket A 133mhz
2002-2003 Socket A 166-200mhz
2004-2005 Socket 754
2004-2006 Socket 939
2006-2007 Socket AM
2007-2008 Socket AM2+
2000-2001 Socket 423
2001 Socket 478 100mhz
2001-2002 Socket 478 133mhz
2002-2004 Socket 478 200mhz
2004-2008 Socket 775
2006-2008 Socket 775 Core2 support
AMD and Intel have the same record.
I Dont think they need to for theirs Jbunch. I am playing a wait and see, but the PR looks very nice. As an AMD fan Ill admit I like what they are saying but I dont know if its that viable. I do like watching Intel fans squirm and cry foul on it. Lets remember that is took Intel years to finally adopts AMDs ground breaking architecture startings with the 64 series. Ondie mem controllers and Hyper transport (getting rid of the FSB pretty much) has been standard. Now AMD rolls out, supposedly, with something alot better and lower watts. I cant wait and see. Then all the AMD leavers who went Intel will stuff it. (End fanboy rant ;) ).
All jokes aside, it looks to be a promising chip for AMD.
All jokes aside, it looks to be a promising chip for AMD.
Nice,4ghz with 1.1vcore :D
by: candle_86
thats kinda an odd argument
2000-2000 Socket A 100mhz
2000-2002 Socket A 133mhz
2002-2003 Socket A 166-200mhz
2004-2005 Socket 754
2004-2006 Socket 939
2006-2007 Socket AM
2007-2008 Socket AM2+
2000-2001 Socket 423
2001 Socket 478 100mhz
2001-2002 Socket 478 133mhz
2002-2004 Socket 478 200mhz
2004-2008 Socket 775
2006-2008 Socket 775 Core2 support
AMD and Intel have the same record.
You dont need to change board, if you do the right choice, especially on amd side. S939 was available at the same time as s754, and it's support X2. AM2 is compatible with AM2+ cpu-s (i hope 45nm parts too).
by: WarEagleAU
All jokes aside, it looks to be a promising chip for AMD.
Yea I agree. I love my FX-64 to bits. I just want this to be true so much. Although I bet that if it is true the pricing will be high.
any word on when we will start seeing these?
Yorkfield/Wolfdale are still way faster per clock and clock above 4 GHz already. Actually, I believe I've read that Deneb is still behind Conroe/Kentsfield on the per-clock performance. So, uh, big whoop. The frugal power use is welcome, considering how ridiculous 65nm Phenom is on that. But 45nm Core 2 is stunningly frugal....perhaps unbeatably so. It idles at like 6W or so. Intel doesn't have AMD's cool IGPs though so they don't have a sweet low-power platform.
I don't see what's so exciting here. Or why people have ever been excited by Phenom. Bring me a $100 45nm Phenom for my low power 780G rig and I'll buy one to replace the $50 A64X2 in it. But I'm not buying one for something I want pure speed from, nor am I paying any significant amount for one.
I don't see what's so exciting here. Or why people have ever been excited by Phenom. Bring me a $100 45nm Phenom for my low power 780G rig and I'll buy one to replace the $50 A64X2 in it. But I'm not buying one for something I want pure speed from, nor am I paying any significant amount for one.
by: jbunch07Nothing on the offical AMD news pages. which is the sucks.
any word on when we will start seeing these?
by: Valdezwell when i went A64 939 wasn't out yet, i jumped on 754 when the A64 3200 Clawhammer launced.
You dont need to change board, if you do the right choice, especially on amd side. S939 was available at the same time as s754, and it's support X2. AM2 is compatible with AM2+ cpu-s (i hope 45nm parts too).
This is exactly how AMD beat Intel the first time. They came out of the blue with the A64 and completely destroyed intel.
Phenom scales better as it reaches higher clocks. I'm sure that AMD realized that they just needed to hold on long enough to get 45nm chips taped so that they could unleash the true potential of Phenom.
Phenom scales better as it reaches higher clocks. I'm sure that AMD realized that they just needed to hold on long enough to get 45nm chips taped so that they could unleash the true potential of Phenom.
I hope this is for real. I've been a fan since the T bird. I was shafted enough times by Intel to stay with AMD high or low water. I've been gritting my teeth every once in awhile and making my 939 tread water hoping it wouldn't sink before Amd came out with a decent replacement.
by: flashstarHope it doesn't get to Nutburst Ghz war with zero performance increase.
This is exactly how AMD beat Intel the first time. They came out of the blue with the A64 and completely destroyed intel.
Phenom scales better as it reaches higher clocks. I'm sure that AMD realized that they just needed to hold on long enough to get 45nm chips taped so that they could unleash the true potential of Phenom.
by: candle_86maybe i should rephrase a little... what i really meant was that with intel there is too much of a risk in having to overhaul your entire core of a build...amd gives us users a lil more adaptive chance. im not debating im just speaking from my past experience...normally with every other intel new process/chipset you have to change your mobo...amd is less likely.
thats kinda an odd argument
2000-2000 Socket A 100mhz
2000-2002 Socket A 133mhz
2002-2003 Socket A 166-200mhz
2004-2005 Socket 754
2004-2006 Socket 939
2006-2007 Socket AM
2007-2008 Socket AM2+
2000-2001 Socket 423
2001 Socket 478 100mhz
2001-2002 Socket 478 133mhz
2002-2004 Socket 478 200mhz
2004-2008 Socket 775
2006-2008 Socket 775 Core2 support
AMD and Intel have the same record.
this is not another netburst hoopla... the phenom is no weak chip as it outperforms the x2s clock for clock...and the x2s aint no push over...
with that being said, i have both a c2d setup and x2 setup the current phenoms use too much power for this day and age so i am waiting for the denebs
with that being said, i have both a c2d setup and x2 setup the current phenoms use too much power for this day and age so i am waiting for the denebs
O my bold clams i predicted this would happen based on rumors and they are all coming true and i jest looked if they use socket G34 which they originally saved for servers this new processor will FLY.
rumors heard:
DDR4 (highly skeptical DDR3 support though)
Larger pin-size (G34 plosible)
Higher clocks (if true confirmed)
New HT since over due (3.1 will do confirmed)
more stuff on the CPU die (hay talk of a PCI-E controller)
skipping NM tech (nothing so far but 32nm used by ATI in next gen cards speculation)
rumors heard:
DDR4 (highly skeptical DDR3 support though)
Larger pin-size (G34 plosible)
Higher clocks (if true confirmed)
New HT since over due (3.1 will do confirmed)
more stuff on the CPU die (hay talk of a PCI-E controller)
skipping NM tech (nothing so far but 32nm used by ATI in next gen cards speculation)
by: WhiteLotusI will never beat the FX-62's 1000+ $$ price tag at launch.
Yea I agree. I love my FX-64 to bits. I just want this to be true so much. Although I bet that if it is true the pricing will be high.
I love my FX too! :respect:
It may not be the fastest out there but it run's all my games so darn well.
by: springs113
this is not another netburst hoopla... the phenom is no weak chip as it outperforms the x2s clock for clock...and the x2s aint no push over...
with that being said, i have both a c2d setup and x2 setup the current phenoms use too much power for this day and age so i am waiting for the denebs
One part of the problem in Phenom power consumption lies within current motherboards not using its power savings abilities. Also, there were numerous reports of motherboards overvolting the CPU...who is to blame for this I don't know...
by: candle_86except for one thing AMD lets you use even the oldest mobo on the newest chip with the same socket try that with early C2D/Q boards and new C2D/Q
thats kinda an odd argument
2000-2000 Socket A 100mhz
2000-2002 Socket A 133mhz
2002-2003 Socket A 166-200mhz
2004-2005 Socket 754
2004-2006 Socket 939
2006-2007 Socket AM
2007-2008 Socket AM2+
2000-2001 Socket 423
2001 Socket 478 100mhz
2001-2002 Socket 478 133mhz
2002-2004 Socket 478 200mhz
2004-2008 Socket 775
2006-2008 Socket 775 Core2 support
AMD and Intel have the same record.
Man, I'm loving AMD right now, I would shit a brick to see them take control of both gfx and processing.
I kinda felt like AMD was a lurking beast the shadows waiting for it's chance to take control. Looks like that time is coming.
THOSE PESKY GERMANS!
I kinda felt like AMD was a lurking beast the shadows waiting for it's chance to take control. Looks like that time is coming.
THOSE PESKY GERMANS!
Add to that socket list another Socket 775, because new boards with new VRD11.1 power supply specs do not support older CPUs, look: http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Support/Motherboard/CPUSupport_Model.aspx?ProductID=2839