1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Gigabyte Website Lists out FX Series Processors in Support Lists

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Sep 1, 2011.

  1. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,750 (11.14/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,683
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    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.

    [​IMG]

    Source: VR-Zone
     
    YautjaLord, DrunkenMafia and hellrazor say thanks.
  2. Melvis

    Melvis

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    3,588 (1.48/day)
    Thanks Received:
    528
    Location:
    Australia
    Not long now boys!
     
    NAVI_Z and hellrazor say thanks.
  3. BraveSoul

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2008
    Messages:
    991 (0.43/day)
    Thanks Received:
    164
    im sure many have given up waiting ,like me,,release it already
     
  4. caleb

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    1,546 (0.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    205
    Location:
    Poland,Slask
    Too bad gigabyte didn't post prices.
     
  5. 1Kurgan1

    1Kurgan1 The Knife in your Back

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2008
    Messages:
    10,325 (4.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,371
    Location:
    Duluth, Minnesota
    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. NC37

    NC37

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,199 (0.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    266
    Hurry up and release it AMD so we can wait for Piledriver :D.
     
  7. H82LUZ73

    H82LUZ73

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,784 (0.74/day)
    Thanks Received:
    267
    Location:
    Cobourg,Ontario
    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.
     
  8. DrunkenMafia

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    2,277 (0.80/day)
    Thanks Received:
    232
    Location:
    Cairns QLD, Aussie
    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.
     
  9. shrivan New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Messages:
    8 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    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?
     
  10. 1Kurgan1

    1Kurgan1 The Knife in your Back

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2008
    Messages:
    10,325 (4.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,371
    Location:
    Duluth, Minnesota
    I don't see 2 different cache values. I see 2x 8120 processors, only difference is wattage.
     
  11. H82LUZ73

    H82LUZ73

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,784 (0.74/day)
    Thanks Received:
    267
    Location:
    Cobourg,Ontario
    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.
     
  12. theoneandonlymrk

    theoneandonlymrk

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,412 (2.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    572
    Location:
    Manchester uk
    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.
     
    More than 25k PPD
  13. caleb

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    1,546 (0.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    205
    Location:
    Poland,Slask
    huh?
     
  14. theoneandonlymrk

    theoneandonlymrk

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,412 (2.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    572
    Location:
    Manchester uk


    too long a tale he paid a lot though and wanna up as in upgrade( but lazy) NOW:)
     
    More than 25k PPD
  15. TheLaughingMan

    TheLaughingMan

    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    4,998 (2.49/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,291
    Location:
    Marietta, GA USA
    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.
     
    1Kurgan1 says thanks.
  16. 1Kurgan1

    1Kurgan1 The Knife in your Back

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2008
    Messages:
    10,325 (4.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,371
    Location:
    Duluth, Minnesota
    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.
     
  17. TheLaughingMan

    TheLaughingMan

    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    4,998 (2.49/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,291
    Location:
    Marietta, GA USA
    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.
     
  18. [H]@RD5TUFF

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    5,615 (3.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,707
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    how is this news :wtf:
     
  19. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    14,059 (4.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,223
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Because it's the first actual confirmation of Bulldozer info, from a real and verifiable source?;)
     
    mdm-adph and TheLaughingMan say thanks.
  20. [H]@RD5TUFF

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    5,615 (3.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,707
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Yay confirmation of stuff we already knew . . . reviews please!
     
  21. TheLaughingMan

    TheLaughingMan

    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    4,998 (2.49/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,291
    Location:
    Marietta, GA USA
    It is much much faster than your Core 2 Quad in your rig description.
     
  22. [H]@RD5TUFF

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    5,615 (3.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,707
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Is it now source ?:shadedshu obvious troll is obvious
     
  23. bear jesus

    bear jesus New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,535 (1.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    200
    Location:
    Britland
    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.
     
  24. [H]@RD5TUFF

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    5,615 (3.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,707
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    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.
     
  25. bear jesus

    bear jesus New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,535 (1.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    200
    Location:
    Britland
    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.
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page