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

Three New, 95 W AMD FX Series Processors Coming Up

Discussion in 'News' started by Cristian_25H, Feb 17, 2012.

  1. Cristian_25H

    Cristian_25H News Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2011
    Messages:
    4,586 (4.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,161
    Location:
    Still on the East Side
    Before the end of this quarter AMD is set to introduce a bunch of fresh FX Series chips, including three boasting a 95 W TDP, the FX-4150 quad-core, the FX-6120 hexa-core and the FX-8140 octo-core.

    The FX-4150 features a base clock of 3.9 GHz (4.1 GHz Turbo) and 12 MB of cache (4 MB L2 + 8 MB L3) while the FX-6120 has its cores set to 3.5 GHz (4.1 GHz Turbo) and packs 14 MB of cache. As for the FX-8140, it's clocked at 3.2 GHz (4.1 GHz) and has 16 MB of cache. All three models have an AM3+ package and are made using 32 nm process technology. No word on pricing yet.

    [​IMG]

    Source: DonanimHaber
     
    cadaveca says thanks.
  2. Mathragh

    Mathragh

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,085 (0.62/day)
    Thanks Received:
    296
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I wonder whether these are still on the B2 stepping.
     
  3. Norton

    Norton WCG-TPU Team Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Messages:
    8,662 (8.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    19,607
    Would be nice but if they are just binning the existing stepping for new model #'s I will pass and hold onto my 960T for a while longer
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  4. Thefumigator

    Thefumigator

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    412 (0.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    58
    if price on the FX 8100 is reduced enough to make any sense then it would be interesting.
     
  5. seronx

    seronx

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    993 (0.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    219
    Location:
    USA, Arizona, Maricopa
    Still B2

    B3 won't come till after Q1
     
  6. Mathragh

    Mathragh

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,085 (0.62/day)
    Thanks Received:
    296
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Hmm Bummer, got a source for that?
     
  7. fullinfusion

    fullinfusion 1.21 Gigawatts

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Messages:
    8,297 (3.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,097
    Why?
     
  8. naoan New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2009
    Messages:
    304 (0.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    62
    This.
     
  9. blibba

    blibba

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    829 (0.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    183
    Location:
    Oxford, UK
    So, going from 8120 to 8140 you get 100MHZ. Going from 8140 to 8150, however you get 400MHZ. Makes sense AMD, makes sense.
     
    HD64G says thanks.
  10. seronx

    seronx

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    993 (0.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    219
    Location:
    USA, Arizona, Maricopa
    You will know B3 by a 300MHz boost while retaining the same TDP bracket
     
  11. suraswami

    suraswami

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2005
    Messages:
    6,193 (1.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    823
    Location:
    Republic of Asia (a.k.a Irvine), CA
    FX-8140 - should be called as FX-8125?

    FX-8100 around $160 would be perfect!
     
  12. badtaylorx

    badtaylorx

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    479 (0.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    152
    no 4170??? is that going to be a B3 release???
     
  13. eidairaman1

    eidairaman1

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Messages:
    12,629 (4.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,531
    Im assumin this isnt piledriver
     
  14. seronx

    seronx

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    993 (0.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    219
    Location:
    USA, Arizona, Maricopa
    Nope, Piledriver is June(Trinity) and October(Vishera/Delhi)
     
  15. TRWOV

    TRWOV

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    3,527 (3.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,073
    Location:
    Mexico
    Piledriver is FX-?300 series (8350, 6300, etc)
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  16. BlackOmega

    BlackOmega

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2009
    Messages:
    624 (0.30/day)
    Thanks Received:
    159
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    95w TDP as opposed to 125w TDP.

    :toast:
     
  17. WarraWarra New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2010
    Messages:
    268 (0.19/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14
    Any idea if 800m or more transistors would be missing from this as well or can AMD cpu division do a quality check before the release it ?

    Come on Rory send the AMD cpu guys to school so they can count, just not sure how you Rory would get the AMD cpu guys to read if they can not count like a 2.5 year old foreigner child can do in 2 or more languages.
     
  18. seronx

    seronx

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    993 (0.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    219
    Location:
    USA, Arizona, Maricopa
    ~2.0B is from Interlagos

    GFlops and Transistor count from Interlagos was ported to Zambezi and Valencia
    (This is what made Zambezi(FX) sound more awesome*)

    So, there is no missing transistors

    *Explanation:

    2B Transistors?!!?!!? OH FUDGE DRAGON! and only 315mm²!!!!(The max limit for the socket die size was ~1.6B for 32nm)
    64 Flops per Clock this is only EIGHT CORES!!!!
    64 x 3.9 = 249.6 GFlops <-- Everyone who was reading the bad marketing was expecting this
    vs
    32 x 3.9 = 124.8 GFlops <-- What people got after the reviews hit and the information delivered^ was falsified
     
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2012
  19. Super XP

    Super XP

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,759 (0.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    538
    Location:
    Ancient Greece, Acropolis
    Don't know what AMD is doing but the FX-8140 is a waist of a release. They need to stick with numbers that make sense. By releasing the HD 8120 @ 3.1 GHz, they messed up IMO. This should have been 3.20 GHz.
     
  20. Inceptor

    Inceptor

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2011
    Messages:
    497 (0.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    119
    It's not much of an improvement over the first batch, performance-wise.
    But they do fall within the 95W power envelope, which is a step in the right direction.
    As has already been said, maybe a bit of binning (and possibly some improvements in GloFo yields).
     
  21. hellrazor

    hellrazor

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2010
    Messages:
    1,578 (0.94/day)
    Thanks Received:
    319
    I'm still confused to hell why AMD would shove 16MB of cache on a processor. Surely by that time you've started loading useless junk so that it's not empty (which would be even more useless)?

    Or am I missing something important here?
     
  22. seronx

    seronx

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    993 (0.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    219
    Location:
    USA, Arizona, Maricopa
    Zambezi, Zurich, Valencia, and Interlagos are server/workstation CPUs L3 Cache is important

    L2 is cache is unified between the cores(each core knows what is in the L2 cache) and is the prefetcher
     
  23. Super XP

    Super XP

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,759 (0.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    538
    Location:
    Ancient Greece, Acropolis
    I think they need to titen up the latencies and speed of the L3 cache. It just seems they are not utilizing it fully yet.
     
  24. faramir New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    Messages:
    203 (0.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    27
    Given the multitude of blunders pertaining to Bulldozer AMD might as well describe it with teraflops, as in "terrible flop; many of them".
     
  25. NC37

    NC37

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,191 (0.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    266
    It also played a role in gaming. Remember Athlon II vs Phenom II. PIIs would always beat the AIIs in many game benches because of the L3. Think there was some other non gaming uses where it was better, forget now which.

    Was a factor when I went to get my 945. I thought about the 640 but when I bought, the difference between the two was maybe $25 due to sales. Just worth it more for me to have the 945 since I knew I'd use the L3.

    Past gens of AMD chips I'd consider more as lacking in enough cache. Both L2 and L3. Heck my last chip before that was a 5000+ BE with only 512K L2 on each core. Yeah it was a big clocker but all the CPUs with 1MB L2 were just walking all over it in benches. Intel at the time was dumping on cache beyond that. High amounts of L2 with high clock speeds...no wonder AMD got left behind.
     

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

Share This Page