Monday, November 2nd 2009

AMD Updates CPU Schedule

AMD updated its CPU market schedules, looking as far as Q4 2010, across various CPU product lines. The update involves phasing out several existing products, adding replacements, and the addition of new products, according to sources in the motherboard industry. To begin with, several Phenom II X4 900 series quad-core processors will be discontinued. The company has reportedly already stopped taking orders for the Phenom II X4 910 (HDX910WFK4DGI, 2.60 GHz), and the 125W Phenom II X4 945 (HDX945FBK4DGI, 3.00 GHz). The latter perhaps is phased out due to its 95W variant (HDX945WFK4DGM). The company will stop taking orders for the 140W Phenom II X4 965 BE in Q1 2010, perhaps because of its 125W variant, for X4 925 around the same time, and for the X4 955 125W in Q2. The company is planning to release a 95W variant of the X4 955 around that time.

The company will also stop taking orders for several Phenom II X4 800 series, X3 700 series, X2 500 series, and Athlon II X4 600 series, and X3 400 series processors, as Phenom II X4 820, Phenom II X3 740 and Phenom II X2 550 will remain. Q4 2009 will see the introduction of the 3.20 GHz Phenom II X2 555, the new Athlon II X4 640 (3.00 GHz, 95W), and the Athlon II X3 445 (3.10 GHz, 95W) will follow in Q2 2010.

Finally, Q2 2010 will see the introduction of the company's six-core processor, codenamed "Thuban". Built on the 45 nm process, it features 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. It retains the socket AM3 package, and the first in the series could sport a clock speed of 2.80 GHz.Source: DigiTimes
Add your own comment

56 Comments on AMD Updates CPU Schedule

#1
Kantastic
Great more regret for going i7.
Posted on Reply
#2
Melvis
Iam planning to get the 965 as my next CPU upgrade, and the lower the Watts the better :) and its also dropped another $100 here in AUS.

SC doesn't utilize 4 cores well at all, 1 core is maxed out and the others are running at like 5%, but it helps alot in SC to play the game smoothly and handle thousands of units.

L4D now that Utilizes 4 cores very well ;)

SC was tested on a 9950

L4D was tested on a 945
Posted on Reply
#3
angelkiller
This article would be alot easier to follow if there was a chart or some kind of visual.
Posted on Reply
#4
1Kurgan1
The Knife in your Back
pantherx12 said:
I'm currently making my 905e a 955 95w specs : ]
Problem with that is you dont have the higher multi or uppable multi to get higher clocks, also most likely a lower binned chip, going to 3.2ghz is a nice gain, but thats a pretty low clock compared to what the 955 could achieve.
Posted on Reply
#5
pantherx12
I've seen reviewers with stock cooling hit 3.6 with these chips XD

Considering stock speed is 2.5 I think that's pretty good.

I'm running at 3.25ghz at the moment 1.285 volts in bios, 0.950 volts when I idle ( cpuz and AMD overdrive) and 0.987 volts underload.

Using a domino ALC to cool it at the moment ( although it is modded) 22c idle 37 underload.

Its 100% stable at the moment so I might try reducing voltage further.

Thing is I've no idea how to Over clock with AMD chips so I'm not sure what other voltages etc can help me push this thing further.

I want at least 3.5ghz.
Posted on Reply
#6
Munki
I sure hope that this goes down with the 965 @ 125w BE This is the reason im waiting for this instead of finishing my build!
Posted on Reply
#7
Velvet Wafer
pantherx12 said:
I've seen reviewers with stock cooling hit 3.6 with these chips XD

Considering stock speed is 2.5 I think that's pretty good.

I'm running at 3.25ghz at the moment 1.285 volts in bios, 0.950 volts when I idle ( cpuz and AMD overdrive) and 0.987 volts underload.

Using a domino ALC to cool it at the moment ( although it is modded) 22c idle 37 underload.

Its 100% stable at the moment so I might try reducing voltage further.

Thing is I've no idea how to Over clock with AMD chips so I'm not sure what other voltages etc can help me push this thing further.

I want at least 3.5ghz.
you got CnQ on i believe.... that would explain the low vcore in windows, i just dont get why its so low under load?:wtf:
Posted on Reply
#8
pantherx12
I do, but I thought it just lowered clocks and voltages during idle ....

Will see what happens when I disable.

Cheers.
Posted on Reply
#9
Velvet Wafer
pantherx12 said:
I do, but I thought it just lowered clocks and voltages during idle ....

Will see what happens when I disable.

Cheers.
when OCing, CnQ can work, but it mustnt work, on many boards, its broken, or produces unwanted side effects. better use k10stat for that;)
Posted on Reply
#10
eidairaman1
Gimme a quad with 1MB Cache for each core under the Athlon II X4 BE Moniker at 3.2GHz and you have yourself a deal.
Posted on Reply
#11
Flyordie
pantherx12 said:
I've seen reviewers with stock cooling hit 3.6 with these chips XD

Considering stock speed is 2.5 I think that's pretty good.

I'm running at 3.25ghz at the moment 1.285 volts in bios, 0.950 volts when I idle ( cpuz and AMD overdrive) and 0.987 volts underload.

Using a domino ALC to cool it at the moment ( although it is modded) 22c idle 37 underload.

Its 100% stable at the moment so I might try reducing voltage further.

Thing is I've no idea how to Over clock with AMD chips so I'm not sure what other voltages etc can help me push this thing further.

I want at least 3.5ghz.
Well, I am running my 2x Istanbuls @ 3.0Ghz and they are drawing an estimated 95-100W each... so... surely they will be 95W'rs @ 3.0 and lower and 125W @ 3.0 and higher...
Posted on Reply
#12
PP Mguire
Kantastic said:
Great more regret for going i7.
Why? Your i7 will kick even the AMD Hexacores ass. No regrets with an i5/i7 :toast:
Posted on Reply
#13
Munki
PP Mguire said:
Why? Your i7 will kick even the AMD Hexacores ass. No regrets with an i5/i7 :toast:
Would you care to elaborate? Spec to Spec AMD > Intel, Price AMD > Intel. You cant tell me Intel i7 Extreme @ a grand for 3.33ghz with 2mg more cache is better than a $200 AMD Phenom II x4 @ a stock 3.4. Intel may allow a better OC'er but does it seriously justify $800 in this case? I think not.....
Posted on Reply
#14
Flyordie
When I had my Istanbul ES's I was pushing them to 3.8Ghz on air cooling with only 1.475V... a custom setup from Dynatron that uses a vapor chamber over the CPU with 4 "joined" heatpipes tied directly into the Vapor Chamber, with 45 aluminum fins soldered to the heatpipes.

Gave me temps of 28C idle and 45-47C load after 12 hrs of 100% loading using LINPACK.
Posted on Reply
#15
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Munki said:
Would you care to elaborate? Spec to Spec AMD > Intel, Price AMD > Intel. You cant tell me Intel i7 Extreme @ a grand for 3.33ghz with 2mg more cache is better than a $200 AMD Phenom II x4 @ a stock 3.4.
But a Core i5 750 at $199 is? Anyway that's a different topic.
Posted on Reply
#16
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
Shoot, Ill stick with my 125W 955BE. I love this thing.
Posted on Reply
#17
PP Mguire
Munki said:
Would you care to elaborate? Spec to Spec AMD > Intel, Price AMD > Intel. You cant tell me Intel i7 Extreme @ a grand for 3.33ghz with 2mg more cache is better than a $200 AMD Phenom II x4 @ a stock 3.4. Intel may allow a better OC'er but does it seriously justify $800 in this case? I think not.....
btarunr said:
But a Core i5 750 at $199 is? Anyway that's a different topic.
Exactly. The price dosent justify it but stock to stock an i7 920 is better than a 955/965 period. You cant really argue with somebody who upgraded from camp AMD top dog to camp Intel mainstream and thinks its 5x better performance wise in anything. Yes, my 720be and 940be and 955be where all equally good for gaming but i do more with my PC than game. An i5 at 4ghz will deff stomp an equally clocked AMD cpu. Not trying to flamebate or anything, but as was said...no bulldozer? Nothing to see here folks.
Posted on Reply
#18
pantherx12
Flyordie said:
Well, I am running my 2x Istanbuls @ 3.0Ghz and they are drawing an estimated 95-100W each... so... surely they will be 95W'rs @ 3.0 and lower and 125W @ 3.0 and higher...
Eh well I don't know how much power the processor is actually drawing :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#19
eidairaman1
PP Mguire said:
Exactly. The price dosent justify it but stock to stock an i7 920 is better than a 955/965 period. You cant really argue with somebody who upgraded from camp AMD top dog to camp Intel mainstream and thinks its 5x better performance wise in anything. Yes, my 720be and 940be and 955be where all equally good for gaming but i do more with my PC than game. An i5 at 4ghz will deff stomp an equally clocked AMD cpu. Not trying to flamebate or anything, but as was said...no bulldozer? Nothing to see here folks.
Listen dude, this is about AMD, not Intel alright, lets keep it on track here people. Stop the Fanboy quotes now.
Posted on Reply
#20
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
Munki said:
Would you care to elaborate? Spec to Spec AMD > Intel, Price AMD > Intel. You cant tell me Intel i7 Extreme @ a grand for 3.33ghz with 2mg more cache is better than a $200 AMD Phenom II x4 @ a stock 3.4. Intel may allow a better OC'er but does it seriously justify $800 in this case? I think not.....
Did we suddenly get transported back to the year 2000? Is this seriously an arguement that clock speed is what matters?:laugh:

Spec to Spec, AMD looks better on paper.
If you go off those paper specs, yes AMD looks better price wise.

Problem is that performance is what matters, not paper specs. When performance is considered, AMD isn't really better than Intel, at least not at the level you are talking about. The i5 750 outperforms the 965BE. Of course you will probably also go on about how the Intel doesn't have an unlocked multiplier, but when the Intel also overclocking better than the 965BE, what does an unlocked multiplier matter?

Anything above $200 AMD can't even compete with, so comparing is impossible. The lower end stuff AMD has some great deals, sometimes even better than Intel, but anything above the low-mid performance sector AMD can't compete.
Posted on Reply
#21
PP Mguire
Oh yes, a fanboy because ive had intel for TWO WEEKS. :rolleyes:

Matter a fact, my sig still has AMD in it. Its called stating the facts. Software support isnt there for more than say, 3 cores. So releasing a hexacore to desktop is kind of a waste when it wont outperform whats already out and good. Id say MAYBE it might be something to talk about if its cheaper than an i5 750, but i doubt it will be. So here again, no bulldozer? Move along.
Posted on Reply
#22
eidairaman1
Thats why Im waiting for the 4MB Athlon II X4 Quads, who needs L3???

newtekie1 said:
Did we suddenly get transported back to the year 2000? Is this seriously an arguement that clock speed is what matters?:laugh:

Spec to Spec, AMD looks better on paper.
If you go off those paper specs, yes AMD looks better price wise.

Problem is that performance is what matters, not paper specs. When performance is considered, AMD isn't really better than Intel, at least not at the level you are talking about. The i5 750 outperforms the 965BE. Of course you will probably also go on about how the Intel doesn't have an unlocked multiplier, but when the Intel also overclocking better than the 965BE, what does an unlocked multiplier matter?

Anything above $200 AMD can't even compete with, so comparing is impossible. The lower end stuff AMD has some great deals, sometimes even better than Intel, but anything above the low-mid performance sector AMD can't compete.
Posted on Reply
#23
PP Mguire
eidairaman1 said:
Thats why Im waiting for the 4MB Athlon II X4 Quads, who needs L3???
If you wanna go that route then who needs 4 cores? According to other AMD user statements 3 is just fine. Who needs DDR3? DDR2 is just as fast on an AMD based rig. :banghead:
Posted on Reply
#24
eidairaman1
PP Mguire said:
If you wanna go that route then who needs 4 cores? According to other AMD user statements 3 is just fine. Who needs DDR3? DDR2 is just as fast on an AMD based rig. :banghead:
Well DDR2 is being phased out, L2 Cache is faster than L3 anyday.
Posted on Reply
#25
PP Mguire
But on an AMD rig the gains of going DDR3 is slim to none. And you cant put on 6mb of L2. L3 does help more than one would think. Just not in the way of camp AMD.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment