Tuesday, April 22nd 2008

AMD Releases Two 45W Energy-Efficient Athlon X2 Chips

Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) today silently released two more energy-efficient Athlon desktop processors with a TDP of 45W. Both the Athlon X2 4450e and the Athlon X2 4050e are dual-core Socket AM2/AM2+ processors clocked at 2.3GHz and 2.1GHz respectively. They are built on 65nm technology and feature 1MB of L2 cache.Source: TechConnect Magazine
Add your own comment

17 Comments on AMD Releases Two 45W Energy-Efficient Athlon X2 Chips

#1
Solaris17
Creator Solaris Utility DVD
hmm i think i want to overclock these
Posted on Reply
#2
ShadowFold
They've been on newegg for about 4 days now. No wonder they said silent cause I havent heard of them before I saw them :laugh: I wish they were out when I was building my HTPC :(
Posted on Reply
#3
PVTCaboose1337
Graphical Hacker
ShadowFold said:
They've been on newegg for about 4 days now. No wonder they said silent cause I havent heard of them before I saw them :laugh: I wish they were out when I was building my HTPC :(
I saw them on newegg too when I was looking. I think that the CPU looks like a fun OC'er and CPU for HTPC nuts, but otherwise, I'm gonna stay away and stick to a quad. Now if there was an energy efficient quad...
Posted on Reply
#4
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
They are supposed to have some EE Quads coming out, though Im not sure when. Looks like they would oc like mad.
Posted on Reply
#5
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
just to point this out EE don't mean it will oc better with AMD
Posted on Reply
#6
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
howabout a BE of these Cores
Posted on Reply
#7
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
there is supposed to be a 4850BE on the way
Posted on Reply
#8
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
hope its 2.4GHz instead of 2.5, Brisbane numbering was so goofed up
Posted on Reply
#9
suraswami
cdawall said:
just to point this out EE don't mean it will oc better with AMD
you r absolutely right. I bought a 65w 3800 windsor core. No matter what voltage I apply that donkey doesn't want to go faster. Max speed is 2.2G at 1.25V from 1.2V. I even applied 1.45V to see if it can OC more. Nope. That sucker can run at 2G @ 1.1V all day long. @ 1.25 and 2.2 full load of Orthos or video authoring it never goes more than 30C on each core. I even put a portable ceramic heater right next to the side intake fan at 85F:D. Then too it won't go more than 30C. Tested with 2 brand of mobos still the same.

Thats the reason I bought the 5600+ and it rocks.

So I am thinking it might be the other way. AMD test the core and see if it can be high binned if not drop the frequency then drop the voltage too to see how far low it can go.
Posted on Reply
#10
wiak
more 45W = great for htpcs, i got a htpc with a X2 5000+ black and it gets 60c on load :(
:P
Posted on Reply
#11
tkpenalty
These CPUs btw come with heatpipe coolers :D... a really silent solution
Posted on Reply
#12
swaaye
I bet my personally-undervolted 1.0v 90nm 3800+ is about 45W. And it was the cheapest AMD dual core Newegg had a month ago at a whole $40. It's fun to see how low you can go on the volts at stock clocks. It's even more fun to see if you can overclock and still run lower volts than stock. :) I think I had this prime stable at 1.15v at 2.4 GHz. Preferred maximum power efficiency though so I stuck with 1.0v at 2.0 GHz.
Posted on Reply
#13
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
Blah, these are Brisbane Core which causes the Clock speed to not match the performance rating.
Posted on Reply
#14
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
its not that far off? mine @3.34 does almost as good as a 90nm @ the same spped its within 5%
Posted on Reply
#15
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
what im getting at is 2.5GHz x2 does not make 4800 it should make 5000.
Posted on Reply
#16
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
the 5000+ is 2.6ghz which is the same across 65nm and 90nm
Posted on Reply
#17
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
its requiring a few more MHz to Obtain the PR that technically isnt right

its odd but the 4800 939 is still faster than the 4800 AM2 Brisbane despite the 100 MHz clock difference
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment