Wednesday, July 23rd 2008

AMD 45nm Deneb Consumes up to 12% Less Power Compared to 65nm Agena

The newest fleet of quad-core desktop processors from AMD, the Deneb series is tested by Chinese website Zol to consume up to 12 per cent less power compared to equally clocked 65nm Agena parts, add to that, the fact that the 45nm Deneb comes with three times the amount of L3 cache, 6 MB.

The 45nm and 65nm parts were compared on a MSI K9A2 Platinum motherboard with a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280 card, a single 320 GB HDD, two modules of 1GB DDR2 1066 MHz memory, the test-bed was powered by a Thermaltake Toughpower 1200W PSU. Power consumption was calculated in idle and load (the CPUs were stressed using instances of Orthos).
In idle, the 45nm CPU-based system's power consumption was measured to be 147W compared 154W of the 65nm CPU-based setup. In load, the margin increased with the 45nm CPU-based system running at 176W compared to 200W of the 65nm CPU-based setup.

Sources: Zol, ITOCP
Add your own comment

40 Comments on AMD 45nm Deneb Consumes up to 12% Less Power Compared to 65nm Agena

#1
vojc
Yokozuna said:
The 12% reduction was in the overall system power consumption. That means the reduction in the CPU's TDP is more than 12%.
true, it consums 24W less so tdp should be 100w instead 125W that is abaut 20% less
Posted on Reply
#2
Mussels
Moderprator
even more impressive, i feel stupid for not realising that :P
Posted on Reply
#3
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
DanTheBanjoman said:
124W still isn't something I'd put in my PC. Besides it says "up to", so on average the gain is lower.
How about this: these chips feature IMC (memory controllers) that apart from adding to the CPU's overall power load, also fuel the memory modules?

AMD chipsets (both by AMD and NVIDIA) consume less power compared to their Intel counterparts (chipsets by NVIDIA and Intel), so much so that the same desktop chipsets by AMD make it to laptops. So the difference between a Phenom and Intel Quad in terms of CPU consumption is shadowed by the fact that the lower power consumption of Intel CPUs is marred by higher consumption of the MCH chips (northbridge).
Posted on Reply
#4
vojc
yes it is true, so u must always lok for total power consumption of system under load
Posted on Reply
#5
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
So 125W you wouldnt put in your pc, but the older p4 architecture hit that did it not?

Lower power is always better for my utility bills. I hope these clock well. I may wait on these instead of a 9850BE :D`
Posted on Reply
#6
Jelle Mees
Does anyone know when these CPU's are going to get released? And how much will they cost?
I am planning on buying a new PC at the end of august and I would love to go back to AMD, if these CPU's are decent offcourse.
Posted on Reply
#7
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
I may have to wait and get one of these instead of the Phenom i was going to get.
Posted on Reply
#8
TheGuruStud
Jelle Mees said:
Does anyone know when these CPU's are going to get released? And how much will they cost?
I am planning on buying a new PC at the end of august and I would love to go back to AMD, if these CPU's are decent offcourse.
You're out of luck. Try January, I think :shadedshu
Posted on Reply
#9
vsary6968
Viscarious said:
Im fairly certain the G34 will surprise us. But you are right too. Its only a blueprint we've seen with very few details on production, however, I have strong faith with AMD on this one. I mean cmon! Its code named 'Bulldozer'!
I think you are wrong. The G34 is not a Bulldozer. The Bulldozer is a new architecture from AMD. It is 8-16 core and 8-16 threads. It has quad G3MX memory control , it's a fusion cpu with GPU+ CPU side by side on the same die.It also have SSE5 instruction set and a new 170 instruction set.This will be a fast single thread.Sandtiger compete win the server and enterprise market.Bulldozer wiill be in desktop.This bulldozer to be 3X the performance of the shanghai.
Posted on Reply
#10
candle_86
WarEagleAU said:
So 125W you wouldnt put in your pc, but the older p4 architecture hit that did it not?

Lower power is always better for my utility bills. I hope these clock well. I may wait on these instead of a 9850BE :D`
not sure where it hit, but i had a P4 weld itself to the heatsink, and no im not exageration here
Posted on Reply
#12
Jelle Mees
hayder.master said:
at last , amd is back
Lol, they are not.

The AMD 45nm Deneb will finally be able to compete with the Intel Q-series. But don't forget that Intel will release their next-gen CPU's only a month or two after AMD Deneb release.

They are not back, they are seriously behind...
Posted on Reply
#13
DanTheBanjoman
Señor Moderator
btarunr said:
How about this: these chips feature IMC (memory controllers) that apart from adding to the CPU's overall power load, also fuel the memory modules?

AMD chipsets (both by AMD and NVIDIA) consume less power compared to their Intel counterparts (chipsets by NVIDIA and Intel), so much so that the same desktop chipsets by AMD make it to laptops. So the difference between a Phenom and Intel Quad in terms of CPU consumption is shadowed by the fact that the lower power consumption of Intel CPUs is marred by higher consumption of the MCH chips (northbridge).
It is completely irrelevant where the power goes. Fact is it is a single small chip from where you have to move heat away. According to your logic putting a GPU and CPU on a single die and have some 300W monster is good "because it also has the GPU". The only relevant thing there is that it is near impossible to move away 300W from a single small die, no matter what tasks it fulfills.
I'd rather have two chips.
Posted on Reply
#14
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
But then energy spent on the machine remains the same, right? As also the machine's total heat generated? It's not like the stock coolers AMD supplies with these 125W chips can't keep them reasonably cool.
Posted on Reply
#15
WhiteLotus
This does look promising; however i have a question:

If say you wanted to sacrifice this energy saving could you not just pump some voltage through it to get to a higher clock - providing cooling is ok?
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment