Thursday, October 16th 2008

Kuma Manifests into Athlon X2 7550, 7750

Industry sources reveal that AMD would be branding its Kuma dual-core processor as Athlon X2 7000 series. These processors are aimed to compete with Intel's Core 2 Duo E7000 series processors. Kuma continues to use the 65nm SOI fabrication process. The core sports 512 KB L2 cache per core, and a shared 2 MB L3 cache. Surprisingly, despite having sub-3.00 GHz clock speeds, the processors have rated TDP of 95W.

These processors use a broader 3600 MT/s HyperTransport interface, and feature DDR2 memory controllers that support the PC2-8500 (1066 MHz) standard. As for the models, the Athlon X2 7550 has a clock speed of 2.50 GHz, and an FSB multiplier of 12.5x. The Athlon X2 7750 comes with the clock speed of 2.70 GHz, and a FSB multiplier of 13.5x. Both processors are expected to be out by Q1 2009.

As for its 45nm successor, there are early indications that it would be succeeded by the Phenom X2 10000 series processors. Depending on the clock speeds, they would be branded as 10x00, with "x" deciding the model number. These would support PC3-10600 (DDR3-1333) memory and have lower TDP of 65W.Source: Expreview
Add your own comment

57 Comments on Kuma Manifests into Athlon X2 7550, 7750

#1
mdm-adph
I think it's a bit strong to say that AMD's products "suck" -- that's a very subjective term. Their products were great when Intel was forcing space-heater Pentium D's onto the market. :laugh:

They're just a bit behind in R&D right now, but that happens to every company from time to time.
Posted on Reply
#2
Silverel
http://forum.msi.com.tw/index.php?topic=120437.0

Moderator in that thread pretty much says the MOSFETs under the heatsink are entirely different, and the cooling solution is non-functional. lol

Ah well, I run my X2 5000BE at 3.36GHz all the time, and nothing has caught on fire yet. Ye can try it at your own risk I suppose. :)
Posted on Reply
#3
mdm-adph
Silverel said:
http://forum.msi.com.tw/index.php?topic=120437.0

Moderator in that thread pretty much says the MOSFETs under the heatsink are entirely different, and the cooling solution is non-functional. lol

Ah well, I run my X2 5000BE at 3.36GHz all the time, and nothing has caught on fire yet. Ye can try it at your own risk I suppose. :)
Aye, but which version do you have? If you've got version 1, I hope I have your luck. :D
Posted on Reply
#4
Silverel
mdm-adph said:
Aye, but which version do you have? If you've got version 1, I hope I have your luck. :D
v1 for me.

There's been plenty of reports of people using the 125w procs and not having any problems when overclocking as well. It's just outside MSI's reasonable limit for warranty coverage. It's not guaranteed to catch on fire, but probably a good 10-15% chance of it.:rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
#5
mdm-adph
Silverel said:
v1 for me.

There's been plenty of reports of people using the 125w procs and not having any problems when overclocking as well. It's just outside MSI's reasonable limit for warranty coverage. It's not guaranteed to catch on fire, but probably a good 10-15% chance of it.:rolleyes:
Aye -- I heard some people using the 125w X2 6000's fine, but they weren't doing any overclocking -- either way, even if there's only a 10-15% chance of fire, I'm likely to get burned! :laugh:

I wonder if your X2 5000 BE, even at 3.3GHz, uses as much as 125w or over...
Posted on Reply
#6
christof139
OK, and thanx for the advice. Yeah, I saw that info. at MSI where they had originally rated the mobo as 125W capable and then removed that info. Bummer.

The long hunk of aluminum I have is a heat sink from an old 478-pin Acer board and it fits over the staggered Mosfets on the MIS K9 mobo but doesn't cover all the MOSFETS completely because they are staggered in arrangement, but that's OK I guess. I probably could also cut the aluminum HS up with a Dremel etc. into individual pieces.

Yeah, I am familiar with the new 89W 6000+ but it also only has 2x512kb of L2, so I will stick with my 5400+ BE as it is fast enough at 3.2GHz. I picked it up new off Ebay for $66 including shipping. being cheap is OK, fun, and just plain cheap. %-) Following that train of thought I should fire-up my old 571 Prescott space heater or even put the PD 940 in since Winter id about here and extra heat from these CPU's is OK now and dual purpose cheap.

I'm thinking of getting one of these Jetway mobos as they seem to be very good and will take 125W and I believe 140W CPU's:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813153113

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813153116

Don't know though, as this 5400+ BE and K9 v1.0 mobo are OK. Once a person starts fiddling with compooters like this it is somewhat addicting.

Those two early 65nm Kumas might be able to OC on the K9 v1.0 mobo to 3.2GHz or so with decent cooling, as I bet they will run cool and not much above 95W OC'd. Have to wait and see and read reviews on them.

An x3 8750 is also OK, and I saw that a x3 8850 BE was released in late October but have not seen it yet at any retail outlets worldwide. Phrrrt.

I usally don't change CPU voltages when OC'ing so I limit myself, but the K9 v1.0 mobo I have now doesn't allow this, but the Jetway mobos do.

I enjoy your description of Windows: Win•dows: n. A thirty-two bit extension and graphical shell to a sixteen-bit patch to an eight-bit operating system originally coded for a four-bit microprocessor which was written by a two-bit company that can't stand one bit of competition.

Thanx for the good advice and info., Chris

PS: I also have read of people running 125W CPU's on the K9 v1.0 without problems, and other people not being able to do so and having the MOSFETS pop and even catch fire. With my luck they would pop and blaze, so I will stick with 95W and below CPU's for this mobo, until I get one of those Jetways. Maybe, if they still remain cheap that is.
Posted on Reply
#7
christof139
mdm-adph said:
I think it's a bit strong to say that AMD's products "suck" -- that's a very subjective term. Their products were great when Intel was forcing space-heater Pentium D's onto the market. :laugh:

They're just a bit behind in R&D right now, but that happens to every company from time to time.
Yeah, it is a silly remark. The AMD Phenoms are now doing OK and people report good performance and they do beat Intel CPU's at some tasks, so overall they are OK for the price. Many people are pleased with them. The TLB Bug was a joke in the earlier B2's, nonexistant IOTW except under extreme 3D rendering conditions or wahatever it was, and the bug did not show-up in the RW (real world), and even those B2's are performing better on the SB700 and SB750 chipsets, ans still do OK on the SB600. Not everyone OC's.

The Intel Prescotts and PD's were hot and performed less than the AMD X2's. Lucky for Intel that they started using hafnium metal gateways and the ferrite chokes (or whatever) in the Conroe core, otherwise AMD would still be faster now due to Intel's use of inferior macro architecture including no onboard memory controller. Intel used an onboard memory controller many years ago but it didn't work good for them and they dropped it, but AMD took the idea and made it work.

The competition between Intel and AMD is good, and also leads to price cuts/drops for those of us - and we are many, we are legion :eek: :D- that enjoy cheap prices. :laugh:

Finding ultracheap stuff that works OK to good is even better. Most women apparently don't have this same view on things.

Chris

PS: @mdm-adph, the 2 HD 4670's I have in XFire at 770MHz x 1140MHz only give a 0.2GPixel rise to 6.2 GPixel Fillrate, a 0.4GTexel rise for 15.4GTexel Texture Fillrate, and a 4.5GB/sec rise in Bandwidth to 36.5GB/sec, but help give that 11,737 or so 3DMark06 score, which isn't bad or cheap for a cheap system.
Posted on Reply