Saturday, June 27th 2009

AMD Readying Phenom II X4 965

Following its roadmap, AMD is continuing with new processor releases based on the Deneb core with increases in the multiplier. The Phenom II X4 965 comes with a clock speed of 3.40 GHz, and an FSB multiplier of 17.0x, giving it a 200 MHz increase over the 955 Black Edition. It is not known if 965 comes in a Black Edition branding, one which could determine its pricing. If launched as a Black Edition (version with unlocked bus multiplier), It could either be priced above the 955, or could displace it and position itself at US $249.99. Without the BE branding it could be priced slightly lower. The new chip will be based on the AM3 package, supporting DDR3 1333 MHz and DDR2 1066 MHz. It comes at a time when AMD is releasing the RS880-based AMD 785G chipset. AMD will dispatch samples of the Phenom II X4 965 starting next week. Source: Tweaktown
Add your own comment

102 Comments on AMD Readying Phenom II X4 965

#27
wiak
VulkanBros
That´s one hell of a FSB frequency.......:wtf:
so you still think AMD still use Front Slow Bus like Intel does? :D
Posted on Reply
#28
VulkanBros
wiak
so you still think AMD still use Front Slow Bus like Intel does? :D
Nope.....sure don´t hope there on speed...haha
Posted on Reply
#29
Nick89
LMAO. Poor bastards that bought the 955:laugh:
Posted on Reply
#30
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
btarunr
I'm hearing that the C2 revision-stepping of Deneb can allow making SKUs till 3.80 or even 4.00 GHz safely, maybe the higher clocked ones scraping the 140W TDP mark. I can't confirm this though.
The roles have reversed. Intel has the IPC advantage so AMD is pushing for higher and higher clocks. It reminds me of Pentium 4/Athlon 64 days except backwards.


Mussels
AMD might well come ahead of intel here, at least until i5 comes out.... (i7 is too expensive, AM3 will definately have more bang per buck compared to that)
Core i7 has a lot of clockspeed headroom. I'm afraid this clockspeed war AMD is starting is one they can't win. The question is, at what point does Intel counter them? I doubt 3.6 GHz is enough but 3.8 GHz might be. We might see Intel respond with a 3.6 GHz Core i7.

At least until Intel responds, this might drive Intel prices down which is good for everyone.
Posted on Reply
#31
snakeoil
overheating core i7 can't ramp up speed

the overheating core i7 can't increase stock speed beyond 3.3, overheats too much because of hyperthreading, phenom II is power efficient and stays cool, which gives room for increasing stock speed using stock cooler

[IMG]http://forums.techpowerup.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=26915&stc=1&d=1246140427[/IMG]
Posted on Reply
#32
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
All that means is Intel will have to include large HSFs and when you're buying a $600+ processor, a $50 HSF is a drop in the bucket. Then again, Intel might not do anything with the upperend of Core i7 until 32nm Westmere processors are out.
Posted on Reply
#33
snakeoil
FordGT90Concept
All that means is Intel will have to include large HSFs and when you're buying a $600+ processor, a $50 HSF is a drop in the bucket.
yeah they should include a coolermaster V8 as stock cooler, for $1000 bucks they should
Posted on Reply
#34
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
Ooh I was gonna grab a 720 or a 955, but I may grab this, especially if the price is 250.
Posted on Reply
#35
Hayder_Master
i see it is 955 with overclock , we wait and see the black addition 965 cuz this well be hit 7Ghz world overclock record
Posted on Reply
#36
Kitkat
legends84
lol... i just got my PII 955 BE.. should've wait for this:ohwell:
hahaha honestly nah... 975 prolly your train to catch

snakeoil
overheating core i7 can't ramp up speed

the overheating core i7 can't increase stock speed beyond 3.3, overheats to much because of hyperthreading, phenom II is power efficient and stays cool, which gives room for increasing stock speed using stock cooler

http://forums.techpowerup.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=26915&stc=1&d=1246140427
k so i did laff outloud lol anways stuff hapens between too i hope it is a stepping revision + the lower watt (required) ver. they have resently anounced. I honestly dont think there gonna keep bumping all the way to 955. Some other descovery will hapen or tweak b4 they do that. (controler improvement, twp drop again ect matiral change) Im also hoping they go ahead and skip 2 of those in the end lol I remember when 945 got passed up for black and it was given to 955. I seriouly wanted the next anouncement news to be 975. But heay 200+ still want it if its black lol, thats gonna be great
Posted on Reply
#38
t77snapshot
Nick89
LMAO. Poor bastards that bought the 955:laugh:
Yeah I was saving up for a 955.....but now there is a 965 coming?!:twitch: It seems like the 955 just came out, wow times flies:rolleyes: AMD is really stepping it up I love it:D
Posted on Reply
#39
Kantastic
I find it amusing how both AMD and Intel have a bunch of 9xx chips.

920
945
955 - I believe Intel will be releasing a 955?
965
Posted on Reply
#40
A Cheese Danish
That is pretty sweet they are bringing out the 965! But then again, I don't have any monies, so I can't really
build a new system like I want to :(
Wonder how the overclockability will be on it
Posted on Reply
#41
aj28
FordGT90Concept
Core i7 has a lot of clockspeed headroom. I'm afraid this clockspeed war AMD is starting is one they can't win. The question is, at what point does Intel counter them? I doubt 3.6 GHz is enough but 3.8 GHz might be. We might see Intel respond with a 3.6 GHz Core i7.
Eh, that's questionable really. And besides, what are we measuring on, stock coolers or LN2? The i7 920 already comes with a beastly cooler just to run 2.66Ghz at reasonable temps, and that's putting aside the fact that it carries a 130W TDP. Beyond that, Intel has already shown that they will milk every Mhz for twice what it's worth with the high-end i7 pricing. $1000? Really?? If you need that kind of power and you have that kind of money, you might as well just buy a damn server!

But I'll be real. The i7 is a great processor, the most powerful on the market, and certain very specific models are a good value, but on the whole Intel is losing to AMD's package approach. With better marketing (and smarter OEM's), the Dragon platform presents the absolute best solution for middle-class gamers around the world, who aren't afraid to get their hands dirty squeezing out power for pennies. And besides...

Real men use real cores.
Posted on Reply
#42
Yukikaze
aj28
Eh, that's questionable really. And besides, what are we measuring on, stock coolers or LN2? The i7 920 already comes with a beastly cooler just to run 2.66Ghz at reasonable temps, and that's putting aside the fact that it carries a 130W TDP.
That is hardly questionable. I can run my CPU at 4Ghz on air, and just about anyone with a D0 stepping i7 920 can do the same, with decent temperatures, on a 37$ cooler (Scythe Mugen 2). How many Phenom IIs that hit 4Ghz on air are there (The average seems to sit around the 3.7-3.8Ghz mark, or so, and the 955BE isn't really clocking better than the 940BE, is it ? To me it looks like AMD is creating higher clocked SKUs which do not neccessarily attain better overclocks in order to look faster) ? This is not to say that there are none, but there are definitely less. If we also remember that the i7 (And the Core 2) is more effective than the Phenom IIs clock for clock, the advantage becomes more evident.

For my current 24/7 settings, my CPU, which is far from being the best 920 out there, needs 1.18v, and with the said 37$ cooler loads to the low 60 degrees C in very hot weather (Lowest ambient we see now is in the low 30 degrees C). I can also run 3.2Ghz at1.04v, which would be well attainable on the stock cooler - Since it is less volts than stock voltage on my chip (!) and sub 1.0v 3Ghz i7 920s aren't very rare.

Besides, aren't the higher end Phenom IIs, namely the 940 and 955, 125W TDP chips, and 5W aren't anything to get fussed over ?

aj28
Beyond that, Intel has already shown that they will milk every Mhz for twice what it's worth with the high-end i7 pricing. $1000? Really?? If you need that kind of power and you have that kind of money, you might as well just buy a damn server!
True, but the Extreme Edition CPUs are not meant to compete against AMD's Black Edition chips. The vanilla 920 does that just fine. I consider anyone buying the EEs as either nuts (not neccesarily in the bad way, actually), or simply rich enough to not care.

aj28
But I'll be real. The i7 is a great processor, the most powerful on the market, and certain very specific models are a good value, but on the whole Intel is losing to AMD's package approach. With better marketing (and smarter OEM's), the Dragon platform presents the absolute best solution for middle-class gamers around the world, who aren't afraid to get their hands dirty squeezing out power for pennies. And besides...
There is no argument there. The 710 and 720BE at their price points are very hard for Intel to beat (Currently, they aren't beat, at least not here). But the situation at the higher end of the spectrum is different. The i7 920 is priced well when compared to the higher end Phenom IIs, and the price of very, very good X58 motherboards is compared to the price of the higher end AM3 motherboards, at least here. Granted, you can build a Ph2 920 rig for cheaper by using a cheap motherboard, but if you're going that route, you might be better off with a 720BE altogether for a cheaper setup altogether.

aj28
Real men use real cores.
And much good does it do them ?

Now, before I am being accused of fanboyism. I am a fanboy of nothing. I recommend AMD builds several times a week, and I do not remember when I last recommended an Intel build which wasn't an i7 for someone of sufficient budget, or wasn't E5200+G31 based for people with next to no budget. Additionally, I was choosing between my current i7 920 and the Ph2 940 less than two months ago. I chose to go the i7 route, since it got me a platform that will happily run both SLI and CF and perform better while doing either, for under 100$ of difference back then. The difference hasn't grown since.

In the bottom line, Intel has nothing to compete against AMD's excellently priced triple-cores, but with the prices of the i7 920 being what they are, AMD has a very tough fight on their hands. This is not to say that Intel isn't losing ground, it probably is (But not according to the Steam HW survey), but not due to AMD's high-end chips. I do think that Intel is somewhat neglecting the "mainstream" for the past few months, since they are focusing on their Lynnfields, and it might cost them more than they have planned for. On the other hand, Lynnfield based CPUs might give AMD a sound beating come September. Time will tell.
Posted on Reply
#43
snakeoil
Yukikaze
For my current 24/7 settings, my CPU, which is far from being the best 920 out there, needs 1.18v, and with the said 37$ cooler loads to the low 60 degrees C in very hot weather (Lowest ambient we see now is in the low 30 degrees C). I can also run 3.2Ghz at1.04v, which would be well attainable on the stock cooler - Since it is less volts than stock voltage on my chip (!) and sub 1.0v 3Ghz i7 920s aren't very rare.
.
so you have a core i7 that doesn't overheat and is not powerhungry, great, you should read the core i7 reviews in newegg where 50% percent at least complain about the heat, probably those people got the lemons

one of many
''Cons: Doesn't have a truly unlocked core multiplier. I can't get mine above 21x. I heard the i7 965 has a completely unlocked multiplier (don't actually know).
The stock cooler is awful. With stock clocks, under full load its temps got up to 80+ degrees Celsius.''

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=N82E16819115202
Posted on Reply
#44
Steevo
I built a fully capable dual core 45W 2.6Ghz AMD machine with well endowed video in the northbridge for less than $600, including XP Pro and a 19" monitor.


Comparing a intel cpu/board for heat production and power efficency to power is like a pinto running with vettes.
Posted on Reply
#45
Yukikaze
snakeoil
so you have a core i7 that doesn't overheat and is not powerhungry, great, you should read the core i7 reviews in newegg where 50% percent at least complain about the heat, probably those people got the lemons

one of many
''Cons: Doesn't have a truly unlocked core multiplier. I can't get mine above 21x. I heard the i7 965 has a completely unlocked multiplier (don't actually know).
The stock cooler is awful. With stock clocks, under full load its temps got up to 80+ degrees Celsius.''

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=N82E16819115202
If someone bought the 920 expecting an unlocked multiplier.....well...

And yes, this is all true, they are hot chips. And still, there are more i7s hitting 4Ghz on air than Phenoms, at least if this board and the reviews are any measure.
Posted on Reply
#46
Kitkat
Yukikaze
If someone bought the 920 expecting an unlocked multiplier.....well...

And yes, this is all true, they are hot chips. And still, there are more i7s hitting 4Ghz on air than Phenoms, at least if this board and the reviews are any measure.
No, no one buys the second i7 when they can get the first and the 3rd cost too much. So theres only really one most ppl will be @ 4 on, 920. Now 3/4 amd phenom IIs (within the reach of more buyers) can do it on air with a good board that cost way less. 955 965 910 945 (720 lol if u can stop blue screening or have good ram) I hit 4.4 last night just screwing around on Crosshair III. allso on boards Check out CDs clocks in the forums he seems to get there prety easy on other boards, Lots of amd "reviews tend use lower ram that no one wants to read about and stock coolers or the they just cant OC an amd chip? who knows. When u get home with 1600s seems to be a diff story. Im sure when u read reviews abut 965 "they could only manage 3.8"
Posted on Reply
#47
DrPepper
The Doctor is in the house
snakeoil
''Cons: Doesn't have a truly unlocked core multiplier. I can't get mine above 21x. I heard the i7 965 has a completely unlocked multiplier (don't actually know).
The stock cooler is awful. With stock clocks, under full load its temps got up to 80+ degrees Celsius.''

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=N82E16819115202
Erm 920's were never designed with an unlocked multiplier. Whereas the 965 is an extreme edition which does have the multiplier unlocked but costs about £800.
Posted on Reply
#48
Imsochobo
Yukikaze
That is hardly questionable. I can run my CPU at 4Ghz on air, and just about anyone with a D0 stepping i7 920 can do the same, with decent temperatures, on a 37$ cooler (Scythe Mugen 2). How many Phenom IIs that hit 4Ghz on air are there (The average seems to sit around the 3.7-3.8Ghz mark, or so, and the 955BE isn't really clocking better than the 940BE, is it ? To me it looks like AMD is creating higher clocked SKUs which do not neccessarily attain better overclocks in order to look faster) ? This is not to say that there are none, but there are definitely less. If we also remember that the i7 (And the Core 2) is more effective than the Phenom IIs clock for clock, the advantage becomes more evident.

For my current 24/7 settings, my CPU, which is far from being the best 920 out there, needs 1.18v, and with the said 37$ cooler loads to the low 60 degrees C in very hot weather (Lowest ambient we see now is in the low 30 degrees C). I can also run 3.2Ghz at1.04v, which would be well attainable on the stock cooler - Since it is less volts than stock voltage on my chip (!) and sub 1.0v 3Ghz i7 920s aren't very rare.

Besides, aren't the higher end Phenom IIs, namely the 940 and 955, 125W TDP chips, and 5W aren't anything to get fussed over ?



True, but the Extreme Edition CPUs are not meant to compete against AMD's Black Edition chips. The vanilla 920 does that just fine. I consider anyone buying the EEs as either nuts (not neccesarily in the bad way, actually), or simply rich enough to not care.



There is no argument there. The 710 and 720BE at their price points are very hard for Intel to beat (Currently, they aren't beat, at least not here). But the situation at the higher end of the spectrum is different. The i7 920 is priced well when compared to the higher end Phenom IIs, and the price of very, very good X58 motherboards is compared to the price of the higher end AM3 motherboards, at least here. Granted, you can build a Ph2 920 rig for cheaper by using a cheap motherboard, but if you're going that route, you might be better off with a 720BE altogether for a cheaper setup altogether.



And much good does it do them ?

Now, before I am being accused of fanboyism. I am a fanboy of nothing. I recommend AMD builds several times a week, and I do not remember when I last recommended an Intel build which wasn't an i7 for someone of sufficient budget, or wasn't E5200+G31 based for people with next to no budget. Additionally, I was choosing between my current i7 920 and the Ph2 940 less than two months ago. I chose to go the i7 route, since it got me a platform that will happily run both SLI and CF and perform better while doing either, for under 100$ of difference back then. The difference hasn't grown since.

In the bottom line, Intel has nothing to compete against AMD's excellently priced triple-cores, but with the prices of the i7 920 being what they are, AMD has a very tough fight on their hands. This is not to say that Intel isn't losing ground, it probably is (But not according to the Steam HW survey), but not due to AMD's high-end chips. I do think that Intel is somewhat neglecting the "mainstream" for the past few months, since they are focusing on their Lynnfields, and it might cost them more than they have planned for. On the other hand, Lynnfield based CPUs might give AMD a sound beating come September. Time will tell.
expect a revision change on PHII and we will maybe see a 975 985 995 :)
Youre right about the tricores, those bring value like nothing else Well, if intel makes a dualcore with HT stuff can change(Low price, good performance, low tpd),but ATI pushes prices like never before, there is one videocard, ONE that is close to ati's pricing and thats the GTX260, in all other price segments, there is no other way that the ati way.
AMD is making greater and greater platforms, and trying to secure some market share, cause stuff is about to become harsh out there with intel going in with graphics!(which i reccon will suck until 2012!) and then be acceptable, takes time to jump on that stuff i guess.
Tricore + 4890 4850 4770 4830 4730 4670.... does nvidia/intel build have anything to match those cards in performance/price ? i cant see it in my country, nor UK.
Posted on Reply
#49
trt740
Guys the AMD chips are great and do have enough power for just about anything but they don't compare at all to overclocked I7 chips, I've owned them both and it is not close. This is a dumb arguement, since the AM3 were never ment to compete with the I7 chips. However, what is unreal is that they can exceed or reach similar performance to a stock I7 speeds at a fraction of the cost while using DDr2. AMD chips are very good and much more cost effective than their intel cousins but they are not faster.
Posted on Reply
#50
[I.R.A]_FBi
but they are not faster
which is all that matters to some ppl
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment