AMD Triple-core CPUs to Launch in February 2008

[malware]

AMD recently notified its partners that it plans to launch two triple-core CPUs (Toliman) in February next year while two dual-core CPUs (Kuma) will appear by the end of the second quarter, according to DigiTimes. The triple-core 7700 and 7600 will have core frequencies of 2.5GHz and 2.3GHz, respectively, and a TDP of 89W. Frequencies for the dual-core 6250 and 6050 have not yet been set, but the CPUs will have a TDP of 65W. In addition, AMD also plans to adjust its entry-level product lines launching the single-core Athlon CPU (Lima) LE-1640 in January of 2008, while higher frequency Lima CPUs will follow in the second quarter. The company will also launch the single-core Sempron (Sparta) CPU LE-1300 with a core frequency of 2.3GHz and TDP of 45W in the first quarter 2008.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Woah Mama!]

Bringing back the old school? Single core launch is an odd move I think.

Naming a Sempron chip with a name such as Sparta? My respect suddenly dropped for AMD.

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

Bringing back the old school? Single core launch is an odd move I think.

Naming a Sempron chip with a name such as Sparta? My respect suddenly dropped for AMD.

there is already an even lame "sparta" on teh market already.

 

[Kreij]

Single core launch is not so odd. There are still people who just want an inexpensive, low-end system to do basic things like surf and check e-mail.

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

also htpc.

 

[Weer]

Wow, a triple-core CPU.. that will totally beat my Quad-core Q6600... /Intel Fanboy

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

Wow, a triple-core CPU.. that will totally beat my Quad-core Q6600... /Intel Fanboy

orly?

 

[Woah Mama!]

there is already an even lame "sparta" on teh market already.

Oh yeah, I heard that somewhere, some time ago. Honestly, I lost interest in AMD a long time ago. The only time I needed to check core versions was when buying/building an AM2 4800 for a friend.


I honestly find single core useless. I see the best majority of them being sold through Dell and alike. So to me personally, single core is long dead. It's those companies that know they can rip people off who know nothing about computers, that are keeping the market for 'cheap' single core rigs alive.

 

[HookeyStreet]

Triple core, too little, too late! (unless its in an XBOX360 )

 

[zOaib]

intel is the way to go for good investment in a proc. performance and prices are reasonable , even though AMD is selling cheaper priced procs.

phenom is no phenomenon , the new 45nm line from intel is gonna put them back 100 miles again ........... but if Amd comes with something better than intel and also price wise i will surely switch to whats better

 

[zOaib]

Triple core, too little, too late! (unless its in an XBOX360 )

I LIKE YOU RUBY SETUP !!! Got my Ruby too now HD 3870's in CF Wooooot !!!

 

[HookeyStreet]

I LIKE YOU RUBY SETUP !!! Got my Ruby too now HD 3870's in CF Wooooot !!!

Thanks

Im jealous

 

[erocker]

Well, lets hope by Febuary that AMD can perform some sort of miracle on thier chips!

 

[suraswami]

Well, lets hope by Febuary that AMD can perform some sort of miracle on thier chips!

 

[trog100]

whats with all this single core being useless rubbish.. only for browsing and checking email.. jeesh.. what planet are u guys on..

for the record my single core amd cpu at 3 gig played all my games just as well as my now current dual core chip does at 3 gig.. i dont have all the games out but i can vouch for.. fear.. prey.. cod 4.. shame i cant do a crysis compare i never had it installed when i was still useing the single core sandy.. but i would like to lay odds it would do just as well as my current dual core..

course i aint in the habit of encoding video at the same time as playing demanding games but who in their right mind is..

it comes down to core speed not how many cores u have for 99% of games.. it is possible that the less cores the chip has the faster it might clock.. i would sooner have a single core cpu at 4 gig anyday over a slower quad..

i would imagine the single core amd chips will be very cheap and snapped up by box builders.. but the bottom line here is that given a decent power supply.. a decent grafix card.. enough ram.. pretty much any old modern cpu will play games in a reasonable fashion..

an ancient 200mhz pentium will browse and do email.. he he he

trog

ps.. and the quad phemons aint worth a wotsit till they manage to get the core speed up..

 

[F-22]

Triple core is cool... but I already have quad core. Q6600 is liek $280 and can be easily OCd.

 

[suraswami]

whats with all this single core being useless rubbish.. only for browsing and checking email.. jeesh.. what planet are u guys on..

for the record my single core amd cpu at 3 gig played all my games just as well as my now current dual core chip does at 3 gig.. i dont have all the games out but i can vouch for.. fear.. prey.. cod 4.. shame i cant do a crysis compare i never had it installed when i was still useing the single core sandy.. but i would like to lay odds it would do just as well as my current dual core..

course i aint in the habit of encoding video at the same time as playing demanding games but who in their right mind is..

it comes down to core speed not how many cores u have for 99% of games.. it is possible that the less cores the chip has the faster it might clock.. i would sooner have a single core cpu at 4 gig anyday over a slower quad..

i would imagine the single core amd chips will be very cheap and snapped up by box builders.. but the bottom line here is that given a decent power supply.. a decent grafix card.. enough ram.. pretty much any old modern cpu will play games in a reasonable fashion..

an ancient 200mhz pentium will browse and do email.. he he he

trog

ps.. and the quad phemons aint worth a wotsit till they manage to get the core speed up..

Very True. Single Cores still plays games well. My S754 3200 with X1600 AGP still plays all modern games like COD4, BF2142 etc.

When it comes to High Definition media play single core cant cut it. You need a bare minimum dual core cpu. May be the software coders built the software like that. I upgraded my media pc to play HD movies with a Dual Core X2 3800. Now I can play movies as well as record my favourite TV shows at the background with out missing a beat. So I guess 3 or 4 cores would be better in that way.

And ofcourse its fashion like owning a IPhone

FYI clock speed myth is gone with crappy P4s. Now CPUs can do more work even at lower clock speeds.

 

[trog100]

Very True. Single Cores still plays games well. My S754 3200 with X1600 AGP still plays all modern games like COD4, BF2142 etc.

When it comes to High Definition media play single core cant cut it. You need a bare minimum dual core cpu. May be the software coders built the software like that. I upgraded my media pc to play HD movies with a Dual Core X2 3800. Now I can play movies as well as record my favourite TV shows at the background with out missing a beat. So I guess 3 or 4 cores would be better in that way.

And ofcourse its fashion like owning a IPhone

FYI clock speed myth is gone with crappy P4s. Now CPUs can do more work even at lower clock speeds.

yes some things work better with dual core but its mistake to think the more the merrier.. software that can take advantage of two cores (lets say its been optimized for dual cores) wont being able to pick up and use as many cores as get thrown at it.. we are still along way away from the real type of multicore software.. the kind that can just pick up use however many cores there are..

somewhere an amd executive got quoted as saying quad core will be wasted on most people.. but as u say when "fashion" dictates we all have to follow.. he he

the speed myth aint entirely dead in fact it aint dead at all.. it still counts big time when u are talking similar chips and quad against dual for example.. the phenom core speed has to go up quite a way before i will chuck out my amd dual core and by a quad core phenom..

trog

 

[HookeyStreet]

AMD are done I personally think they need to focus more on the ATi side of the business now, because they wont win the CPU war anytime soon! (TBH, I dont think they will EVER catch up to Intel!)

 

[suraswami]

AMD are done I personally think they need to focus more on the ATi side of the business now, because they wont win the CPU war anytime soon! (TBH, I dont think they will EVER catch up to Intel!)

I am a hardcore AMD/ATI fan. All CPUs and VCs I have are AMD/ATI. But with my latest upgrade for my Media PC, Nvidia Video card won my business. I installed both Nvidia 8600GT and ATI X2600 pro video card. Suprisingly 8600GT had less CPU usage when watching Blu-ray or HD movies. Average about 30%. But with ATI it was about 65%. Used the latest drivers on both and used Hardware acceleration from inside PowerDVD. Don't know what I missed but I settled with Nvidia.

So I don't know if ATI is really going to do well.

Set aside my Fanboyism and listened to my mind.

 

[TheMailMan78]

None of this matters to us 939 folks

 

[hacker111]

My interest of this subject has changed...very nice!!!!!!!!!!

 

[hacker111]

YO malware do you ever check your private messages because I've sent you a couple and you never sent back....

 

[HookeyStreet]

I am a hardcore AMD/ATI fan. All CPUs and VCs I have are AMD/ATI. But with my latest upgrade for my Media PC, Nvidia Video card won my business. I installed both Nvidia 8600GT and ATI X2600 pro video card. Suprisingly 8600GT had less CPU usage when watching Blu-ray or HD movies. Average about 30%. But with ATI it was about 65%. Used the latest drivers on both and used Hardware acceleration from inside PowerDVD. Don't know what I missed but I settled with Nvidia.

So I don't know if ATI is really going to do well.

Set aside my Fanboyism and listened to my mind.

I sit on the fence, I like nVIDIA & I like ATi.....I used to also be a big fan of AMD, that was when they were good for gaming (and Intel were utter shite!)

 

[IcrushitI]

None of this matters to us 939 folks

Hey its alright now, don't let the marketing dept. get your panties tied into a knot. Im using whats in my sig and have no problems as of yet with whats out there. Yes I tried Farcry 3 at max and had a blip every once in awhile, but guess what, is that the game I'm going to play 24 hours aday, no.
My son and I did our own test about two years ago. We wanted to find out if cpu gigs really made a difference in synthetic tests. He used an Asus with a 2500 mobile o/c to an actual 2.5 and I used a Dfi 148 optron o/c to 2.5, both of us using the same o/c Video card and on the cpu test with 3dmark there was a difference of 100 to 150 points . Again I lay it out, do you spend good hard earned cash on marketing and play Crysis for a few hours or get back to reality and play all your games with what you have.
Remember a few years ago when the rage was duel core and where we were going to be headed to, I had visions I was going to be in heaven the way the Industry was explaining things to me, where are all the two threaded software progs or even all the 2 threaded games. I'm still waiting. It looks like someone at the top said Hey lets skip the duel cores and get everyone on the band wagon for quads and maybe a little tri cores. So don't let the Jones next door break the bank for you, theres still life for the 939.
Another thought how many years ago were we all going to 64 bit, I got prepared but for some reason the Industry that keeps pushing us didn't get on the bandwagon, lots of chip sales but look around most progs are still at the 32 bit level. AH it must be my age, I have a good memory and don't quite easliy get moved by the hype from the industry anymore and neither does my 18 year old son. As Walter Cronkite use to say " Thats the way it is Nov29, 2007."