backtop

Hardware AMD Prepares 45-watt "Brisbane"
Anh Tuan Huynh (Blog) - May 30, 2007 1:00 AM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 41 comment(s) - last by US56.. on Jun 1 at 1:10 AM

AMD Athlon 64 X2 BE-2350 CPU-Z screen shot (Source: OCWorkbench)
AMD's "Brisbane" gets a new name and lower TDP

AMD expects to reposition its Athlon 64 X2 processors towards entry level users, below the upcoming Phenom processors. The repositioned Athlon 64 X2 model lineup does away with the performance rating, which made its debut with the Athlon XP, in favor of a new model number system – the Athlon 64 X2 BE-2000-series.

AMD began sampling its upcoming Athlon 64 X2 BE-2000-series processors. The new Athlon 64 X2 BE-2000-series remains based on AMD’s 65nm Brisbane-core, but with lower thermal ratings. AMD Athlon BE-2000-series processors will arrive with 45-watt TDP ratings, equaling that of the energy efficient single-core processors.

AMD Athlon 64 X2 BE-2000
Model
 Core
Frequency 		L2 Cache
TDP
BE-24002.3 GHz 2x512KB
45W
BE-23502.1 GHz 2x512KB
 45W
BE-2300
1.9 GHz2x512KB
45W

Three AMD Athlon 64 X2 BE-2000 series models will be available – the BE-2400, BE-2350 and BE-2300. AMD has set the clock speeds of the new BE-2000-series at 2.3 GHz, 2.1 GHz and 1.9 GHz, respectively. As with other Brisbane-based processors, the AMD Athlon 64 X2 BE-2000-series feature 2x512KB of L2 cache, 2000 MHz HyperTransport speed and AMD Virtualization technology.

Expect AMD to debut its Athlon 64 X2 BE-2300 and BE-2350 next month. The Athlon 64 X2 BE-2400 will arrive later, in August.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
core 2 killer
By muzu x2 on 5/30/07, Rating: 0
RE: core 2 killer
By killerroach on 5/30/2007 2:14:42 AM , Rating: 5
Brisbane is still K8, it will be no better than the current low-end Athlon 64 X2 chips, although consuming less juice and are potentially better overclockers. For a potential Core 2 killer, you'll have to wait for whenever AMD releases the Barcelona and Agena cores.


RE: core 2 killer
By maroon1 on 5/30/2007 2:56:09 AM , Rating: 1
The lower power consumption will prevent those processor from being a good overclockers


RE: core 2 killer
By jajig on 5/30/2007 3:02:17 AM , Rating: 2
What makes you says that? The opposite should be true


RE: core 2 killer
By JackPack on 5/30/2007 4:34:52 AM , Rating: 1
Low-power processors tend to use high Vt transistors for low leakage and tend to have lower transistor performance. There are design trade-offs that depend on whether the engineers are optimizing for clock speed or power.

It's also possible that AMD has improved their 65 nm process, however, that explanation seems unlikely because they're not lowering power across the board. AMD is only offering 45W Brisbane for 1.9-2.3 GHz.


RE: core 2 killer
By stryfe on 5/30/2007 5:11:27 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Low-power processors tend to use high Vt transistors for low leakage and tend to have lower transistor performance.

In the past AMD hasn't modified their low TDP chips, they've simply picked the cream of the crop which are the ones capable of running at lower voltages. This is also why the lower TDP chips (EE chips in recent times, XP-M previously) are generally better overclockers than their higher TDP brothers.

quote:
...they're not lowering power across the board. AMD is only offering 45W Brisbane for 1.9-2.3 GHz.

While not across the board, they are lowering the TDP for three out of four of their 65nm chips. Currently the only 65nm chips are 1.9, 2.1, 2.3, and 2.5ghz (all other models are 90nm still). Only the 2.5ghz chips retain the 65w TDP. The reason for this is likely, as you suggested, that they've refined their 65nm process and are getting more chips of higher quality than they were at launch.


RE: core 2 killer
By JackPack on 5/30/2007 7:16:05 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
In the past AMD hasn't modified their low TDP chips, they've simply picked the cream of the crop which are the ones capable of running at lower voltages. This is also why the lower TDP chips (EE chips in recent times, XP-M previously) are generally better overclockers than their higher TDP brothers.


As far as I know, the idea of "cherry picking" to get EE and mobile chips is a myth. There isn't that much variation on the same wafer or between batches to allow for 20W+ TDP difference.

Here's an older, but informative presentation on AMD's low-power K8 process technology:
http://www.hotchips.org/archives/hc16/3_Tue/9_HC16...


RE: core 2 killer
By Reynod on 5/30/07, Rating: 0
RE: core 2 killer
By Spoelie on 5/30/2007 3:58:52 PM , Rating: 3
Oh but by process improvements, they actually got a significantly lower tdp, without changing the underlying technology.

Try this article:
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article313-page2.htm...

I have 2 venices in my house, rated by tcasemax at 37 (E6) and 39 (E3) watts respectively. Even though the official numbers for those processors both were 65w TDP.


RE: core 2 killer
By mindless1 on 5/30/2007 5:22:52 PM , Rating: 2
Yes there is that much difference because when targeting this modest clock rate the voltage need not be as high.

Similarly, it does tend to make for a good overclocker if only one ramps voltage up again.


RE: core 2 killer
By GlassHouse69 on 5/30/2007 10:51:01 AM , Rating: 1
poor guy! he is the first person to start off on the right track and gets down-voted.

life sux and then you post intelligently on DT. That is when life shows how much sucks.


RE: core 2 killer
By 265586888 on 5/30/2007 2:15:39 AM , Rating: 1
It's placed the same segment than "Pentium E" series...
Core 2 killer was the Phenom thingy...


RE: core 2 killer
By ZoZo on 5/30/2007 2:56:41 AM , Rating: 2
"will be", not "was"


AMD after the office market?
By Amiga500 on 5/30/2007 6:04:25 AM , Rating: 2
AMD aiming these at the office market, where low power consumption is a big selling point?

If you have 1000 PCs in a building, and you have a CPU and GPU consuming around 80-90W (max) in total (see low end HD2400) , it will be on the mind of the purchasing dept.... wouldn'it it?




RE: AMD after the office market?
By Regs on 5/30/2007 6:43:27 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, these processors aren't exactly for consumers. Not unless you like to save 10 cents on your power bill each month.


RE: AMD after the office market?
By jajig on 5/30/2007 6:52:33 AM , Rating: 3
There are other good reasons for having low power processors, HTPC's for example.


RE: AMD after the office market?
By FITCamaro on 5/30/2007 9:15:39 AM , Rating: 1
The fact though that the savings isn't even noticeable to an average person with just one or two PCs is still relevant though. I have a dual P3 server thats always on in my house and a gaming rig. I don't care about turning off the server every night so I save $2-3 dollars on my power bill.


RE: AMD after the office market?
By mindless1 on 5/30/2007 5:26:20 PM , Rating: 2
You are only thinking in limited scope of your personal applications. Many people or applications don't have any need for a higher performance processor so even if the heat difference is small, that combined with a lower price are two positive factors. Consider also the trend towards smaller systems and low noise. 45W is not low enough for some potential applications but being closer to the ideal it would be easier to integrate the part into a design.


RE: AMD after the office market?
By defter on 5/30/2007 7:28:01 AM , Rating: 1
Office users don't need graphics performance. Thus it's better in that case forget about discrete graphics and use intergrated, that will save even more power.

If one chooses discrete graphics, then what's the point of using HD2400 in office environment? Some older low end chip (7xxx/x1k series) would be cheaper and consume less power.


RE: AMD after the office market?
By FITCamaro on 5/30/2007 9:20:52 AM , Rating: 1
A lot of business computers come with discrete graphics cards. All of the newer PCs in the office where I work have C2D E6300s and Quadro FX 550s in them. They buy a set PC standard that can do the task of anyone in the company. And some people need that stuff. Same at previous jobs. Since graduating from college I've been with 3 different companies. All 3 jobs I had a laptop or desktop with a discrete graphics chip. Granted I work in an engineering field.

And you get whatever the newest thing is because that's what Dell, Gateway, HP, etc is selling. The newest.


RE: AMD after the office market?
By jajig on 5/30/2007 7:00:37 PM , Rating: 2
My office got new computers last year. Celerons with 512MB and integrated graphics that upgraded Pentium3 with 256MB. I work in tech support and my systems are down more often the the customers who call in.

I think most of us get crap computers in an office.


By Lightning III on 5/30/2007 9:23:25 AM , Rating: 2
can you say GIS applications and the die shrink of the HD 2400 means it gets all it power from the slot no extenal power connectror great for the office or a HTPC or upgrades that don't cascade from the wont of a extenal connector a power supply upgrade was needed so you dont overtax an almost guanteed to be under powered Dell

or at least in my office


RE: AMD after the office market?
By AlexWade on 5/30/2007 7:59:17 AM , Rating: 2
Not just for office people either. I'm going to try very hard to get a lower-power CPU next time I upgrade. You'll save on the electricity to power the computer and you'll run the AC less because of generating less heat, saving even more electricity. Every little bit helps.


Grr, just got a 65W CPU
By Kuroyama on 5/30/2007 2:16:38 AM , Rating: 2
Damn, just last month I upgraded my 89 watt X2 3800+ to a 65 watt X2 5000+, largely hoping that the lower wattage would keep the processor cooler. And now I see that the 45 watt parts are coming out soon! Oh well, think I'll put off another upgrade for a bit.




RE: Grr, just got a 65W CPU
By tkSteveFOX on 5/30/2007 3:21:27 AM , Rating: 3
Who cares these are entry level dual core CPU`s.Whic mean that they will sell for the price of the Celeron D.Who doesn`t want a dual core CPU for 60$.Amd is doing the market a favor by pushing dual core cpu`s to low end users.Good job AMD keep it up!!!


RE: Grr, just got a 65W CPU
By stryfe on 5/30/2007 5:16:43 AM , Rating: 4
Especially since a $60 x2 3600+ can hit around 2.7-3.0ghz. Mine hits 2.7ghz (very stable) on default voltage! With a bump from 1.3v to 1.35v I can get 2.8ghz. With more voltage I could probably get more but with summer coming and my lacking air conditioning I favor stability/low temps over absolute maximum speed.

It may not beat an overclocked Core 2 but that doesn't mean it's not a bargin.


RE: Grr, just got a 65W CPU
By GlassHouse69 on 5/30/2007 10:54:52 AM , Rating: 3
you would be surprised, friend! with your oc comes higher memory bandwidth. it has been shown that a 2.8ghz am2 matches most of the c2d line, or a e4300 oc'd. Do not buy the hype. C2D only was fast for its wattage and for its price, like, almost a year ago that was true.


Why the odd frequencies...?
By kirbalo on 5/30/2007 10:54:03 AM , Rating: 2
Why 1.9, 2.1, 2.3 GHz? Doesn't Brisbane, like Windsor, have an issue where it doesn't clock DDR-800 at full frequency if the multiplier is not an integer, or even better, an even integer?




RE: Why the odd frequencies...?
By coldpower27 on 5/30/2007 11:07:15 AM , Rating: 2
Because those are the Brisbane frequency's already in use.


RE: Why the odd frequencies...?
By kirbalo on 5/30/2007 1:59:26 PM , Rating: 2
It would appear that there is no room in the new part numbering scheme for integer multipliers...? Why only fractional multipliers?


RE: Why the odd frequencies...?
By US56 on 6/1/2007 1:10:54 AM , Rating: 2
The fractional multipliers seemed to have been used to slot Brisbane processors into speed rating gaps in the existing Athlon X2 line. That may change once the inventory of Windsor processors is depleted. There was some discussion on forums last fall even before the first Brisbane shipped that there would be a G2 core revision early in 2007 which would have better overclocking potential and hopefully fix the main memory underclocking. Seems to be no discussion of that now so Brisbane will probably never be all it could have been. It's reminiscent of the way Intel did things in the bad old days.


CPU better + GPU worse = unchanged
By qwerty1 on 5/30/2007 2:16:36 AM , Rating: 2
I'm really glad they're lowering the CPU power consumption but with GPUs sucking more power than ever, our total power consumption remains unchanged if not more! I'd really like to see AMD apply their power efficiency know-how to their graphics products as well...




By FireTech on 5/30/2007 3:55:54 AM , Rating: 2
Good CPU's for HTPC use though, 45w makes it much easier to go passive....


Intels TDP
By Chadder007 on 5/30/2007 9:18:19 AM , Rating: 2
So what is Intels lower TDP processor at the moment?




RE: Intels TDP
By Justin Case on 5/30/2007 12:30:35 PM , Rating: 2
The two can't really be compared (BTW, this isn't AMD's lowest-TDP CPU, either, they have sub-25-watt Turions).

Intel measures TDP in a different way (as "maximum consumption under normal operation", whatever that means), not as absolute maximum. Also, Intel systems have the memory controller on the chipset, and a different topology.

You're better off comparing the power consumption of complete systems. The typical results are that Intel (desktop) systems have slightly lower consumption under full load but slightly higher when idle.


Very worrying...
By Proteusza on 5/30/2007 4:10:02 AM , Rating: 1
This worries me.

Are these CPU's aimed at the segment of the market concerned about power consumption, or the segment of the market concerned about cost?

If this is aimed at the budget market, it doesnt speak wonders for the upcoming barcelona cores. because, with these things being aimed at below Phenom, they need to be less powerful than Phenom. Lowering the clock speed is one way of making sure of that, and in the case of CPU's, that usually amounts to a multiplier change, nothing else. We know that the Athlon core when made using 90nm can run at 3.0 GHz, and even though the 65nm process didnt really help in that department much, these chips could easily be clocked at 2.4 -2.8 GHz while still remaining fairly energy efficient. The fact that these things are clocked as low as they are makes me wonder if their clock speeds are intentionally lowered to avoid encroaching on the territory of the Barcelona, and the fact that that is even necessary (ie one would hope a 2.8 Ghz Athlon would have no chance against a 2.4 GHz Phenom) doesnt look good for AMD.

Why dont they release new higher clocked cores for the mainstream segment? For one thing, these new cores will be cheaper to manufacture than the old 90nm ones.




RE: Very worrying...
By Proteusza on 5/30/2007 4:56:05 AM , Rating: 2
Whoops! my mistake, I confused 45nm with 45 watt. Ignore my last post please, its obvious where this chips are aimed.


worry not
By JayDeeJohn on 5/30/2007 4:30:58 AM , Rating: 2
I see this as the bottom, the lowest available. I know theres alot of people that would love to have a cpu like this. And this is considered the low end. If anything, the P4's demise at least shows until they were gone the low end was alot lower, so no worries




brisbane!
By anandr on 5/31/2007 12:15:08 AM , Rating: 2
i live in brisbane!




By nerdye on 5/31/2007 1:13:43 AM , Rating: 2
Yes,
is this exciting news for us with over clocked core 2 duo's, perhaps not, is this good news for those that want a low power system, perhaps, yet the best news of this is that AMD has finally made a little progress in their 65nm process and that the public can see it. Can we expect the K10 architecture to build on the same power saving logic to benefit from this, we hope so, yet we take every crumb of real evidence from AMD these days and eat it up. AMD, don't drop the ball with K10, the current intel price drops that we all are loving on the core 2 architecture are due to anticipation of the K10, keep us enthusiasts with a choice!




yawn.....
By aguilpa1 on 5/30/07, Rating: 0
"Well, we didn't have anyone in line that got shot waiting for our system." -- Nintendo of America Vice President Perrin Kaplan

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki