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.