backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 40 comment(s) - last by camylarde.. on May 5 at 2:59 AM
Tired of writing a book to describe a CPU? So is AMD

If typing "AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 89W 1MB L2 Brisbane" feels like a chore, don't fret as you'll only have to put up with it a little bit longer. AMD's newest roadmap reveals the company has plans to change the naming schedule of its upcoming processors.

The first of these processors to get the new nomenclature are the low-power, dual-core Brisbane CPUs.  These processors, clocked in the 1.9 GHz to 2.3 GHz range, will feature a 45W thermal envelope.  AMD guidance claims these chips will get a simpler designation than "Athlon 64 X2 4000+ 45W 1MB L2 Brisbane."

Each of these new processors will be named as follows:
  • AMD BE-2400: 45W Brisbane, 2.3 GHz
  • AMD BE-2350: 45W Brisbane, 2.1 GHz
  • AMD BE-2300: 45W Brisbane, 1.9 GHz
Low-end, single-core Sempron cores will also get this designation, as follows:
  • LE-1300: 45W Sparta, 2.3 GHz
  • LE-1250: 45W Sparta, 2.2 GHz
  • LE-1200: 45W Sparta, 2.1 GHz
  • LE-1150: 45W Sparta, 2.0 GHz
  • LE-1100: 45W Sparta, 1.9 GHz
Upcoming K10-based Agena, Kuma, Rana will likely receive similar name changes, though AMD has not revealed these names yet.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Err..
By Enoch2001 on 5/2/2007 8:17:44 AM , Rating: 2
Correct me if I'm wrong but...this doesn't seem that much less of writing a book than the previous naming scheme.




RE: Err..
By Anosh on 5/2/2007 8:22:51 AM , Rating: 2
Well if it will be possible to write: Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 89W 1MB L2 Brisbane

As: (example) BE-4400

I'd say that's shorter.


RE: Err..
By AnnihilatorX on 5/2/2007 8:22:55 AM , Rating: 3
Indeed lol

But at least you can just use terms like BE-2300 in search engines.


RE: Err..
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 5/2/2007 8:24:09 AM , Rating: 3
I apologize if I wasn't totally clear. Instead of "AMD Athlon 64 X2 4000+ 45W 1MB L2 Brisbane," you'll just write "AMD BE-2400."

Sure it's not earth shattering, but we're going to start using the terms a lot so I wanted a nice place of reference for the name change on DailyTech.


RE: Err..
By MartinT on 5/2/2007 9:33:51 AM , Rating: 2
So, bascially, the brandname Athlon and Sempron are going the way of the Duron? Or do they still have a place, in there, somewhere?


RE: Err..
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 5/2/2007 9:53:21 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
So, bascially, the brandname Athlon and Sempron are going the way of the Duron? Or do they still have a place, in there, somewhere?

Actually, I have a post about that coming up later today.


RE: Err..
By zedd2 on 5/2/2007 11:42:43 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, according to a 2 hours newer article on this very site, there will indeed be a brand name as well. How could you seriously think there won't be? In case of K10, it will read like this: "AMD Phenom X2 BE-2400", or something like that. And so most probably that Brisbane's name will read "AMD Athlon X2 BE-2400". The change is that the BE/LE/etc. will tell the TDP, and the likes, and the number is the distinction between modells in a family.


RE: Err..
By lennylim on 5/2/2007 3:00:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I apologize if I wasn't totally clear. Instead of "AMD Athlon 64 X2 4000+ 45W 1MB L2 Brisbane," you'll just write "AMD BE-2400."

Actually, you'll be writing "AMD BE-2400, which was previously known as the Athlon 64 X2 4000+ 45W 1MB L2 Brisbane" :-)


RE: Err..
By Masterrer on 5/2/2007 8:57:01 AM , Rating: 6
"Instead of AMD Sempron 65nm Sparta 2.3GHz 1MB L2 you will write AMD LE-1300"

- This is madness?!!
- This is SPARTAA!!!!!


RE: Err..
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 5/2/2007 9:03:36 AM , Rating: 2
I lawled.


RE: Err..
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 5/2/2007 9:44:30 AM , Rating: 2
Your comment has been forever immortalized as a thumbnail.


RE: Err..
By Marcus Yam on 5/2/2007 9:48:43 AM , Rating: 2
I have a feeling that this thumbnail will be permanently attached to anything to do with AMD Sparta news.

So awesome.


RE: Err..
By encryptkeeper on 5/2/2007 10:40:24 AM , Rating: 2
Seeing the "2300" or "1300" closely reminds me of some of the Core Solo and Core (not 2) Duo designations for the Intel mobile processors. Kind of reminds me of the legal scuffle between Intel, AMD and Cyrix over who could use 586 on their processors.


RE: Err..
By Masterrer on 5/2/2007 11:58:36 AM , Rating: 3
Thanks,
I feel distinguished…

The funny thing is that I haven't actually seen the film…
Guess that's what too much blogging does to you :)


RE: Err..
By shaw on 5/2/2007 6:02:37 PM , Rating: 3
I'd prefer it if they called the processor a "LE-1300: 45W Cake Town, 2.3 GHz" or "LE-1300: 45W This is delicious, 2.3 GHz"

Then I could go into a Comp USA and say "Yes, I'm looking for that new delicious AMD processor."


Following intel's lead?
By Anosh on 5/2/2007 8:18:52 AM , Rating: 2
Isn't this what intel did with their Core line up?
I mean changing the names to reflect features rather than including speed in the processor names?




RE: Following intel's lead?
By Zirconium on 5/2/2007 8:29:50 AM , Rating: 5
Naming a processors ####+ was AMD's way of saying that the processor was as good or better than a Pentium 4 running at #### MHz. Since Intel has phased out the P4s, it only makes sense for AMD to change their naming system. I wish the naming system allowed you to determine the specs from the name. From the article:
quote:
* AMD BE-2400: 45W Brisbane, 2.3 GHz
* AMD BE-2350: 45W Brisbane, 2.1 GHz
* AMD BE-2300: 45W Brisbane, 1.9 GHz
Couldn't they name them BE-2300, BE-2100 and BE-1900 for the 2.3 GHz, 2.1 GHz and 1.9 GHz processors, respectively?


RE: Following intel's lead?
By webdawg77 on 5/2/2007 8:42:51 AM , Rating: 5
They could, but then what would happen if they stuck in more cache or changed the TPW without affecting the clock speed?

AMD BE-2300 for 2.3 GHz 45W 1MB L2

So, what would it be for 65W 1MB L2 or 45W 2MB L2 or 65W 2MB L2 or ... you can see where this could go.

The naming convention for CPUs will never be as simple as P4 2.8 GHz anymore. I am pleased with AMD trying to make it somewhat easier for us.


RE: Following intel's lead?
By webdawg77 on 5/2/2007 8:44:17 AM , Rating: 2
TPW should be TPD.


RE: Following intel's lead?
By Goty on 5/2/2007 9:01:14 AM , Rating: 2
TPD should be TDP.

Sorry, couldn't resist =D


RE: Following intel's lead?
By webdawg77 on 5/2/2007 9:04:37 AM , Rating: 2
I thought it was Total Power Dissipated (Dissipation)?


RE: Following intel's lead?
By webdawg77 on 5/2/2007 9:07:02 AM , Rating: 2
Ah, TDP is Thermal Design Power (Point). I guess both get to the same point :).


By doctor sam adams on 5/3/2007 5:52:12 PM , Rating: 2
It's actually Thermally Dissipated Power or Thermal Dissipation Power. The amount of power that is dissipated through thermal loss. The remainder of the power is used for computation.


RE: Following intel's lead?
By stromgald on 5/2/2007 11:45:37 AM , Rating: 2
True, but couldn't they just do something like BE-2310 or BE-2320 for different combinations of cache sizes and power? That would mean you would have to look up the exact details with the last two numbers, but by just looking at the model number you could know if it was 2300 Mhz or 2100 Mhz.

Actually, I think it would be better if they used effective speed (i.e. 4800+) for their model numbering. Clock speed isn't all that important these days.


RE: Following intel's lead?
By Samus on 5/2/2007 9:46:59 AM , Rating: 3
Actually the PR (performance rating) "####+" was in comparison to an Athlon XP (initially Palomino) series processor. The Athlon XP series PR was in relation to an Intel Pentium 4.

Either way, I like the new number rating system. It doesn't really make much sense, yet, but it will. Intel's system is working out pretty well as far as helping non-enthusiasts determine the specs of their chip.


By SquidianLoveGod on 5/2/2007 10:21:14 AM , Rating: 2
Actually the PR rating is not based on the pentium 4 nor is it based on the Athlon XP.

From the all-powerful wiki:

"The Athlon XP (as well as the Athlon 64) PR rating scheme is not intended to be anything more than a comparison to the same family of processors, and not a direct comparison to Intel or any other company's processor speeds (in raw MHz), despite what skeptics may believe."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PR_rating

We all know that during the early days of the Athlon XP the PR rating was rather conservative, for instance in some (or alot of cases) an 1800+ Athlon XP out-performed the much higher clocked Pentium 4 @ 2.0ghz.
Yet if we go up the clockspeeds the Pentium 4 3.0 and 3.2ghz processors out performed the Athlon XP 3000+ and 3200+.

Then the Athlon 64 was released... Which nothing touched until Core 2.


RE: Following intel's lead?
By Crassus on 5/2/2007 1:41:43 PM , Rating: 2
I thought the rating was a comparison of the Athlon XP with the older Thunderbird Athlon.


RE: Following intel's lead?
By JackPack on 5/2/2007 4:09:34 PM , Rating: 2
Both Athlon XP and Athlon 64 model numbers were based on P4 performance.

Of course, due to legal reasons, AMD says otherwise. If AMD had indicated the 3000+ was as fast as a 3.0 GHz P4, someone would point out a media encoding benchmark where the P4 won and then follow up with a lawsuit. But world+dog knew the model numbers were designed to parallel Intel's GHz marketing.


So what does BE and LE mean?
By aftlizard01 on 5/2/2007 9:48:24 AM , Rating: 2
?




RE: So what does BE and LE mean?
By James Holden on 5/2/2007 9:52:31 AM , Rating: 2
It means this is SPARTA!


RE: So what does BE and LE mean?
By aftlizard01 on 5/2/2007 9:56:06 AM , Rating: 3
Oooh perhaps the LE means Leonidas Efficient????


By horsecharles on 5/2/2007 10:27:46 AM , Rating: 2
ROTMFFLMMFAO!!!


RE: So what does BE and LE mean?
By defter on 5/2/2007 10:21:22 AM , Rating: 2
What does HD mean in "Radeon HD xxxx", high delay?

(note: this post is a joke)


RE: So what does BE and LE mean?
By Fritzr on 5/2/2007 11:24:00 AM , Rating: 2
Probably wrong since it fits :P

LE==Low efficiency (Low end)
BE==Better Efficiency (High end)


Confusing
By psychobriggsy on 5/2/2007 9:52:09 AM , Rating: 2
I guess the first number is the number of cores.

BE is 45W? LE is 25W? Why go up in 50s?

I expect that the quad-cores will be something like 4600, 4650,4700,4750,... if the last 3 numbers are a kinda-performance metric.




They still got it wrong!!!
By horsecharles on 5/2/2007 10:26:35 AM , Rating: 2
Why did the numbnuts choose a number very close to yet slightly different from the processor speed???!!!??!!?




By kenyee on 5/2/2007 10:38:56 AM , Rating: 2
can't find the latest AMD roadmap :-P




By rdeegvainl on 5/2/2007 2:33:46 PM , Rating: 2
The thousand nations of the Intel empire descend upon you!!!

I just had to, sorry. Kinda makes you like the PR that will be spread viraly. Just for kicks anyways.




By splines on 5/3/2007 9:16:06 AM , Rating: 2
I have to hold some hope that these processors will actually be any good.

I mean, you name the things after my hometown. You've gotta provide some sort of payoff.




Actually
By camylarde on 5/5/2007 2:59:19 AM , Rating: 2
By "AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 89W 1MB L2 Brisbane" I would gather all important information. By LE-2400 you have no idea what is inside. So you have to google the contents like you do with intel. Few months agoI could not reach the intel CPU specs page for more than five minutes when I was on another computer as the page had recently moved in the intel website tree. The same awaits us now with AMD. Don't be fooled that this will ease things. The caches will change, the manufacturing process will shift, you will loose track of it all very soon. All you have to remember now is the order of core names and the rest is clear on the paper to compare.




"I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it." -- Bungie Technical Lead Chris Butcher











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