backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 147 comment(s) - last by Viditor.. on May 9 at 11:38 PM

AMD prepares its Phenom FX, Phenom X4 and Phenom X2 lineups for launch

AMD is preparing the launch of its next-generation K10-derived Stars-family single, dual and quad-core processors. The next-generation Stars-family splits into three different brand names – Phenom, Athlon and Sempron. Ringing in the flagship are three Agena FX-based AMD Phenom FX processors. AMD has yet to confirm clock speeds for the three models; however, the latest roadmap reveals ballparks for the processors.

The top-end AMD Phenom FX processor clocks in the 2.4-2.6 GHz speed range. Slotting below the top-end Phenom FX is a 2.2-2.4 GHz model. These two models occupy AMD’s upcoming Socket 1207+ and current Socket 1207 Quad FX platforms. AMD also has a Phenom FX for single-processor customers as well, clocked at 2.4-2.6 GHz.

AMD further differentiates its Phenom FX processors with different Hyper Transport 3.0 clock speeds. The flagship 2.4-2.6 GHz model features a 3.6 GHz HT 3.0 clock speed while the two 2.2-2.4 GHz models have a lower 3.2 GHz HT 3.0 clock. All three models share the same 4x512KB L2 cache and 2MB L3 cache configuration. AMD has yet to determine the TDP of its Phenom FX processors.

Catering towards high-end user are two Socket AM2+ AMD Phenom X4 processors. AMD remains undecided on its model numbers; however, clock speeds on the Agena-based Phenom X4 processors are set. The two AMD Phenom X4 processors clock in at 2.4 GHz and 2.2 GHz. These models share the same 4x512KB L2 cache and 2MB L3 cache configuration as the Phenom FX processors.

HT 3.0 speeds differ on the two models, the 2.4 GHz features a 3.6 GHz HT 3.0 speed while the 2.2 GHz model features a 3.2 GHz HT 3.0 speed. AMD rates the Phenom X4 processors with 89W TDPs. AMD plans to start taking orders for its Phenom FX and Phenom X4 processors in Q3’2007.

AMD’s dual-core Kuma processors will carry the Phenom X2 name and drop into Socket AM2+ and AM2 motherboards. There are three AMD Phenom X2 processors in the pipeline with 2.8 GHz, 2.6 GHz and 2.4 GHz clock speeds. HT 3.0 speeds vary on the AMD Phenom X2 processors. At the top with the AMD Phenom X2 2.8 GHz model. The HT 3.0 bus clocks in at 4.2 GHz – higher than the Phenom FX and Phenom X4 models. The two lower models have 3.8 GHz and 3.6 GHz HT 3.0 clock speeds, respectively.

All three models feature a 2x512KB L2 cache and 2MB L3 cache configuration. The higher end 2.8 GHz has an 89W TDP, similar to the Phenom X4 models, while the 2.6 GHz and 2.4 GHz receive a lower 65W TDP rating. AMD plans to take orders for its Phenom X2 processors beginning in Q4’2007.

If low power is a concern, AMD intends to offer three low power AMD Phenom X2 models. AMD rates these models with 45W TDPs. The low power Phenom X2 clocks in at 2.3 GHz, 2.1 GHz and 1.9 GHz with 3.4 GHz, 3.0 GHz and 2.8 GHz HT 3.0 speeds, respectively.

Although AMD plans to launch its new Phenom branding for high-end processors, the Athlon 64 X2 name lives on with Rana. There’s one Rana model in the pipeline clocked at 2.2 GHz. The Rana-based Athlon 64 X2 does away with L3 cache and only has 2x512KB of L2 cache, differentiating it from the Kuma-based AMD Phenom X2.

At the bottom of the Stars-family are the Spica Sempron models. Two Spica Sempron models occupy AMD’s value lineup. The new Spica Sempron models clock in at 2.4 GHz and 2.2 GHz with 512KB of L2 cache. As with the dual and quad-core products, the two Spica Sempron models have 3.6 GHz and 3.2 GHz HT 3.0 clocks, respectively. AMD rates the Spica Sempron models with 45W TDPs, as with the low power Phenom X2 models.

AMD plans to take orders for its low power Kuma Phenom X2, Rana Athlon 64 X2 and Spica Sempron models beginning in Q1’2008.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

People who pick sides crack me up.
By SavagePotato on 5/4/2007 11:26:51 AM , Rating: 3
I really do get a laugh at the kiddies that vehemently and brainlessly stand by "their" brand. Personally right now I own an E6400, which I got because it was fast, very overclockable, and just a really awesome chip. Fantastic upgrade from my Opteron 175 which was also a chip I got great usage out of.

What I have a hard time with is the notion that some people can be so short sighted as to cheer for one company to be beat out by "their" company. If you think for a minute without a competitor Intel won't be severely hiking prices think again.

It's just like the NVIDIA ATI war with people cheering the expected failure of the X2900. Have you looked at the costs of the 8800 series cards lately? Without competition you will be paying 2 grand for high end cpu's and 1k plus for video cards in very very short order.

Think of that while you are making your haw haw I hope they go bankrupt comments.




RE: People who pick sides crack me up.
By Shadowmaster625 on 5/4/07, Rating: -1
RE: People who pick sides crack me up.
By zsouthboy on 5/4/2007 2:35:17 PM , Rating: 5
Why is that?

I have a 6300 render box at home, next to my 165 server, and the 6300 blows it out of the water doing ... well, rendering, as it's supposed to. On order of 20-30 % I would assume his situation is similar.


By bjacobson on 5/8/2007 10:27:30 AM , Rating: 2
Well...there really aren't that many of these hardcore fanboys, as evidenced by AMD's latest quarter earnings.


By SavagePotato on 5/4/2007 4:46:24 PM , Rating: 1
Eh? Think again. For one I made a mistype there, I have an e6600 2.4ghz. However a 6400 will smoke an Opteron 175 as well.

In addition to that, my Opteron was good for about a 200 mhz overclock, just didn't get the pick of the litter. My 6600 I slapped with a 1 ghz overclock without even trying hard

For that matter even at stock the 6400 is damn near as good as an FX 62. and the 6600 at stock will crush an FX 62.

Oh my Thermalright ultra-120 extreme is on It's way too, so well see if we cant turn that modest little 3.4ghz into something a little more respectable like 3.6 or 3.8.

So I guess "lol" right back at you kiddie.


RE: People who pick sides crack me up.
By dnosferatu on 5/5/2007 1:09:45 AM , Rating: 2
...then why your "brainy" failed to compare Opt175 to E6400?
you can wait for K10, K11, or K-Whatever, but you can't deny the fact, those numbers are real, in case you don't have those numbers in your "brain", go google kid!


RE: People who pick sides crack me up.
By just4U on 5/5/2007 1:50:50 AM , Rating: 4
While I don't have my amd fanboi tee shirt on I can definitely say in all honesty that I would like to see them have continued success. I think it would be pretty good over all if both companies had close to the same hold on this market instead of the lopsided affair it's always been.


By dnosferatu on 5/5/2007 2:09:15 AM , Rating: 2
I agree, we need the competition along with the fanboy, not to mention that fanboy's posts are enjoyable to read.

My main reason is the price, boy i love price-cut everytime it happens, LOL.
Been with AMD since the day Athlon XP 1800+, only because i care for price/performance so much, not the performance crown-go digging dollar.

No point to talk the numbers we don't know yet but those kid already "i'm sure this, i'm sure that..", LOL
everything can happen..


RE: People who pick sides crack me up.
By Pythias on 5/9/2007 2:14:12 AM , Rating: 2
Then amd needs to build quite a few more fabs. Even if they gained majority market share, they couldn't supply it.


By Viditor on 5/9/2007 11:38:16 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Then amd needs to build quite a few more fabs. Even if they gained majority market share, they couldn't supply it

Not true actually...
Many people look at the total number of Fabs that Intel has rather than the number of their Fabs that can actually produce modern CPUs...that number is 3 BTW.
AMD (when the Fab 38 conversion is complete in Q1 08) will have easily enough Fab capacity to deliver more than 60% marketshare.


RE: People who pick sides crack me up.
By crystal clear on 5/5/2007 2:26:39 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Without competition you will be paying 2 grand for high end cpu's and 1k plus for video cards in very very short order


1)Yes competition is essential for higher quality products & lower prices.

2)For us the buyers we need an a market, where the market share of the 2 companies should be-(Intel)70% (Amd)30%.
In such conditions the buyer always stands to gain to enable you get higher quality products & lower prices.

3)EXCESS of competition & LACK of competition is BAD for us-we the buyers, the ULTIMATE DECIDERS of market share for these companies should maintain the above RATIO !(70 to 30).

4)Higher quality products & lower prices is an incentive or motivator for buyers/users/consumers to UPGRADE.

5)The lack of incentives to upgrade, means people simply dont upgrade-thats all ! they prefer to make do with what they have & wait for prices to drop.

6) Example for the above is VISTA !
People are just not motivated to upgrade & prefer to make do with XP & prefer to wait.They simple DONT BUY !

But let there be Apples O.S. "X" (tiger/leopard) up for sale
without the Apple hardware-Then watch !
If Apple sell its O.S. like M.S.-then see what happens-
YOU will see real WAR-Intel/Amd style.

We will get higher quality & lower prices !

7)Just remember-People are not that stupid-If the prices are HIGH they simply DONT BUY.So Intel can charge in your scenario "2G" & Nvidia "1K"- result-NO BUYERS !
I am sure there are millions out there who say this-
"I can live without a 8800 series card-Whats the hurry"
So Nvidia can charge what it wants-NO BUYERS !

Summary-WE the buyers decide the FATE of Intel & Nvidia !
They need US more than WE DO !


RE: People who pick sides crack me up.
By just4U on 5/5/2007 2:57:45 AM , Rating: 2
Actually crystal, I'd like to see it even more even say 55-45 either way with a constant struggle for that 10% That way we'd see less of the doom and gloom posts along with the bankruptcy scares.. provided they both were making money as you know even the more profitable companies can find ways to lose it all sometimes.


RE: People who pick sides crack me up.
By crystal clear on 5/5/2007 3:45:34 AM , Rating: 2
YES & NO

"Yes" indeed but unfortunately AMD is comapritively weaker financially to take on Intel to reach that ratio !
They need IBM(as a partner) to take on Intel to reach that levels-
It requires R&D+Finance+Marketing+Support etc that all put together as package.

"No" that struggle for that 10% is bad for STABILITY as MOBO manufacturers need to adjust their product offerings-they have to have time.
Too many new CPUs coming out into the market in short span is fine on paper,but in reality its upsetting everybodies(OEM/ODM) product cyles & schedules.Just count how many Cpus Intel released in short span (Core2duo)till today.

In short a period of stability is needed for all-from Buyers to Vendors to OEMs to ODMs & the whole industry itself.Thats the reason I quoted-

quote:
EXCESS of competition & LACK of competition is BAD


Fine tuning that ratio is the key !


RE: People who pick sides crack me up.
By KernD on 5/5/2007 10:00:08 PM , Rating: 2
About even market share wouldn't cause more architectural change than we have now, I don't think Intel would get them out faster than one a year, they wouldn't have the money to make it any faster than they are now. 45-55% split would obviously be ideal, they could have a similar R&D budget, just look at the graphic side of things, they have a balanced market and it works fine, the OEM aren't complaining.


RE: People who pick sides crack me up.
By crystal clear on 5/6/2007 12:47:59 AM , Rating: 2
You have a valid point there,but some very interesting news is on its way that could change everything.

ASSET LIGHT ! AMD !

quote:
asset light is code word for the company moving toward more of a "fabless" model of doing business in which computer chip companies outsource their manufacturing to factories called foundries, many of which are located in Asia.


This model frees up a lot of resources for both the companies(AMD/Intel),enabling them divert these resources to more essential/crucial areas namely R&D.
Resources I mean Money/Manpower/Time that will bring about as you say-

quote:
"more architectural change" & "would get them out faster than one a year"


The race for more & more "CORES" has already started-
today its 2 & 4 cores-up it goes to 8 then to 16 & more.
Even though, there isnt sufficient SOFTWARE around to exploit the full potential of these cores & what each cores does in the design.

So in a such scenario as you say-
quote:
45-55% split would obviously be ideal


RE: People who pick sides crack me up.
By Viditor on 5/6/2007 5:35:48 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Asset Light...This model frees up a lot of resources for both the companies(AMD/Intel),enabling them divert these resources to more essential/crucial areas namely R&D

Unfortunately, Asset Light doesn't work for companies like AMD and Intel. Both companies are far ahead of the independant Fabs in Asia as far as technology goes, and that Fab technology is a major part of their R&D budget because it has to be. If it weren't for their Fab tech, we wouldn't have things like HKMG, SOI, APM, Copper interconnects, strained silicon, etc...


RE: People who pick sides crack me up.
By crystal clear on 5/7/2007 4:11:27 AM , Rating: 1
I had made a comment recently on Asset Light & gave the source from where I picked this information-see below

http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID...

Details are vague & I asked the Ed(Kristopher Kubicki) to check on this as he has his ways to check up.

Yes in a way you are right-but who knows what AMD has in mind.
They are expected to release details on this in June.


By Viditor on 5/7/2007 9:12:10 AM , Rating: 2
The link doesn't work for me...