DailyTech - RIP: Athlon 64 3000+, 3200+ Socket 939

Submit News

Hardware RIP: Athlon 64 3000+, 3200+ Socket 939
Sven Olsen (Blog) - June 21, 2006 2:25 PM

23 comment(s) - last by IMPoor.. on Jun 22 at 12:27 PM

AMD's memo documenting the change

Another one bites the dust

In what is turning into a graveyard of discontinued AMD processors, it has come to DailyTech's attention that a single-core Athlon 64 3000+ and 3200+ Socket 939 processors are getting the axe. AMD has just notified its distributors that it is terminating the Athlon 64 single-core Socket 939 3000+ and 3200+ components. AMD's documentation claims no more of the following processors may be ordered after the end of June:

ADA3000AWBOX	ADA3000DIK4BI
ADA3200BIBOX	ADA3200AWBOX
ADA3000DEP4AW	ADA3200CGBOX
ADA3200BPBOX	ADA3000BPBOX
ADA3000DAA4BP	ADA3200DAA4BW
ADA3200DAA4BP	ADA3000DAA4BW
ADA3200DKA4CG	ADA3200DIK4BI
ADA3200DEP4AW	ADA3000BIBOX

This comes just a week after DailyTech first received word that AMD had plans to remove its initial batch of AM2 2x1MB Windsor processors from the market -- possibly due to the pending price war between AMD and Intel. The very next day, we received confirmation that a number of retailers including NewEgg and ZipZoomFly were indeed removing the processors from their websites.

AMD's reason for EOL'ing the products was simplify the roadmap "per customers' request."

Comments

Threshold

Username
Password
remember me

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

How sad... She was EOL'd before she saw 64bits happen

By DallasTexas on 6/21/2006 6:20:37 PM , Rating: 2

With all the 64bit fanfare from AMD in 2003 with 64bits, it's sad that stallion of a design never made it to 64bit land - at least here on earth. Oh well, let her run free in heaven with the others. Very sad day indeed.

That brings up a question ! Was Intel correct back in 2003 when they said 64bits will not be mainstream for another 2-3 years? Where did all the 64bit pundits go?

RE: How sad... She was EOL'd before she saw 64bits happen

By bombledmonk on 6/21/2006 6:38:15 PM , Rating: 2

Everyone knew that 64bit wouldn't see the light of day for several years. Anyways the real advantages of 64bit were not found in personal computing, but servers and workstations that handled rediculous amounts of memory.

Parent

RE: How sad... She was EOL'd before she saw 64bits happen

By Furen on 6/21/2006 8:27:05 PM , Rating: 3

Intel was stalling for time, they already had 64bits in Prescott. We may not be using 64bits yet but we're building an installed base of 64bit-able CPUs. Without an installed base we'd never see the software actually come out.

Parent

RE: How sad... She was EOL'd before she saw 64bits happen

By toattett on 6/22/2006 12:33:38 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
With all the 64bit fanfare from AMD in 2003 with 64bits, it's sad that stallion of a design never made it to 64bit land - at least here on earth. Oh well, let her run free in heaven with the others. Very sad day indeed.

I remember I was still heavily using the 16-bit DOS in the early Pentium 90MHz days, and I am sure not a lot of people were using Windows when the first 32-bit 386 CPUs were introduced, and it wasn't until the 2000/XP age that people are finally switching to a true 32-bit only platform.

Parent

RIP

By matthewfoley on 6/21/2006 3:39:21 PM , Rating: 2

My 939 90nm 3000+ that would do 2.4 GHz on air will always hold a special place in my heart :)

RE: RIP

By killerroach on 6/21/2006 5:04:00 PM , Rating: 2

Agreed completely... I have a Venice core 3000+, and I've gotten it up to 2.65GHz on a stock cooler stable enough to encode a DVD in XviD with dual-pass encoding, have run 3DMark06 at 2.7 even, and have gotten it to pass POST at close to 2.9 (although I'm not even sure the CPU's the reason for that limitation). It's an incredible chip for the money, and it will be sadly missed. Nice to know your $125 chip can beat an FX-53 solidly and edge out an FX-55 in 3DMark06's CPU test :)

Parent

RE: RIP

By Homerboy on 6/21/2006 5:13:18 PM , Rating: 2

2.8 on stock cooling boys :) Venice 3000+
I'm not giving her up quite yet.

Parent

RE: RIP

By matthewfoley on 6/22/2006 10:13:17 AM , Rating: 2

Mine's Winchester, and 2.4 at just over stock voltage. I sure hope the 65nm die shrink gives AMD as much of a push as the 90nm did. Not that I'm a fanboy, but otherwise, I'm afraid we'll see nothing but blue after Conroe for a while.

Parent

Axeing 3000 & 3200

By shabodah on 6/21/2006 3:45:40 PM , Rating: 3

I don't know anyone who owns a 90nm 3000 that hasn't overclocked it a long way. Seems like their process has gotten to the point that the worst chips are still capable of 2.4ghz, so why sell some of them as 1.8ghz chips for less?

RE: Axeing 3000 & 3200

By OrSin on 6/21/2006 3:55:57 PM , Rating: 2

He hit it right ont he head. The 939 process is so good thier is no reason to lable thier chips 3000 or 3200 when they know 90% of all the chips can be rated at 3800 and above. Just no profit in selling something for less then what it really is. If you want low end they will say go with the 754 platform. I see amd axing chips under 3800 by the beginning of '07

Parent

RE: Axeing 3000 & 3200

By ThisSpaceForRent on 6/22/2006 8:00:55 AM , Rating: 2

When you buy the more expensive chip you do get different multipliers. So that's all you're really paying for.

Parent

Dual Core War

By SilthDraeth on 6/21/2006 3:29:40 PM , Rating: 2

Understandable.

The following is my opinion.

AMD won the single core war, and yes, with the price war about to rage, they would be hard pressed to make any profit on 3000+ single core processors.

Espescially with Intel moving towards an almost exclusive dual core marketing technique, anything less from AMD would make it appear that they are losing the edge they had gained.

RE: Dual Core War

By Squidward on 6/21/2006 3:36:10 PM , Rating: 2

Yes I would think single core on the lowend is the least profit margin they'd get for their processors and with major price cuts looming it wouldn't be in their financial best interest. I for one am oh so patiently waiting for the X2 price cuts so I can snag a 3800+ on the cheap!

Parent

RE: Dual Core War

By sabrewulf on 6/21/2006 4:46:07 PM , Rating: 2

They handily won the dual core war as well, up until about last christmas when Core 2 numbers started showing up. There's really no dual core war now. Dual core is the new single core, and quad core will be the new dual core ;)

Single core procs are just value chips now (still great for gaming though, at least until more games embrace and rely on SMP)

Parent

AM2's will follow

By johnsonx on 6/21/2006 10:59:58 PM , Rating: 2

I'll bet that the AM2 3000+ and 3200+ will soon meet the same fate. AMD has no reason to keep selling those either, when Semprons meet all the low-end needs. It wouldn't surprise me if within 6 months AMD's single-core parts are all Semprons.

RE: AM2's will follow

By RallyMaster on 6/21/2006 11:23:21 PM , Rating: 2

I think that's a good prediction. Since Intel's been selling Pentium D 805s for 130, why would AMD sell their single core chips for more?

Parent

RE: AM2's will follow

By Knish on 6/22/2006 9:26:32 AM , Rating: 2

Real good prediction:
http://dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2974

Parent

Growing pains

By Trisped on 6/21/2006 3:41:26 PM , Rating: 2

Sounds like growing pains. Cut the lowest gains so you can maximize productivity of high profit chips. Makes sense to me.

RE: Growing pains

By Googer on 6/22/2006 2:41:41 AM , Rating: 2

Actually AMD is planning on price cuts in the next 30 days or so. A 3000+ will cost the same as a 3500+ When that happens the 3000+ wont make much sence.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2800
http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/1779_large_full...

Parent

Food for Thought

By fenderkb76 on 6/21/2006 10:34:37 PM , Rating: 2

Food for thought - the computer I am posting this on is running on an Athlon64 3200+ Clawhammer (socket 754, 1 MB cache, 2.0 Ghz). That was the launch chip for Athlon 64 in October 2003 and a 3200+ was also the fastest Athlon XP at the time. It took a while for the 3000+ and 2800+ to come out. I paid $418 for the retail CPU (I just looked at the invoice on newegg...can't believe its still there!) They've changed the 3200+ to a 2.2GHz 512 KB cache part. Newegg has the S754 Newcastle for $109 and the S754 Venice for $107. The S939 Venice is $99. All roughly 1/4 the cost. What I can't believe is that these chips are even still available at all! It's been almost 3 years since launch! The prices should have dwindled to the point that these were not even offered anymore long before this time. What's funny is that the majority of overclockers and single core people are probably still buying these chips (939 of course), or maybe the 3500+. What's even funnier is that S754 will outlive S939 (in the low end of course). I remember when everyone said to wait for S939 as 754 was only a stopgap. Shoot, newegg even still has the Socket A Duron 1.8 GHz Applebred for $44.00.

RE: Food for Thought

By jrussel316 on 6/21/2006 11:23:00 PM , Rating: 2

omg...ur right! they do have a duron for sale....talk about a blast from the past - I think I'd forgotten 266mhz FSB's used to exist!

Parent

3800+

By gramboh on 6/21/2006 3:59:10 PM , Rating: 2

My local retailer is selling the AMD A64 3800+ AM2 for $165CDN, looks like they are already reflecting the price cut. Pretty good deal.

Is S939 still good

By IMPoor on 6/22/2006 12:27:33 PM , Rating: 2

I have the 3200+ chip. I went to my motherboard's website and they show that there is a bios update to support the X2 chips. I noticed on newegg there are S939 X2 chips and there are AM2 socket X2 chips. Is S939 as good as the AM2 socket? I know the price drop is coming and I want dual core. I am wondering if I should plan on a full upgrade to the AM2 socket or just buy a new X2 chip and stick with the S939 board I already have. What would be the benefits?

"If you look at the last five years, if you look at what major innovations have occurred in computing technology, every single one of them came from AMD. Not a single innovation came from Intel." -- AMD CEO Hector Ruiz in 2007