backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 60 comment(s) - last by Marty007.. on Dec 28 at 9:23 AM
Specifications for AMDs Phenom 9600 Black Edition hit the Internet

AMD has been trailing Intel in the performance wars that rage between the two chipmakers for the most powerful processors. AMDs latest entry into the battle is its Phenom processors.

ChileHardware has scored some specs for the AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition and posted them. The Phenom 9600 Black Edition is a quad-core Agena processor with an 89W TDP. The processor is built on AMDs 65nm process just like the other Phenom processors. The operating voltage is 0.97va to 1.15v.

The HyperTransport bus runs at 1800MHz and the operating frequency is 2.3GHz. The processor covered here is B2 stepping and features several extensions including MMX, 3DNow Extended!, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, AMD64, Cool’n’Quiet, and NX-bit AMD-V. The best feature of the processor for computer users who overclock is that the Phenom 9600 Black Edition is multiplier unlocked.

The price is pegged at 220 Euros, which equates to about $315 USD. Like all the other Phenom processors, the Black Edition 9600 does suffer from the well-publicized TLB processor bug DailyTech reported on early in December 2007.

This isn’t the first Black Edition processor from AMD, though it is the first Black Edition Phenom part. AMD introduced a Black Edition Athlon 64 X2 5000+ in September of 2007. According to the AMD Phenom roadmap that DailyTech broke in December of 2007, Phenom processors are expected to show up in 2008 running at 2.4GHz, 2.6GHz and beyond.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Not bad
By FITCamaro on 12/21/2007 2:11:34 PM , Rating: 2
$315 for a quad core CPU with an unlocked multiplier isn't bad.




RE: Not bad
By AmbroseAthan on 12/21/2007 2:23:01 PM , Rating: 3
Wouldn't be surprised if it came in lower in the States also. Over at Newegg the 9500 has dropped down to $199 and the 9600 is at $239. Its unfortunate the BE will not be the new stepping on its release; I am waiting on the new stepping before making the jump.

(And before someone says get Intel, I have an AM2 Motherboard, and do not have unlimited cash for a new board & cpu)


RE: Not bad
By MrBungle123 on 12/21/2007 2:32:51 PM , Rating: 1
You'll probably wait and wait then when they are finally released end up getting one of the old stepping chips through the crap shute of dumb luck that is ordering stuff online.


RE: Not bad
By The Jedi on 12/21/2007 2:55:24 PM , Rating: 3
ClubIT.com is kind of good about specifying the stepping of the CPU's they sell. But true, most places are just faceless e-commerce sites that could care less.


RE: Not bad
By Proteusza on 12/21/2007 3:18:05 PM , Rating: 2
Thats what I'm doing.

I have an Athlon X2 5600+, and I'm gonna wait until the Barcelona chips achieve clock speed parity with my chip.

IE until they release a 2.8 GHz one, so that in the worst case scenario I wont lose any performance at all.


RE: Not bad
By 16nm on 12/21/2007 5:14:03 PM , Rating: 3
The 2.8 Barcelona (post B2 stepping) will be faster than your 2.8 X2. Their new chips are faster clock for clock than the older ones. It's not a huge jump but its still there.


RE: Not bad
By Spoelie on 12/22/2007 6:35:18 AM , Rating: 2
from what i read, B3 is supposed to have a different model number, like 9650 instead of 9600


RE: Not bad
By jhtrico1850 on 12/21/2007 3:59:28 PM , Rating: 2
The Q6600 is cheaper with a locked multiplier and overclocks better. Faster too.


RE: Not bad
By xti on 12/21/2007 5:02:05 PM , Rating: 2
not everyone needs huuuuuuge speed. granted the intel chips are pretty nice, but its almost the communities responsibility that if they can keep them afloat and still be content with the performance they receive from AMD, then to go for it and see it through.

wrestling got crappy when they only had 1 major player.


RE: Not bad
By djkrypplephite on 12/21/2007 6:01:54 PM , Rating: 1
Wrestling never became crappy and never stopped begin crappy, it's a constant state of being for WWF. Or WWE, or NWO or whatever it is now.

True though, SOMEONE will have to get AMD's chips to keep the afloat during the hard times. Perhaps they will rise again someday. Until then, fanboys better be keeping my prices down.


RE: Not bad
By clnee55 on 12/22/2007 2:15:58 AM , Rating: 2
I have no responsibility for AMD. Hector is the guy who is responsible. Where is mr Viditor who claims AMD is a great buy at $12. Mr Viditor, can you buy some more million shares to rescue AMD?


RE: Not bad
By crystal clear on 12/22/2007 11:36:44 AM , Rating: 2
As of 04:01 PM EST
$7.79 USD Price Change
0.18 Percent Change
2.26% (downwards)


RE: Not bad
By ImSpartacus on 12/22/2007 7:15:53 PM , Rating: 2
hmm, thats purdy cheap. and most likely someone will buy amd and bring it out of the depths of bankruptcy.


RE: Not bad
By lindejos on 12/26/2007 3:55:59 AM , Rating: 3
I couldn't disagree more. How is it anyone's responsiblity to purchase an inferior product? If AMD goes under, someone else will step in and fill the void.

You can "feel bad" for the employees of the company, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be held responsible for failing to meet launch dates, delivering buggy products, buying companies they couldn't afford and being a full generation behind in process technology. If the AMD managment hadn't failed over the past year, they wouldn't be in the spot that they are in now.


RE: Not bad
By Regs on 12/26/2007 10:07:46 AM , Rating: 2
Past year? More like years. They stalled. They were able to put what they had in their pipeline on the shelves but it's obvious their pipeline ran dry over 2 years ago. Something that was likely forseen.


RE: Not bad
By eye smite on 12/21/07, Rating: 0
RE: Not bad
By clnee55 on 12/22/2007 2:18:26 AM , Rating: 2
Who are us? is it your family?

quote:
Most of us don't care for intel chips


RE: Not bad
By eye smite on 12/22/07, Rating: -1
RE: Not bad
By mindless1 on 12/23/2007 6:23:41 PM , Rating: 1
Some of US are both AMD and Intel fans. They have both performed remarkably in developing and furthering performance of desktop PCs. Sometimes it seems crazy that everyone poo-poos AMD for being mere single to a couple dozen percent behind Intel in performance or overclocking, while ignoring what a vast increase in performance we have enjoyed in such a very short period of time over the past few years!

Performance does not matter THAT much, that you would be lost today if owning a processor only having the performance possible in 2005. Looking back, somehow you manged to survive 2005 performance levels and even get some work done, maybe even play a game.

Today nothing has changed, enthusiasts rate CPUs like it is some kind of sporting even where one only has to score a tiny bit better to seem like some vastly superior choice when in fact, most people don't have any real effect in their system use unless they're the type that no matter how fast it was, they'd try as hard as they can to bring it to it's knees. (CPU isn't the problem then, it's the nut behind the mouse).


RE: Not bad
By eye smite on 12/23/07, Rating: -1
RE: Not bad
By clnee55 on 12/24/2007 2:16:58 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
I prefer AMD and Intel burnt me a long time ago during the original Pentium days. They started me down the road to AMD in 1998 and I've been happy with them ever since.

It sounded pretty smart then
quote:
I however keep the 4 AthlonX2 desktops, 2 Athlon64 mobile laptops, and 1 turion laptop running 24/7 on a proj