backtop


Print 142 comment(s) - last by Chocobollz.. on Jan 12 at 8:14 AM


AMD's Phenom II X4 940 in the wild  (Source: TweakTown)

AMD's Phenom II launch party will kick off Thursday with the launch of its first 45 nm processors.  (Source: techPowerUp!)
AMD is looking to take another shot at market leader Intel

With Intel's 45 nm Penryn dominating three and four core Phenom offerings, chipmaker AMD is desperate to do anything it can to cut into Intel's lead.  The first major change literally split the company in half, separating its manufacturing branches into a new company.

Now we're on the eve of the second major act from AMD:  the launch of the Phenom II lineup codenamed Deneb (4-core) and Heka (3-core).  With AMD debuting its new mobile platform this week, it looks to continue to make even more waves by announcing the first of its Phenom II processors this Thursday.

While details of this launch are currently under embargo, DailyTech received verbal confirmation from sources at AMD that the first of the Phenom II processors will be announced Thursday at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.

The new processors represent primarily a die shrink as AMD is finally adopting a 45 nm process a year after Intel released a 45 nm die shrink (Penryn) and a few months after Intel released its new Core i7 architecture.

Phenom II processors will feature a 3-digit naming scheme, with X4 for the four core editions and X3 branding for the three core editions.  The 4-core versions will have 8xx and 9xx model numbers, while the 3-core Heka Phenom IIs will have 7xx model numbers. 

The first of new processors will have a 4x512 KB L2 cache, and a 6 MB L3 cache for 8 MB of total cache.  They will come tomorrow, with the release of the Phenom II X4 920 and 940, high-end socket AM2+ processors clocked at 2.8 and 3.0 GHz, respectively.  The Phenom II X4 940 will feature C2 stepping.  In February the lineup is planned to be fleshed out with the release of more four core processors and some three core processors, all AM3 socket designs.  Among the coming models are mid-range X4 805 and X4 810, clocked at 2.5 GHz and 2.6 GHz.  These models will only feature 4 MB of L3 cache, but will also feature 4x512 KB of L2 cache.  Also debuting in February will be the X4 910 and X4 925, clocked at 2.6 GHz and 2.8 GHz, respectively.  These models will have 6 MB of L3 cache and 3x512 KB of L2 cache.

AMD will follow with a high-end AM3 socket quad core, the Phenom II X4 945, which will land late in Q2 2009.  Dual core plans are still up in the air, and new 45 nm dual cores likely will not arrive until the release of the much-delayed K10 architecture, AMD’s upcoming new architecture, which AMD says will come in late Q2 2009 or early Q3 2009.

While the launch of the Phenom II lineup represents AMD's first major launch since late 2007's Phenom launch, many question whether the new processors will be able to reverse the company's market share slide.  Early benchmarks, while suspect in quality, show the Phenom II outperformed by Intel i7 processors.  At high resolutions, the Phenom II may hold its own against Intel's designs due to the processing be graphics limited, but its competitiveness both in gaming and in other applications at stock speeds is in question.

Meanwhile, the folks at AMD tell DailyTech that one of the most exciting developments of the new lineup is its overclocking potential.  They say that the chips, which feature unlocked multipliers overclock very well at can be expected to run in the high 3 GHz range, or even higher with custom cooling solutions.  AMD claims that its chips will be significantly better overclockers than Nehalem.  Claims one AMD employee, "They were cooling with liquid nitrogen and got the things up 6, 7 GHz.  Crazy stuff."

Will AMD's overclocking potential save it from being overshadowed by the Intel i7's formidable out-the-box performance?  Only time will tell, but for those looking to get the scoop on the future of the microprocessor wars, Thursday will be a big day.



Comments     Threshold


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

Core i7 Overclocking
By TomZ on 1/7/2009 4:46:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Will AMD's overclocking potential save it from being overshadowed by the Intel i7's formidable out-the-box performance?
Huh? Why would someone compare AMD OC to Intel non-OC performance? Core i7 overclocks quite well itself, so I don't see how Phenom II OC ability will give it a leg up on Core i7.




RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By clovell on 1/7/2009 4:51:06 PM , Rating: 5
Depends on their relative prices.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Mitch101 on 1/7/2009 4:57:33 PM , Rating: 1
Your right Its going to be priced very well to be competitive.

What I don't understand is if the chips overclock so well even on air cooling why not release higher clock speeds?


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By TomZ on 1/7/09, Rating: -1
RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Mitch101 on 1/7/2009 6:07:08 PM , Rating: 3
I haven't heard of the i7 being a good overclocker but their low end i7 packs a lot of punch but also has to be paired with a pricey mobo and costly ram. Bang for dollar is good with the i7 low end but rather pricey when you add up all the components needed.

AMD Phenom II will be competitively priced on the cpu level to the low end i7 but can be paired with a fairly inexpensive priced mobo and dare I say nearly free ram. AMD really has the best mobo featured chipsets too for HTPC and light gamers. Previously AMD didnt have overclock potential really making Core 2 one of the best bangs for buck. With the overclock of Phenom II AMD really has a good alternative to Core 2. Given what AMD delivers on the Mobo's I might lean more toward AMD than an Intel Core 2 or Q6600 paired with an NVIDIA mobo. Wow tough call. I think consumers win this round thanks to AMD having a good CPU again.

Phenom II might not win the performance crown from the i7 but might pack the best bang for buck.

For the record my Main rig is an E8400 OC to 4ghz with Radeon 3870 on P45 Gigabyte mobo. My HTPC is a AMD 4850 45watt on Gigabyte 780g Mobo. My Beater/learner system is a AMD X2 4200+ on NVIDIA based ASUS mobo. Before someone says I am biased or a fanbois. Bang for buck baby!


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By FaceMaster on 1/7/09, Rating: -1
RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By SlyNine on 1/7/2009 6:55:58 PM , Rating: 5
Can they not just ban this clown.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By JKflipflop98 on 1/7/2009 7:21:12 PM , Rating: 4
I second that. Please ban this asshat.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By dflynchimp on 1/7/09, Rating: -1
RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By FaceMaster on 1/8/2009 4:45:03 PM , Rating: 2
I thought that America supported free speech.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Reclaimer77 on 1/8/2009 4:54:28 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
I thought that America supported free speech.


Nope that died when the term 'politically correct' was coined.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By danrien on 1/8/2009 5:05:54 PM , Rating: 2
private businesses are a separate entity from the American government. your point is null.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By SlyNine on 1/8/2009 7:18:17 PM , Rating: 2
You can, as long as it doesn't infringe on someone elses rights.

But if you want, go make a web site about how you're going to bang peoples mums and leave us alone. Free speach doesn't mean you can go where ever you want and say what ever you want.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By FaceMaster on 1/8/2009 8:40:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
go make a web site about how you're going to bang peoples mums


HOW HADN'T I THOUGHT OF THAT BEFORE? Thanks!

quote:
Free speach doesn't mean you can go where ever you want and say what ever you want.


I'm pretty sure it does.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By lordcheeto on 1/10/2009 1:33:16 PM , Rating: 4
Yes, that's why you hear cuss words left and right on primetime TV, because there's no such thing as censorship. And as a private entity, dailytech reserves the right to censor who and what they want, as goes with any business, they can deny service to anyone.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By SlyNine on 1/7/09, Rating: 0
RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Tsuwamono on 1/7/2009 7:24:21 PM , Rating: 2
Ive only built one intel rig since my AMDs and im not very impressed with it. Mines a E6600 and I prefer my 4200 x2. Atleast it was more stable then this thing. I dont really care about OC.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By murphyslabrat on 1/7/2009 8:40:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I dont really care about OC.

And that's why you aren't violently pro-Inel. This is besides the fact that the e6600 is about 30% better at stock.

For the record, I have no idea why Intel went with a DDR3 only approach for i7. Could anyone enlighten me?


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By themaster08 on 1/7/2009 8:58:35 PM , Rating: 2
Because of it's integrated memory controller.

Intel won't support DDR2 when DDR3 is becoming mainstream and prices will soon become parity with DDR2. It would be pointless among other things, such as it would increase the price of the processor.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 1/8/2009 7:10:28 AM , Rating: 2
DDR3 has advantages over DDR2 when using Intel's new QPI system.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Targon on 1/8/2009 7:22:09 AM , Rating: 2
But at an increased price in terms of memory cost, motherboard cost, processor cost, etc. DDR 3 MAY have advantages, but if I can buy a Phenom 2 and clock it fairly easily to 4GHz/core, I think I would prefer that...


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By themaster08 on 1/8/2009 5:36:43 PM , Rating: 3
It's been possible to do that even with the Q6600 for the past year and a half......


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By SlyNine on 1/8/2009 7:22:57 PM , Rating: 2
AMD is supporting DDR 2 and DDR 3 with an intergraded controller.

"AMD was active in JEDEC on making the DDR2 and DDR3 specs similar enough that this one-CPU, two-sockets approach could work." Anand.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By themaster08 on 1/9/2009 8:34:36 AM , Rating: 3
Yeah. It's possible for Intel to do the same, but they are not in dire need for sales, and know that DDR3 will be mainstream eventually, so they can just sit back for a while and watch their product grow, whilst they already have another product (Core 2) which will appeal to those who want a cheap upgrade.
AMD, however, need to take whatever measures they possibly can to make sure the Phenom II actually sells to as many people as possible. I feel they've got this part right.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By themaster08 on 1/7/2009 7:01:08 PM , Rating: 2
You bring up a good point there.

Aren't the AM3 chips also compatible with AM2+ boards?

So if you already have an AM2+ board, you can still purchase a Phenom II AM3 without having to go to the trouble of buying a new motherboard and RAM.
Granted it will be slower than it would be if using it with DDR3 RAM, but it still offers an affordable upgrade as opposed to the i7.

But from what I read, the Phenom II is still having trouble competing against high-end Core 2, and most people who already have an LGA 775 board probably won't think twice about switching if there isn't going to be any performance gain. For thost who already have 775 boards, the cheapest and more beneficial option would be to just upgrade their CPU.

I feel AMD have done everything right to encourage current AMD users to still use their products. Where they are lacking is to encourage Intel users to switch to AMD, and the only way to do that is the obvious.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By SlyNine on 1/7/2009 7:15:59 PM , Rating: 1
Since the memory controller is based inside the CPU's, It depends on weather or not AMD puts the DDR2 memory controller in them.

It sounds like to me that these new Phenoms will not have the DDR2 compatable memory controller.

AMD did every thing they could with what they had, But I was looking for more then they could offer when I built my C2Q.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By themaster08 on 1/7/2009 7:24:21 PM , Rating: 2
Good point. It's just something I read, that's all.
But the point still stands as they are still releasing AM2+ CPU's

Same here when I built my computer.

Only X2's were available at the time. There was absolutely no competition. I wanted a quad-core and AMD didn't have one available.

I have tried a few of the current Phenoms, mostly the 9850. It's a good performer, that's about all I can say.

I am very unbiased as to what goes into my computer. At the time I built my system, Intel waas the best route.
I think if I was to build another I would still stick with Intel.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Laitainion on 1/7/2009 7:44:00 PM , Rating: 3
AM3 processors will still have the DDR2 memory controller, so will work in AM2(+) but AM2(+) won't work in AM3 because they don't have the DDR3 controller.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AM3


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By SlyNine on 1/8/2009 7:09:47 AM , Rating: 2
Thanks for the that, It's been awhile since I've paid alot of attention to AMD.

about a year ago I probably understood the AM3 AM2+ compatibility better.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Chocobollz on 1/12/2009 8:14:20 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
It depends on weather ...


Ok, it's rain now so would the PhII got cool enough and get speed improvement? ;-)


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Reclaimer77 on 1/7/2009 7:31:44 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I haven't heard of the i7 being a good overclocker


Then you ain't listening.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By just4U on 1/8/2009 3:33:19 AM , Rating: 2
Heat issues are a concern with the i7 tho. Those suckers get extremely hot.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By FITCamaro on 1/8/2009 8:53:07 AM , Rating: 2
Aren't you also really restricted on what kind of voltage you can run? Anandtech did an article on it.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By SlyNine on 1/8/2009 7:26:54 PM , Rating: 2
There is a setting in the bios to disable that. That function is meant more for server and notebook environments.

The I7 920 has been an amazing overclocker. I'm getting one :).

I have to admit, I wish I could go Phenom 2 but the core I7 still kills it with a price.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By DeepBlue1975 on 1/7/2009 8:30:03 PM , Rating: 2
Hear ya!!!

I've now a an intel q6600 (b3 stepping, the oldest school of all)...
I came to think about changing for an i7 setup, as CPU prices for i7 look good enough to me...

But as soon as I started looking at mobo prices for i7, and then add the need for costly ddr3, all the i7's charm vanished away for me.

So the news about phenom II being right around the corner got me interested. I can't wait to see some benches, thermal tests and, most important of all, mobo prices.

My actual Intel setup has given me quite a lot for the last 2 years, but because of prices, I think I'm gonna end up going back to AMD for my next setup.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By warezme on 1/7/2009 10:19:22 PM , Rating: 2
You haven't heard that i7 is a good overclocker? LOL!!!

Have you been living under a rock!?

I have an air cooled i7 920 $299, that runs 4.0Ghz all day till the cows come home and can easily run 4.2Ghz for fancy benchmarks. I don't see how Phenom II or III can match that with their track record.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Pirks on 1/7/2009 10:38:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I don't see how Phenom II or III can match that with their track record
It's because AMD makes mainstream CPUs for masses, not a niche chips (like Nehalem) for a rare overclocker in the woods.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Reclaimer77 on 1/8/09, Rating: 0
RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By just4U on 1/8/2009 3:37:00 AM , Rating: 2
No their not currently for the masses... to get into a half ways decent i7 setup your looking at a substantial costs. That's more then the "masses" are willing to pay.

Here in Canada for a cheap i7 setup your looking at about $950.00 for mobo, cpu, and 6 gigs of ram. While it's cheaper in the states it's still not cost effective enough for the majority to move over to or even consider under current economic conditions.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By SlyNine on 1/8/2009 7:29:48 PM , Rating: 2
Not a problem with what you said, except people still quote the 3 channel ram when in fact you can still go dual channel 4gigs without a problem and without any real performance hit.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Integral9 on 1/8/2009 9:11:12 AM , Rating: 2
Four letters. MTBF
In my experience, my overclocked CPUs have never lasted more than a year or two eventhough they operated within their thermal envelope.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By adiposity on 1/8/2009 1:35:29 PM , Rating: 2
I have a core2duo (65nm) 2.4GHz overclocked to 3GHz, bought at launch, that is still running strong.

-Dan


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By lukasbradley on 1/7/2009 6:27:01 PM , Rating: 2
Deserves a 6.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By FireSnake on 1/8/2009 4:18:08 AM , Rating: 3
They don't want to ship a processor with more then 125W of consumtion I guess (If I remember well I read this somewhere).

In time, when manufacturing process will get better I guess we can expect higher clocks.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By lordcheeto on 1/10/2009 1:29:50 PM , Rating: 2
Right, AMD's price/performance ratio has always been better than Intel's. Same goes for ATI.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By dj LiTh on 1/7/2009 4:53:26 PM , Rating: 2
Well OC is just free performance so thats always a plus and you might as well mention it rather than not. Hopefully AMD can sell these chips at a price/performance ratio that will beat the i7, since its obvious that they wont take the performance crown.

Anyone have any info on that K10 architecture?


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By MonkeyPaw on 1/7/2009 5:44:15 PM , Rating: 3
It appears that K10.5 (cpus listed above) have some tweaks to get about 5-15% more IPC over the old K10. Basically, it catches AMD up with Core2. While that's not Core i7, consider that in some cases (games), Core2 is faster than the comparable Core i7. Granted, in other cases (encoding) i7 smokes everything, but AMD's IPC should at least be within striking distance of i7, which is why pricing should make things very interesting.

One thing to remember is board costs. I bet you won't have to shell out $300+ for the motherboard on K10.5 like you do on X58. The best AM3 board might be $200+, but $150 should go a long way.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By wideout on 1/7/09, Rating: -1
RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Targon on 1/7/2009 7:36:51 PM , Rating: 2
With the 45nm process, the newer processors will be a bit cheaper to produce, and if they sell more of them, it will make it worth it.

Take the difference between making $10 on a processor, and making $5 on a processor. Selling for $5 cheaper may get them 3 times the number of sales, so is a better idea overall.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By themaster08 on 1/7/2009 7:07:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well OC is just free performance


I wouldn't necessarily say that overclocking is "free"

First of all, overclocking consumes more power. More power = bigger electricity bill. You also have to consider wear on the CPU, appropriate cooling etc etc.

AMD chips have always lacked in overclockability towards Intel chips. This is where they take a hit from enthusiasts who like to overclock the hell out of their CPU's.
I feel that even if AMD have an inferior CPU than Intel at stock, if their overclocking abilities were enhanced, they would see a lot more sales in the enthusiast market.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Reclaimer77 on 1/7/2009 7:36:12 PM , Rating: 2
Speedstepping works on the i7's while overclocked. Also you can get a pretty damn good OC going on them with little to no voltage increase depending on how "golden" your chip is.

So yeah, its pretty much free performance today.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By themaster08 on 1/7/2009 7:57:37 PM , Rating: 3
Even if you don't increase voltage, power consumtion still increases ;) It's just more-so when voltages are increased.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Targon on 1/8/2009 7:17:58 AM , Rating: 2
There are times when you can overclock without increasing the voltage though. In cases where the current range of speeds are all at the same power levels, you can often buy the lower end chips and run them at the same speeds as the higher end without ANY adjustment to voltages. For those cases, it really is extra performance for no additional cost.

You are thinking of those who really are trying to max out the performance of their processors, not those who want to save some money by buying the 2.4GHz version of a chip and then run it at 2.8GHz.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Reclaimer77 on 1/8/2009 4:44:25 PM , Rating: 2
Also the biggest problem in the past with overclocking was voltage droop or "v-droop". That's why you typically raised voltages. Because under load the voltage would drop to levels which made the overclock unstable.

The new Intel boards by Gigabyte and I believe Asus now have anti v-droop options and MUCH better power delivery/management than mobo's in the past.

I'm seeing pretty impressive OC's on the i7's with no voltage increase at all.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By themaster08 on 1/8/2009 5:44:09 PM , Rating: 2
No. If you get a wattage reader and attatch it to the plug of your computer, you will see that even slight overclocks with NO voltage increase will increase overall power consumtion. Clock speeds, FSB or HT Link will be increased, RAM speed in some cases. Power consumtion obviously increases, it's common sense! It increases even more when voltages are increased, that's all.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Reclaimer77 on 1/8/2009 6:19:13 PM , Rating: 2
Where did I say OC'ing doesn't increase power consumption at all whatsoever ?

It's simply just not as big of an issue at it used to be.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By themaster08 on 1/8/2009 6:37:11 PM , Rating: 2
No, I was replying to the post above yours because I don't think that he understood what I meant.

I agree with your post. I have an option in my BIOS that allows me to lessen VDROOP, and it works a little. There is still some VDROOP ther but it's noticeably less than when the option is disabled.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By theapparition on 1/7/2009 4:53:48 PM , Rating: 2
Yep,
Don't get that comparison either.

How about this nugget of info too......
quote:
At high resolutions, the Phenom II may hold its own against Intel's designs, but its competitiveness outside gaming also remains to be seen.

Meaning, when applications are graphics limited the Phenom2 is somewhat competitive. However, this is a red herring, since when graphics are improved (on a much faster cycle than processors), you will once again become CPU bound faster with a Phenom2 rather than an i7.

I'll wait until the embargo is lifted and critical benchmarks are released before passing any final judgement.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Sunrise089 on 1/7/2009 5:12:40 PM , Rating: 3
I think the original line was very silly. In fact, at more or less every price point since Summer 2006 we've seen comments in reviews like "The AMD XXXX chip is very close to the Intel XXXX chip at stock speeds, but the easy 50% overclock on stock cooling the Intel chip is capable makes it the easy choice for enthusiasts." This could finally be a shift away from that.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By SuperSix on 1/7/2009 6:05:49 PM , Rating: 2
Approximate disty pricing:

HDX920XCGIBOX $229.00
HDZ940XCGIBOX $269.00

Launch tomorrow- most disty's have stock.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By Gul Westfale on 1/7/2009 10:50:38 PM , Rating: 2
i recently upgraded my old athlon64 X2 (socket 939 FTW!) mobo to an intel LGA 775-based one. the CPU cost me just $100, but as it was a wolfdale (E5200, 2.5GHz but on a slow 800MHz bus and 45nm) i was able to overclock it to a stable 3.6GHz, on air cooling. google around a bit and you'll see that this is fairly common for these chips.

i know AMD's coming CPUs are quads, and mine is just a duallie, but how much power do you need? if you can get a 3.6GHz dual core CPU for a hundred bucks would you really spend more than twice as much to get a 2.8GHz quad that may or may not overclock?

a few years ago power was important, we needed as much as we could get. those were the days of tualatins and palominos; today even cheap ass emachines computers come with dual core CPUs that would be decent at playing games if they had a real graphics card to work with. for everything besides games and video editing today's machines are overkill.

so AMD will have to do more than say they might overclock better, they will have to prove that they can beat intel on price/performance ratio, and they will have to be consistent across their whole lineup. the fact that they are starting out at only 3GHz does not bode well at all, so let me be the first to doubt their claims of better OC ability.

all in all, the only thing i can say about this launch is "meh". not interested. better luck next time.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By SlyNine on 1/8/2009 7:38:55 PM , Rating: 2
I remember back then they were debating the worth of dual core, yet your 939 X2 was being criticized. Now if you did buy in to the dual core 4200x2 or higher your still able to play any game with it. Yes there are now games that WILL NOT play on single cores, assassins creed for one example will not run on a single core.

Quads are for future proofing, If you get a Core I7 and OC it too 3.6 ghz, you are probably good for a while if you don't do incremental upgrades.

As far as the argument that you upgrade to something cheaper now and get something faster when its cheaper and spend the same amount, all that does is sacrifice quality now for better quality later. If I wasn't so addicted to this stuff I'd probably build a beast and use it for 5 years+.


RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By MrBowmore on 1/7/09, Rating: -1
RE: Core i7 Overclocking
By SlyNine on 1/8/2009 7:41:23 PM , Rating: 1
Can it run Giants citizen kabuto ;)


Is the gap getting smaller?
By Pirks on 1/7/2009 4:47:47 PM , Rating: 3
Did AMD shrink the process tech "catch up" gap this time? I mean did it have more than one year delay after Intel's transition to 65nm, compared to this transition delay of just 1 year for 45nm?

I wonder if AMD is starting to get their new tech somewhat sooner and sooner after every iteration, 1 year now for 45nm and maybe 9 months after Intel for the 32nm? Is it really a solid trend or am I just dreaming? Any expert advice on that?




RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By dj LiTh on 1/7/2009 4:57:07 PM , Rating: 2
Thats a good point, anyone have the answer as i'd like to know that as well


RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By BSMonitor on 1/7/2009 5:01:05 PM , Rating: 2
Uhh, its already 2009 and it's not yet released. The 45nm Penryns were first released in November of 2007. That's more than a year.

Considering it took over a year to release Phenom II, I doubt we will see 32nm anything from AMD this year. Especially since the AM3 unlocked X4 isn't due until the end of Q2.


RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By Pirks on 1/7/2009 6:50:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
its already 2009 and it's not yet released
Who cares about "released" if you can buy it now at uk.insight.com for example


RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By MonkeyPaw on 1/7/2009 5:37:22 PM , Rating: 3
AMD cannot afford to match Intel's transition speeds. From what I've read of past node transitions, Intel purchases the manufacturing tech early and frequently orders all of the equipment that is available (such tech isn't a high-volume product). This comes at a huge cost (in terms of capital and risk), which AMD cannot afford. Consequently, AMD ends up being second to the show. Now that it appears that AMD has plans to outsource some production, they may be able to tap the likes of TSMC, but I don't know how good those products could be. While Intel might be the best at manufacturing, AMD is more than likely second, as both companies are building products on the edge of semiconductor technology. GPUs just don't get as complex, and that's about all outsource fabs make.

Ultimately, for AMD to succeed, it takes either an Intel screwup (Netburst), or a surprise/innovative product (K8). Where AMD really shines is providing customers what they want (Opteron), which I hope will be the case again with Fusion. I think with the proliferation of netbooks and the impending recession, Fusion might be a profitable segment for both AMD and OEMs. More performance, less (system) complexity, and a lower price.


RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By RamarC on 1/7/2009 5:46:13 PM , Rating: 3
Phenoms are very competitive when it comes to price. For the majority of users, a $100 tri-core has more than enough horsepower. The question is can Phenom II continue to undercut Core pricing while turning a profit.


RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By Pirks on 1/7/2009 7:01:41 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
GPUs just don't get as complex
Oh really? So you didn't know that GTX 280 has twice as many transistors as Nehalem (1.4 billion vs 731 million in Nehalem)? Here, some free education for ya, enjoy ;)

The next fact you obviously not aware of is that TSMC is already preparing for production of 40nm AMD GPUs.

Now combine these two new (for you) facts: 1) GPUs are way more complex than CPUs (see my proof above or check wikipedia) and 2) GPU tech is thinner than best Intel can offer (40nm for AMD GPU to be released quite soon vs 45nm for Intel) and after that think about the whole picture again, I'm sure it will change quite a bit in your mind.


RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By JKflipflop98 on 1/7/2009 7:29:19 PM , Rating: 2
GPU's are not as complex as a CPU. Gpu's are good at 1 or 2 things it can do really, really fast. A CPU can do anything you throw at it.

If a CPU were easy to make, it wouldn't cost us the total worth of Nvidia per quarter to keep making them, now would it?


RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By Pirks on 1/7/2009 7:47:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
A CPU can do anything you throw at it.
Ever heard of GPGPU, OpenCL, CUDA etc? GPU can calculate anything too. Surprise surprise :P
quote:
If a CPU were easy to make, it wouldn't cost us the total worth of Nvidia per quarter to keep making them, now would it?
If GPUs were sold in the same quantities at the same prices as CPUs they would cost us much more than the total worth of Intel per quarter to keep making them, now wouldn't they?


RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By Pryde on 1/7/2009 8:09:35 PM , Rating: 2
Nvidia 280GTX 1.4B Transistors - 240 Shaders or "Cores"
Intel Nehelam 731M Transistors - 4 Cores

A huge part of Nehelam Transistors are Cache. What you are forgetting tho is that Nvidia GT200 cards are simply enchanced 8800GTX with more Shaders.

Yes a GPU is better at parallal task than a CPU on tasks that can split up. But Parallel computer programs are more difficult to write than sequential ones and a CPU will smoke a GPU at a sequential program.

Does the cost really determine the complexity of the design. I don't think so, a CPU is far more complicated than a GPU. A GPU is designed for 1 specific operation, Parallel Programming. While a Basic x86 CPU would be easy to make it would be slow. Intel has Designed SSE instructions and other improvements into their CPUs that add to the complexity which increase the speed.

What do you see Nvidia and ATI doing? Modifying old Tech alittle and throwing more Cores at the problem.


RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By Pirks on 1/7/2009 8:21:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Modifying old Tech a little and throwing more Cores at the problem
The only difference Intel has is that it also steals some AMD ideas like HT and IMC, in addition to modifying old tech a little and throwing more cores at the problem. Yeah, a huuuuge difference, unbelievable!

*LOL*


RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By nomagic on 1/7/2009 8:51:30 PM , Rating: 2
AMD is not the first to include IMC in chip design. Intel also had designed chips with IMC a long while ago (Timna).

In our industry, everybody is learning from others. Claims like "I did it first" doesn't mean anything. Only "I did it better" counts.

From design and development perspective, CPU is more complex than GPU. Transistor count actually means very little. It is easier to make a 100-core CPU with large transistor count than to make a more efficient and better performing next gen CPU.


RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By themaster08 on 1/7/2009 9:15:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The only difference Intel has is that it also steals some AMD ideas like HT


So wrong!

Have you ever heard of Intel Pentium 4 HT?

That was the first hyperthreading CPU available

;)


RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By Pirks on 1/7/2009 9:18:55 PM , Rating: 2
HyperTransport, you lama :)


By themaster08 on 1/7/2009 10:07:53 PM , Rating: 2
Touche ;)

I thought you were talking about HyperThreading. I hate it when completely different things have such similar names.

Still, over the years, more ideas have come from Intel, including IMC's ;)


RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By Pryde on 1/7/2009 9:21:33 PM , Rating: 2
Haha. How long did AMD MAKE! Intel processors.

AMD founded May 1st 1969. That same year, it introduced a reverse-engineered clone of the Intel 8080 microprocessor.

February 1982, AMD signed a contract with Intel, becoming a licensed second-source manufacturer of 8086 and 8088 processors.

In 1991, AMD released the Am386, its clone of the Intel 386 processor

AMD's first in-house x86 processor was the K5 which was launched in 1996.

1969-1996 AMDs CPU market consisted entirely of Intel Clones or Licensed Intel second source for IBM.

Any CPU that uses the x86 instruction set are a modified Intel 8086 ( the 86 at the end is where x86 got its name from ).

AMDs HyperTransport was not original at all. All it is a point to point interconnect and IMC was used a couple of years before in DEC/Compaqs Alpha 21364.


RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By Fritzr on 1/7/2009 11:26:57 PM , Rating: 2
That should be 1979 for the 8088 clone. The 4004 wasn't released until 1971. Though the first desktop micro was around 1969 using a wired circuit CPU and sold as a smart terminal.


RE: Is the gap getting smaller?
By Pryde on 1/8/2009 12:14:56 AM , Rating: 2
Yes AMD did make a 8088 clone in 1979 it wasn't until IBM selected the Intel 8088 for its PCs. One of the conditions of IBM using Intel 8088 was that there had to be a reliable second-source CPU manufacturer. AMD

This helped AMD negotiate new license agreement with Intel on the x86 tech and allowed them to second source 8086 and 8088. AMD began volume production of 8088 CPUs in 1982.

If it wasn't for this agreement in 1982 there would be no K5 which means there would be no Athlon etc etc.


Intells sales down
By unclesharkey on 1/7/2009 5:02:53 PM , Rating: 2
I know that AMD is not doing so well but Intells sales are down 23% this quarter. If AMD can just keep at the heels of Intell with their new CPU's and price them competitively then I think they will be fine.




RE: Intells sales down
By Reclaimer77 on 1/7/2009 5:34:44 PM , Rating: 4
Sales for EVERYTHING is down this quarter in almost every industry. Hardly revealing.


RE: Intells sales down
By Pirks on 1/7/2009 7:10:04 PM , Rating: 2
Sales are down mostly for the luxury items like Intel's overpriced enthusiast CPUs, everything else is doing more or less fine, which means that while Intel will have hard time selling its overpriced chips AMD will sell a lot of the cheapo K10 derived chips (Kuma, X3 and X4), eating at Intel's market share which is good news.


RE: Intells sales down
By Reclaimer77 on 1/7/2009 7:28:12 PM , Rating: 1
Right dude. Meanwhile here on planet Earth...


RE: Intells sales down
By Pirks on 1/7/2009 7:58:48 PM , Rating: 1
...recession continued, squeezing consumer wallets and pushing people towards cheaper better-bang-for-buck solutions (i.e. AMD)


RE: Intells sales down
By JKflipflop98 on 1/7/2009 8:58:09 PM , Rating: 2
You're not getting it. People that are strapped for cash don't buy computer parts at all. They spend what they have on the mortgage and electric bills. Thereby rendering your silly little point moot.


RE: Intells sales down
By Pirks on 1/7/2009 9:26:11 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
People that are strapped for cash don't buy computer parts at all
And people who were throwing money in the garbage bin by buying overpriced Intel chips are buying AMD now, 'cause people still need computers, you know. It's not like everyone is starving, right? :) Have you ever heard that during recession people buy less Lexuses and more Toyotas? This is the same. Time to study basic economics, buddy.


RE: Intells sales down
By Reclaimer77 on 1/7/2009 10:26:01 PM , Rating: 2
Pirks could you be more biased ?

Intel's haven't been "garbage bin" since the Pentium 4.

quote:
Have you ever heard that during recession people buy less Lexuses and more Toyotas?


Toyota just announced their worst financial statement since the 1980's. So no, I haven't heard that.

quote:
Time to study basic economics, buddy.


Uh huh..


RE: Intells sales down
By Pirks on 1/7/2009 10:37:49 PM , Rating: 2
Any enthusiast CPU is an overpriced garbage, including AMD ones. Except that AMD stopped making those a long time ago. Intel still makes them and gets lotsa cash off its sheep (AKA overclockers/"enthusiasts")

Toyota got lower revenue precisely for the reason I mentioned above - people buying less luxury Lexuses because they buy more Toyotas instead. Same as with CPUs. So thanks for proving my words :)


RE: Intells sales down
By themaster08 on 1/8/2009 6:58:01 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Any enthusiast CPU is an overpriced garbage, including AMD ones.


Your opinion, albeit, a small-minded one.

I fail to understand how you work out that AMD chips are cheaper, unless you're comparing clock speed to clock speed, i.e a 2.4GHz Intel to a 2.4GHz AMD.

For example, a Phenom 9950 is around £145 here in the UK, whereas the Q6600 is around £10 more. You get better performance from the Q6600 overall, making up for that £10. I'd say they were pretty much equal, wouldn't you?
The fact that Intel brought quad-cores to the market long before AMD did has obviously been a major advantage to Intel, because although the AMD counterparts offer near-enough exactly the same, and just for examples sake maybe a little bit more bang for your buck, the cheaper and more viable route for a current Intel user to take is to remain with Intel and just upgrade their processor.

There's absolutely nothing to win over current Intel users.


RE: Intells sales down
By TomZ on 1/8/2009 11:45:48 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Any enthusiast CPU is an overpriced garbage, including AMD ones.
Overpriced - yes. Garbage - no. The budget-buster processors are the best available and they always rank at the top of the benchmarks. So for someone who wants and can afford the best, they are a good choice. There are a lot of people for whom the $500+ premium is insignificant.
quote:
Toyota got lower revenue precisely for the reason I mentioned above - people buying less luxury Lexuses because they buy more Toyotas instead.
Untrue - Toyota sales - number of vehicles sold - is down across the board for both Lexus and Toyota. There is no evidence of anybody buying more Toyotas anywhere.


RE: Intells sales down
By themaster08 on 1/8/2009 5:42:49 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
And people who were throwing money in the garbage bin by buying overpriced Intel chips are buying AMD now


You're clearly an avid AMD "fanboy"

The only processors from Intel that are overpriced are the Extreme Editions, which are aimed at ENTHUSIASTS only.

You've very clearly not tried an Intel since Pentium 3, hence your very biased opinions.

Give me the name of one processor from Intel that is priced similar which it's AMD counterpart outperforms? I'm sure you'll struggle for an answer.
I'n the mainstream market, i'm sure Dell, HP etc etc are able to purchase most Intel chips by large quantities cheaper than their AMD counterparts, again, rendering your opinion "moot"

Your theory works for Extreme Editions and i7's. You seem to forget that Core 2 is still very much alive and kicking!


RE: Intells sales down
By rudolphna on 1/9/2009 11:01:57 AM , Rating: 2
Phenom 2 compared to the Q9400. They are very very close in performance and price. In fact, I beleive anand recommended AMD over its Intel counterpart.


RE: Intells sales down
By themaster08 on 1/9/2009 4:52:48 PM , Rating: 2
It might be recommended by Anand over the Q9400, but it's hardly a very good recommendation for those who already have LGA775 socket motherboards compatible with the Q9400.

From reviews i've read, I believe the Q9400 has the edge over the Phenom II's, so it'd make absolutely no sense whatsoever for someone already has the ability to upgrade to a Q9400 with their current hardware to switch over to AMD.


RE: Intells sales down
By Reclaimer77 on 1/9/2009 9:09:21 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly, the AMD guys are REALLY stretching when they say stuff like that.

My two plus year old P5B Asus board could easily take a Q9400 today with no mods. In fact, its on the ASUS site as a supported CPU for my board. Why in the hell would I switch to AMD ?


RE: Intells sales down
By themaster08 on 1/7/2009 9:03:48 PM , Rating: 2
Why do poeple always come out with this?

Price/performance ratio, you will get better bang for back with most Intel chips, especially the quad-cores.

The Q6600 and the Phenom 9950 are relatively the same price, yet the Q6600 outperforms the 9950 in more benchies than the 9950 beats the Q6600 in.

Because of the economic downturn, all factors need to be considered. So taking into account external factors such as power consumption and appropriate cooling, you would be better off financially with an Intel.


RE: Intells sales down
By Pirks on 1/7/2009 9:29:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
taking into account external factors such as power consumption and appropriate cooling
You conveniently forgot the mobo prices, but I did not! :P


RE: Intells sales down
By Pryde on 1/7/2009 9:56:10 PM , Rating: 2
Mobo Prices for Q6600 and 9950 are similar.

We have yet to see the price difference of AM3 vs X58. But I would expect AM3 + DDR3 to work out alot more than Core2 775 + DDR2


RE: Intells sales down
By themaster08 on 1/7/2009 9:58:39 PM , Rating: 2
You can get a P35 motherboard for a similar price of an AM2 board ;)


RE: Intells sales down
By Targon on 1/8/2009 7:45:20 AM , Rating: 2
You seem to have missed that we are talking about the Phenom 2, not the current/last generation Phenom. While AMD may not recapture the performance crown with the new processors, from the advance press, AMD will at least be competitive again in terms of processor performance, and if overclocking is as easy in release versions as in the press samples, it may be that for the price, many people will prefer the Phenom 2.

AMD is also an architecture company, not just a processor company, so they may be working on some things that will boost overall system performance(I am not talking Fusion, which caters to the low end of the market).


AMD no longer innovative?
By UNCjigga on 1/7/09, Rating: 0
RE: AMD no longer innovative?
By Pirks on 1/7/2009 7:28:06 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
AMD is 18 months BEHIND Intel on the performance curve
What's more important is that AMD is way ahead of Intel on the price/performance curve.


RE: AMD no longer innovative?
By Reclaimer77 on 1/7/2009 7:59:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
What's more important is that AMD is way ahead of Intel on the price/performance curve.


More important to who ? Clueless people buying PC's from WalMart or those who know better ?


RE: AMD no longer innovative?
By Pirks on 1/7/2009 8:08:53 PM , Rating: 2
More important to those who know better.

Clueless WalMart ones buy Intel crap called "Celeron".


RE: AMD no longer innovative?
By Pryde on 1/7/2009 9:59:02 PM , Rating: 2
AMD have the very low Price - Preformance but in the mid range where most people that know a bit about tech it is very even but Intel pulls ahead when OCing.


RE: AMD no longer innovative?
By themaster08 on 1/8/2009 6:03:12 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Clueless WalMart ones buy Intel crap called "Celeron".


Again, another silly statement. You're really stuck in the past when it comes to Intel, aren't you?

As you were saying in other posts, people need computers.

Intel Celeron is Intel's cheapest chip. Very competitive price, what I have read, very good performance. Being based on the Core 2 architecture, they also have extremely good overclockability, so it can even appeal to some enthusiasts whilst providing enough performance for general users who justy want to use their computers for surfing the web, word rpocessing, and possibly even some light gaming.

The fact that Celeron is still around just goes to show the success of the chip. I hardly see Sempron still around.

Stop bashing everything Intel do just because you're an AMD "fanboy". You're fighting a losing battle.


RE: AMD no longer innovative?
By Fritzr on 1/7/2009 11:40:12 PM , Rating: 2
Mass consumer market (Best Buy, WalMart etc.) Low system price and low to moderate performance looked for. Larger volume allows greater profit at lower margin

Enthusiast market Better perfomance, higher prices, lower net quantities. Higher margins allow profits at lower volume

Commercial market Midrange perfomance, proven stability, lowest TCO looked for. Since Total Cost of ownership should be more important than initial price this market allows some leeway for high margin bulk sales.

Buyers in each market have different needs and Intel and AMD will each have offerings that will fit.

The "ones who know better" are a small percentage of total buyers :P


RE: AMD no longer innovative?
By Integral9 on 1/8/2009 9:35:52 AM , Rating: 2
I think you need to look further back to see the whole picture. Starting in the late 1990s... What you were seeing is Intel sitting on it's ars soaking up profits like a fat kid in a candy shop. Then AMD came along sent that kid to fat camp. That kid then came back and ran a marathon.

You can do that when your company (intel) is well over twice the size of the other (amd) before they split themselves. Intel has the R&D, the money, the people, the fabs, etc. They are the M$ of the CPU world and as such we need amd or intel will go back to the candy store and we'll see another era of dismal evolution in the CPU like we did with the P4.... That and people dancing in colorful biohazard suits to catchy show tunes. Can you wait?


Overclockability
By clovell on 1/7/2009 4:41:19 PM , Rating: 3
Hopefully the chips us lowly consumers get will be able to achieve a respectable fraction of the overclocks we're seeing the reviews right now. These things look like they're going to scream. *crosses fingers*




RE: Overclockability
By Rodney McNaggerton on 1/7/2009 4:51:49 PM , Rating: 2
I've also read that the SB800 will have additional features to allow increased overclocking.


RE: Overclockability
By clovell on 1/7/2009 5:23:49 PM , Rating: 2
Even more than SB710? I hadn't heard that - you have a link handy?


RE: Overclockability
By lagitup on 1/7/2009 4:54:00 PM , Rating: 2
*points at the x3 720*

I think the unlocked mult on the x3 720 would let you push it pretty far, I've seen original Phenom x4's running at 3.4 (just google it)


yay, I am saving all my pennies
By William Gaatjes on 1/7/2009 5:11:42 PM , Rating: 2
I never buy the first batch but around may/june i am sure going to buy one after some extensive research about all pc internals and i have decided what model ,motherboard,gfx, memory to buy.




RE: yay, I am saving all my pennies
By TomZ on 1/7/2009 5:29:34 PM , Rating: 3
Only a loyal fanboy plans his purchases before any reviews or comparitive reviews are available!


By Natfly on 1/7/2009 6:16:08 PM , Rating: 2
Well when they are released tomorrow the NDA will be lifted and reviews will be a dime a dozen. But new tech is usually overpriced and occasionally buggy. Early adopters pay the price.


By William Gaatjes on 1/8/2009 11:24:18 AM , Rating: 2
Only fanboys call people who do not buy the same brand as those fanboys fanboys...

I admire Intel but i like AMD as my cpu reseller because the 780/790 chipsets
are very promising for very little money. And the 45nm cpu's from AMD seem to do very well.
Also the 4000 series gfx cards are doing very well. I do not need the most expensive system out there. And with AMD i have a good but not to expensive system.

Afcourse i will read the phenom II reviews, but i already know that the server versions named shanghai do very well.
I have been doing research already and keeping track. I have still an athlon xp at 2,0 Ghz and i will be having a quad core phenom II in a few months. And i am for sure not an early adopter. I always wait and see. But i can assure you that i will get a new AMD system. Even if that means waiting another stepping which i assume will this time not be the case..


For AMD to win back the performance crown...
By SeeManRun on 1/7/2009 6:13:21 PM , Rating: 2
They should release a chipset that allows dual CPU's. People would pay 250 dollars for this board, and given AMD's excellent interconnect technology, the downsides are virtually nothing. But it would allow them to sell twice as many CPU's to the people that want all that processing power (basically anyone that would buy a core i7 right now. And I am guessing that 8 phenom cores would kick the snot out of 4 Core I7 hyperthreaded cores.

It seems like a no brainer. They did it with their ATI 4870 X2, why not do the same with CPU's.. Enthusiasts will pay.




By Performance Fanboi on 1/7/2009 6:30:16 PM , Rating: 3
I'd love to see that also but I'm afraid AMD still wake up screaming with 4X4 nightmares.


By JKflipflop98 on 1/7/2009 7:32:26 PM , Rating: 4
But, that's only if you want MEGATASKING PLATFORMANCE!!!!one!! QFX rules all! AMD4LIFE!


AMD needs to ...
By dondino on 1/7/2009 7:14:43 PM , Rating: 2
... re-evaluate it's current release strategies. They need to take a year or so off and pump money into R&D. Pop out something revolutionary instead of evolutionary and float atop their graphics/server products in the meantime. They cannot catch up with Intel on the enthusiast end, they don't have the resources. IMHO.




RE: AMD needs to ...
By Pryde on 1/7/2009 10:14:13 PM , Rating: 2
Take a year off? Servers now prefer I7, more costly yes but far greater performance, graphics has 55nm GTX260 around the corner and GTX285 to fight 4870X2. AMD is facing fierce competition in all their markets. AMD can't afford to take a year off anywhere. AMD need a product that is competitive with Intels mainstream but where do they get this performance from is what AMD is thinking hard about now.


RE: AMD needs to ...
By dondino on 1/7/2009 11:38:45 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly my point. Desperate times call for desperate measures. They simply cannot compete anymore. Their cpu's aren't competitive like they used to be. Especially in our crap world economy, people are buying the best bang for their buck. This is coming from a former AMD user.


RE: AMD needs to ...
By Bateluer on 1/8/2009 1:55:18 PM , Rating: 2
AMD cannot 'take a year off'. They need to sell product now. They've been bleeding money over the last several quarters.

The Radeon 4000 series still overs very competitive performance at an excellent price. Its taken nvidia nearly 7 months to get their 5nm parts out the door, they've been relying on price cuts since they released the original GT200 chips to a luke warm welcome.


it pains me to say this, but...
By kattanna on 1/7/09, Rating: 0
RE: it pains me to say this, but...
By Pirks on 1/7/2009 7:17:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
the core duo and now i7 chips are simply superior in performance
So you still think that the only thing people look at when buying computers is pure CPU performance? Wake up buddy, WAKE UP!


RE: it pains me to say this, but...
By Dark Legion on 1/7/2009 9:31:23 PM , Rating: 2
That was only half of his point. If the AMD part is truly competitive against the i7, then Intel will have to lower its prices, just like nVidia did when ATI/AMD introduced similar performing parts at a much lower cost.


RE: it pains me to say this, but...
By Pryde on 1/7/2009 10:03:52 PM , Rating: 2
Simple point is Intel having the performance lead they control the prices. IF AMD try to undercut Intel, in AMDs financial position they would be hurting themselves more than Intel. I would also think that Intel being on 45nm for over year it cost them far less to produce their chips than AMD.


By themaster08 on 1/8/2009 6:24:57 AM , Rating: 2
As much as I trust all of those sites to give accurate and unbiased reviews, we still need to wait for the release of these chips so they can be properly compared to their counterparts. I do find it a little unfair, as they're probably testing engineering samples.


By themaster08 on 1/8/2009 6:40:02 AM , Rating: 2
With that said, I just checked the dates of the reviews. Probably not engineering samples.

Taking everything into account such as cache etc etc, they are not bad benchmarks for the Phenom II.

Then again, I have just checked the prices. The Phenom II's are ever so slightly cheaper than the Q9450. With lesser performance with the Phenom II, i'd personally say that price/performance is pretty much parity between AMD and Intel.
Enough for current AMD users to continue using AMD chips. Nothing to encourage Intel users otherwise.


How much more red?
By Hydrofirex on 1/7/2009 7:25:20 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
AMD is finally adopting a 45 nm process a year after Intel released a 45 nm die shrink (Penryn) and a few months after Intel released its new Core i7 architecture.

So, in the time it has taken AMD to complete a die shrink Intel has done this and released an entirely new architecture.... Phenom was a solid flop, and Phenom 2 will probably only compete in price as well (Even if, as I imagine the best case to be, it matches the i7 in performance). Meanwhile, we're in the midst of a global recession.

There is definitely at least one more chapter to AMD's story: Chapter 11. I can only hope someone gobbles them up at a song and is able to deliver on the promise that was ATi/AMD.

HfX




RE: How much more red?
By unclesharkey on 1/7/2009 7:56:57 PM , Rating: 2
That makes no sense at all. Then Intell would be a monopoly and we can't have that....I am sure that the Phenom II will be good enough to keep AMD afloat.

Also, Phenom was only a solid flop to enthusiasts and that is a very small part of the market. Throw an AMD dual or quad in a Dell and put it against a Dell with an Inell dual or quad running about the same speed and AMD holds its own. Your average Joe will not know the difference. It is the OC ability of the Intell chips that destroys AMD.

AMD is the recession CPU. ;-)


Core2 Too Good
By Slaimus on 1/7/2009 6:05:56 PM , Rating: 2
It seems like the Core2 is just too good for their own good. When money is tight, people realize their 2 year old CPUs are fast enough for everything they need even now.




RE: Core2 Too Good
By Slaimus on 1/7/2009 6:06:44 PM , Rating: 2
Replied to wrong topic, meant to post under Intel revenue article.


By mxnerd on 1/10/2009 3:25:12 PM , Rating: 2
No matter how good is i7, I personally don't want a beast that eats up to 130W.




By Reclaimer77 on 1/10/2009 5:36:11 PM , Rating: 2
Thats a little more than a light bulb, at full load.

Do you keep your CPU at full load 100% of the time or something ?

130w rated CPU doesn't mean its USING 130w.


By chucky2 on 1/7/2009 5:46:05 PM , Rating: 2
...before buying a new AM3 board, DDR3 memory, and one of these new CPU's.

I'm really looking forward to an 8 series onboard GPU motherboard with 128MB of memory, and a 45nm low wattage X3 or X4 CPU in it. And, AMD, PLEASE fix the lack of 8-channel support via HDMI! If Intel and nVidia can do it, you can also. Thanks....

Chuck




AM3 model numbers are wrong
By Bigginz on 1/7/2009 6:11:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Also debuting in February will be the X3 910 and X3 925, clocked at 2.6 GHz and 2.8 GHz.

These model numbers are wrong. The X3 family are the 700 series.
quote:
... while the 3-core Heka Phenom IIs will have 7xx model numbers.

So it should be:
"Also debuting in February will be the X3 710 and X3 725, clocked at 2.6 GHz and 2.8 GHz, respectively."




two horse race
By parge on 1/7/2009 8:08:43 PM , Rating: 2
I'm a big fan of Intel, and I don't think anyone could say that since C2D we haven't had value for money, but I would absolutely love to see AMD bring out a CPU that could actually compete with the Core/I7 lineup. No one can criticise Intel for resting on their laurels because they are top of the pile, but it would be nice for the CPU market to be more of a two horse race, if only for entertainments sake.




Phenom II detailed benchmark
By R3ader on 1/8/2009 6:49:12 AM , Rating: 2
looks nice, here is detailed benchmark(in Bosnian), so I translated it via translate.google.com

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&u=http...




"Young lady, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!" -- Homer Simpson

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki