Print 80 comment(s) - last by maynardc.. on Dec 11 at 3:20 PM

Athlon 64 X2 gets the 65nm treatment

AMD today announced its long-awaited 65nm Brisbane core Athlon 64 X2 processors. This begins AMD’s transition to 65nm from 90nm. AMD expects to transition its complete product lineup to 65nm in mid-2007. Nevertheless, four Brisbane core Athlon 64 X2 processors are launching today—the 5000+, 4800+, 4400+, and 4000+. All 65nm Brisbane core processors are equipped with 2x512KB of L2 cache.

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Brisbane 
L2 Cache
TDP Pricing
5000+ 2.6 GHz 2x512KB 65W
4800+ 2.5 GHz 2x512KB 65W $271
4400+ 2.3 GHz 2x512KB 65W $214
4000+ 2.1 GHz 2x512KB 65W

With Brisbane, AMD Athlon 64 X2 dual-core processors equipped with 2x1MB of L2 cache will become a thing of the past as AMD completes its 65nm transition. While AMD has announced its Brisbane core 65nm processors, the processors only available in limited quantities. Expect mass availability in Q1’2007.

OEMs are expected to deliver Brisbane powered systems as well. These OEMs include Acer, Dell, Founder, Gateway, HP, Lenovo, Packard Bell and TongFang. Dell is expected to adopt Brisbane 65nm processors in its Optiplex and Dimension desktops while Acer is expected to have Brisbane powered Aspire systems too.

Pricing for Brisbane 65nm processors start at $169 for the 4000+ and goes up to $301 for the 5000+ in quantities of 1000. Do note that Brisbane core processors are still K8 based and not K8L like the upcoming Stars core processors.

Comments     Threshold

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

By yacoub on 12/5/2006 8:00:12 AM , Rating: 0
Less cache, lesser performance than comparable Core 2 Duo processors (comparable by speed, price, or any other method of comparison, really, they lose to the C2D), and barely any speed increase (the entire range is still around the mid 2000MHz range like processors have been for a couple years now).

Blah. :[

By Blackraven on 12/5/2006 10:44:39 AM , Rating: 2
Well, it's supposed to be for the mid-range market, I think.

Nevertheless, it looks like this isn't enough to beat the new Core 2 Duo line from Intel.

It looks like Intel has won this year. :)

By smitty3268 on 12/5/2006 11:29:50 AM , Rating: 2
Yacoub, how many times are you going to repeat the same post? A paranoid person might think you were a fanboy of some type... :)

By mino on 12/6/2006 1:52:47 AM , Rating: 2
Actually these EE chips comsume SIGNIFICANTLY LESS power that C2D in usuall environment(C'n'Q, 90% of time at IDLE).

Those 20Watts alone make i.e. 4200+ far better from TCO perspective than E6300.

By Hoser McMoose on 12/6/2006 5:21:48 PM , Rating: 2
Just to put some numbers to thing, running system 24/7 for an entire year gives us

20W / 1000W/KW * 24 hour/day * 365 day/year ~= 175KWh

Considering most people pay between $0.10 and $0.15/KWh of electricity, that's between $17.50 and $26.25 a year.

A more practical setup might have a the system running 8 hours a day, 5 days a week and 50 weeks a year (ie an office computer), which gives us 40KWh or between $4 and $6 a year.

Of course those people living in very warm climates may need to add a bit of extra to this to account for additional cooling requirements. The difference between the chips though is small enough that only additional electrical consumption need be considered for anything short of a large data center (or, more simply, you will *NOT* need to buy an extra air condition to cool an office full of Core 2 Duo chips vs. Athlon64 X2 EE chips)

Now, whether or not this makes a difference as far as TCO is concerned is up to the individual reader to decide. Also a difference of 20W is by no means guaranteed, it will vary somewhat from one chip to the next.

By mino on 12/7/2006 12:39:52 AM , Rating: 2
Nice numbers. Those 20W cited is in reality more of the conservative estimate than not.

Provided those $5 a year you got means $20 for amchine lifetime. Add another $30 saved on board and one suddently has $50 difference on hand for $800 complete machine.

Also this is in fact the lowest possible benefit one would see.

I could tell, in summer (35C outside) the lower-heat machines will be far more reliable.
It should be noted however, that similar saving are posible also by choice of better PSU. However I preffer both 80%+ PSU with active PFC and low-power components.

"Spreading the rumors, it's very easy because the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim its credible because you spoke to someone at Apple." -- Investment guru Jim Cramer
Related Articles
AMD Beyond "Brisbane"
November 14, 2006, 6:31 PM
AMD 65nm Product Plans Unveiled
November 14, 2006, 3:17 PM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki