Print 57 comment(s) - last by dajeepster.. on Aug 7 at 8:46 PM

AMD plans one last "Windsor" based Athlon 64 X2

AMD refuses to kill off its 90nm Windsor core Athlon 64 X2 processors. The Athlon 64 X2 6000+ is AMD’s fastest dual-core performance processor. The processor launched last February to the tune of 3.0 GHz with a 125-watt TDP.

The model continues to stay on AMD’s roadmap throughout the rest of 2007 and half of 2008. AMD plans a refresher for the Athlon 64 X2 6000+. Instead of moving it to the 65nm Brisbane core like many other Athlon 64 X2 models, including the 5200+, 5000+, 4800+, 4400+, 4000+, 3600+ and BE-series, the refreshed X2 6000+ sticks to the Windsor core.

The refreshed model drops the thermal ratings down to 89-watts. Still, the reduced thermal envelope is still 24-watts higher than the highest-clocked Brisbane – the X2 5200+ at 2.7 GHz. However, the thermals match AMD’s upcoming Phenom X2 GP-6800, a Kuma based model slated for Q1’2008.

Despite the impending launch of the Phenom X2 series, the Athlon 64 X2 6000+ remains the only mainstream AMD dual-core desktop processor with a 3.0 GHz clock frequency. The upcoming Phenom X2 series top out around 2.4-to-2.8 GHz when the GP-6800 launches, according to a recent AMD roadmap. AMD does not have any plans to release a 3.0 GHz Barcelona on its roadmap yet.

Expect AMD to release 89-watt Athlon 64 X2 6000+ processors next quarter.

Comments     Threshold

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

What to do?
By MADAOO7 on 7/31/2007 11:20:32 PM , Rating: 1
Interesting article considering I was thinking about purchasing an Athlon 64 X2 6000+ for a new desktop. I don't particularly need to build a new desktop, but my HP 1.5 Centrino laptop and it's 5400RPM hard drive are slowing me down.

So what does all this mean? I want a processor that can rip through rendering video (currently takes me 2.5 hours for 15 minutes!) and just about anything else I throw at it. I also like the $170 price point. So do I wait for the 65nm, or do I wait for the Phenom X2 GP-6800? This 6800 sounds fast (6800>6000), but for how much, how much faster, and realistically how long do I have to wait?

Figure this is definitely the right people to ask this question to. Thanks!

By the way, does anyone recommend a RAID 0? Figure a slow drive might be my current bottleneck.

RE: What to do?
By Spoelie on 8/1/2007 5:53:14 AM , Rating: 2
You either hold out for phenom or get an intel processor at the moment.

RE: What to do?
By Moishe on 8/1/2007 8:05:12 AM , Rating: 2
Personally, I'd buy Raptors before I went to a RAID setup... But if you've got money to throw around then RAIDing Raptors would be a nice HDD setup. IMO RAID is a lot like buying supreme top of the line RAM... it DOES have a performance effect but it's small and the cost is high.

Maybe I'm cheap, but I prefer to get 90% of the way to the top for 50% of the cash. That last 5-10% is always what costs the most and has the smallest overall return.

RE: What to do?
By SlyNine on 8/5/2007 3:29:54 PM , Rating: 2
In games the differences are normally 4% or less unless your talking about video cards. Then its maybe 10% at most between a 8800GTX to 8800Ultra, even less from a 1900XT to 1900XTX when they were released.

I don't really understand the demand for the very highest top of the line stuff. when you can go one very small step down and save 50%.

RE: What to do?
By Silver2k7 on 8/7/2007 2:35:21 AM , Rating: 2
Perhaps there are people out there who play the latest games on ultra high resolutions and actually needs the fastest thats avalible.. If you feel you don't need it then just don't buy it. Also there is people who buy a machin that shall last 2-4 years.. who don't do incremental updates but just purchase a new machine.

[quote]I don't really understand the demand for the very highest top of the line stuff. when you can go one very small step down and save 50%. [/quote]

RE: What to do?
By encryptkeeper on 8/1/2007 9:56:03 AM , Rating: 2
I don't particularly need to build a new desktop, but my HP 1.5 Centrino laptop and it's 5400RPM hard drive are slowing me down...By the way, does anyone recommend a RAID 0? Figure a slow drive might be my current bottleneck.

Well, I'm going to assume you have a desktop already, even though you didn't mention it, and I figure RAID on an HP 1.5 laptop is probably noooooot going to happen.

If you want speed, just remember RAID 0 increases your performance, but with every drive you add, you increase your risk of total data loss. Especially since the data is written into fragments between the 2 (at least) drives, if one goes bad, you will likely lose EVERYTHING. With 2 drives, you double your chances of never seeing your porn, er, files again. What kind of desktop do you have right now?

RE: What to do?
By MADAOO7 on 8/1/2007 12:00:43 PM , Rating: 2
I don't have a desktop at the moment. I am looking to build one in the next few weeks.

RE: What to do?
By encryptkeeper on 8/1/2007 1:51:44 PM , Rating: 2
Build yourself a good machine (that's in your budget of course) without raid to keep your cost low. Any halfway decent board out there now will do Raid 0 or 1. You can always add the raid functionality later on, if you feel you need it. Chances are a 600-700 machine will run circles around your laptop without raid 0.

RE: What to do?
By sdsdv10 on 8/1/2007 10:39:22 AM , Rating: 2
MADA007 said...
I want a processor that can rip through rendering video

Then I would suggest a Intel Q6600 quad core CPU.
Currently for $280 at ewiz, see link

$100 more for two more cores (which can actually be used by video editing software), can be overclocked and motherboards are ~$150. Best bang for the buck in video processing.

As for harddrives, with 2.5hrs or rendering time HDs are not your bottle neck. I can copy a couple of GBs of data from one HD to another in 15-20 minutes. You can do RAID O, but I don't think it will help much. A better option IMO, would be two 7200rpm 500GB drives, installed as two seperate disks. Have one for OS and source files and the other as a destination drive.

My 2 cents.

RE: What to do?
By Moose1309 on 8/1/2007 3:45:39 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with every point here. Stay away from RAID 0 - in my experience it doesn't add much for desktop performance at all. sdsdv10's recommendation would be more reliable, and likely faster than RAID'ing it.

If video rendering is your thing, go with the Intel Q6600 if it's in the budget. Otherwise, the 6000+ is a good option, no big reason to wait for lower-watt version IMO.

RE: What to do?
By Silver2k7 on 8/7/2007 2:44:20 AM , Rating: 2
A few years back I had 2x80 Gb raid 0 wich actually did feel alot faster than the other hdds in that system. But todays harddrives might be faster than that raid was on a single drive.. its also a risk to put the data on a raid 0.. if one disc fail so will the data on both discs.

If you want the fastest avlible just get a SSD just don't expect good value per Gb.

RE: What to do?
By Alexvrb on 8/1/2007 1:46:13 PM , Rating: 2
Your HD is probably not your weakest point. Either way, a single 150GB Raptor should do quite well for you as your main drive, and for mass file storage you could slap in a 500+ GB 7200RPM as your second drive. I can't really recommend RAID 0 if any of the data is remotely important.

The Athlon X2 6000+ is a competent processor, and its cheap enough. But you're still better off waiting for Phenom or buying a C2D right now. Start saving up your chickens and see what happens.

RE: What to do?
By Bigginz on 8/1/2007 3:23:44 PM , Rating: 2
The name GP6800 does not mean it will be faster than an Athlon X2 6000+.

AMD went to a new naming scheme.
G is Premium
P is Power consumption greater than 65 watts
6800 is high end, Phenom dual core

So the GP-6800 will be a high end, dual core Phenom for gamers and other people who want a lot of performance.

I plan on buying the GP-7100. A quad core clocked at 2.4 GHz.

RE: What to do?
By MADAOO7 on 8/2/2007 2:47:03 AM , Rating: 2
First off, thanks for the helpful information. Do you have any idea what kind of price range to expect this new GP-7100?

RE: What to do?
By SlyNine on 8/5/2007 3:40:33 PM , Rating: 2
If your going to play games, Don't go all out on a CPU, the performance will not reflect what you spend. I say go with a high-midrange CPU for about the cost of a 6000+ and the best video card you can afford and 2gigs of ram.

With that said the Q6600 is probably the CPU i would by if I was in the market now. Quad core has alot of potential in the gaming market when future games take advantage. Remember you are getting 2x the power of the other cores out there. With the Xbox 360 able to use 6 threads at one time its very likely game developers will take advantage of any extra cores to great effect.

RE: What to do?
By SlyNine on 8/5/2007 3:42:15 PM , Rating: 2
almost 2x the power of any dual core is what i ment.

Not quite..
By zsdersw on 7/31/07, Rating: 0
RE: Not quite..
By caqde on 7/31/07, Rating: 0
RE: Not quite..
By kenji4life on 7/31/2007 7:49:59 PM , Rating: 2
The E6850 is still the preferred option for people who don't care about the price difference. It's not mainstream, if you are average Joe, going to bestbuy to buy a computer. But "average" Joe is just that. There are plenty of well off people who will buy the expensive dell XPS with the latest 300 dollar processor, and plenty of enthusiasts who will spend the dough for bragging rights.

But your arguement holds water. I too, don't consider anything that costs 300 dollars mainstream. But then again, I also would not spend 170, if I can get one for 50.

RE: Not quite..
By zsdersw on 7/31/07, Rating: 0
RE: Not quite..
By zsdersw on 7/31/07, Rating: 0
RE: Not quite..
By ninjaquick on 7/31/07, Rating: 0
RE: Not quite..
By zsdersw on 7/31/2007 9:57:04 PM , Rating: 1
According to you and some others here, perhaps.. but what you and some others on here consider "mainstream" is not the standard by which news articles are written or worded. Ever heard of a thing called "objectivity" in journalism?

RE: Not quite..
By defter on 8/1/2007 2:13:45 AM , Rating: 2
The official price for E6850 is $266.

RE: Not quite..
By ReeZun on 7/31/07, Rating: -1
RE: Not quite..
By rninneman on 7/31/2007 7:51:29 PM , Rating: 4
E6850 - 9 x 333.333333333 (repeating infinitely) = 3000

The E6850 can be had for under $300 all day long.

Why are you people arguing semantics?

RE: Not quite..
By dajeepster on 8/1/2007 12:51:26 AM , Rating: 2
the only problem I have with your post is the "repeating infinitely"... that statement alone isn't possible in todays computers.... we are still constrained by applications and physical limits ... computers do a damn good appoximation of numbers... but they aren't as accurate as your "repeating infinetely" would apply

RE: Not quite..
By dajeepster on 8/1/2007 12:52:55 AM , Rating: 2
**would imply**
an edit function would be nice

RE: Not quite..
By StevoLincolnite on 8/1/2007 1:01:03 AM , Rating: 2
He is correct though, its like the Old Pentium 3 667
It has a 133mhz Front side bus, and a multiplier of 5, which gives 665.
But the bus was never just "133" it was 133.3333333 recurring.
But they only used the last two digits of the 133.3
Now, 133.33 multiplied by 5 gives you 666.65, round that off and you get 667.

RE: Not quite..
By dajeepster on 8/7/2007 8:46:33 PM , Rating: 2
no, he's not correct. I can say anything I want theoretically... doesn't mean its true.
there isn't a piece of test equipment in existance that can measure anything infinite. it's kinda like say that a perpetual motion machine really does exist.

RE: Not quite..
By Lugaidster on 8/1/2007 4:14:05 AM , Rating: 2
Look at it this way (It's not really relevant but still)

1000/3 = 333.333333....

So do this:

9 * 1000 / 3 = 9000 /3 = 3000

Now you don't have constraints.

RE: Not quite..
By Spoelie on 8/1/2007 5:29:26 AM , Rating: 3
It is very much possible, as that number is not held in memory or need to be known/calculated exactly, it's only a physical characteristic that results from circuit design.

Like said above, if have a reference clock of 1000mhz and you only tick for every third tick of the reference clock, you get exactly 333,33333.. mhz. Even though you never have to 'calculate' it or anything.

That's just one way of a multitude of ways to get that exact 333,33..mhz clock.

read this:

RE: Not quite..
By dajeepster on 8/7/2007 8:41:50 PM , Rating: 2
please don't quote wikipedia to me... i can list 5 engineering books that do a much better job.

please explain to me how you are getting 333,3333.. mhz from every third tick of 1000mhz... i'm assuming its a typo... a bad typo.

RE: Not quite..
By SlyNine on 8/5/2007 3:12:48 PM , Rating: 1
I doubt a X2 6000+ ever lands exactly at 3ghz. they are never THAT accurate.

RE: Not quite..
By Dactyl on 8/1/2007 2:12:15 AM , Rating: 4
What about Pentium D???

Those are super cheap for dual core and they go WAY over 3GHz.

They suck compared to X2, but X2 isn't exactly a beauty queen compared to Conroe.

There is a reason AMD's 3GHz part will be is cheaper than Intel's. It's slower, has less cache, and can't overclock.

RE: Not quite..
By zsdersw on 8/1/2007 7:00:01 AM , Rating: 1
I'm pretty sure the Pentium D has been thrown into the "value" segment, along with Celeron 4xx and Pentium Dual Core E2xxx chips.

RE: Not quite..
By coldpower27 on 8/1/2007 8:00:54 PM , Rating: 1
Thankfully due to your vigilance he fixed the wording, so good job z!!

X2 5200+ Brisbance @ 2.7 GHz
By Daven on 7/31/2007 7:36:57 PM , Rating: 2
Does anyone know where i can get one of these?!

RE: X2 5200+ Brisbance @ 2.7 GHz
By Treckin on 7/31/2007 8:33:35 PM , Rating: 1
wow. Ever bought any electronics before?

By JumpingJack on 7/31/2007 10:29:52 PM , Rating: 3
RE: X2 5200+ Brisbance @ 2.7 GHz
By JumpingJack on 7/31/2007 10:32:39 PM , Rating: 2
Did some pecking around, not much... but...
Plenty of 5000+ listed under Brisbane.
None listed for 5200+ brisane
Plenty listed for 5200+ Windsor...

Another paper launch perhaps?

RE: X2 5200+ Brisbance @ 2.7 GHz
By Targon on 8/1/2007 7:47:38 AM , Rating: 2
They may have been sucked up by Dell or HP, which has happened in the past.

By coldpower27 on 8/1/2007 8:02:31 PM , Rating: 2
They seem to be non-existent in the e-tail and retail channels, I don't know of anyone who owns one.

Rumored X2 6400
By CrystalBay on 7/31/2007 6:44:56 PM , Rating: 2
How about the rumored X26400 @3.2Ghz is that not a Windsor or is it just a rumor???

RE: Rumored X2 6400
By Smurfer2 on 7/31/2007 7:01:56 PM , Rating: 1
As no one stocks it, the 6400 is a rumor.

RE: Rumored X2 6400
By Daven on 7/31/2007 7:34:42 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Rumored X2 6400
By Daven on 7/31/2007 7:41:36 PM , Rating: 2
One last thing. If they do come out with a 6400+, I wonder if they will make a FX-76 for the DSDC platform. Might be pretty nice if they can get it to work at 89W/processor and sell it for $599/pair.

RE: Rumored X2 6400
By CrystalBay on 7/31/2007 8:20:54 PM , Rating: 2
I also heard AMD are going to produce original X2's to 3.8 Ghz on their 65nm process...

K6-2 / K6-III
By cocoviper on 8/1/2007 12:43:05 PM , Rating: 2
Man this is so reminiscent of 1999...

AMDs got a new architecture on the way (Barcelona vs K7)...but it's having problems with the initial they respin their old cores (K6-2+, K6-III+) as a stop gap measure.

Hopefully the same thing will happen that happened then- we'll get some very inexpensive, but cool running and very overclockable chips.

RE: K6-2 / K6-III
By US56 on 8/1/2007 4:04:11 PM , Rating: 2
Think you're on the right track. There is no apparent successor to a long string of AMD high bang for the buck end-of-the-line processors beginning with the 386DX-40 and continuing with the AMD-X5, K6-III+ and Athlon XP-M. The Opteron 1xx came about as close as any Athlon 64 but the fun was short-lived and it was necessary to play the Newegg stepping and production code lottery or pay a premium to get one of the best ones. It will take a number of core rev's until a K10 can fill that role, if ever. It looks like the rumored G2 core stepping isn't going to happen either because AMD doesn't have the resources or because the potential performance would be too close to the early K10. It looks like the next window of opportunity for the best high bang for the buck fun will be the 45nm C2D. That would break a long streak of satisfying AMD processor based builds for me.

RE: K6-2 / K6-III
By Silver2k7 on 8/7/2007 3:00:36 AM , Rating: 2
You type like you have an AMD right now. If you have AM2 then you you should only need a bios update to plug-in an AM2+ Phenom CPU.

By whickywhickyjim on 8/1/07, Rating: 0
RE: lame
By Targon on 8/1/2007 7:57:02 AM , Rating: 2
Socket 939 is dead, which you should have realized by now. AMD moved to socket AM2 due to the industry as a whole moving to DDR2 memory and not being in the position to support both DDR1 and DDR2 using the integrated memory controller.

It isn't so much about AMD not having the technology or the ability to design such a part, the issue is that AMD is currently involved in making new fabs, as well as the conversion of their existing fabs to move fully to 65nm. If AMD had the fab capacity that Intel has, then of course they could have left one facility manufacturing socket 939 while the others worked on AM2, AM2+, 1207, and 1207+ based parts.

With Barcelona due out in August, you also have to figure that AMD is working to stockpile initial supplies for the launch, as well as trying to get Barcelona yields up, including testing to see if any will pass the tests at 2.1 and 2.3GHz at this point.

You complaining about a lack of new socket 939 parts is like complaining that you don't see new Pentium 4 chips being released at higher clock speeds. Once a company has put an end of life on manufacturing of a certain category of parts, that's pretty much going to be it for new versions.

RE: lame
By aos007 on 8/1/2007 12:54:21 PM , Rating: 2
You are right, lame INDEED. I bought Q6600 this weekend to replace my X2 4400 939 which is not even 2 years old. I normally upgrade often and I would have LOVED to pick up an upgrade to that machine given current low CPU prices. But no, they HAD to change the friggin' socket. Given the right motherboard I was even able to keep using my old DDR ram for now with Q6600. I don't care if it's hard to make memory controller handle both DDR and DDR2 - AsRock and VIA apparently didn't think so when they designed 4COREDUAL-VSTA.

AMD has only to blame themselves. If you don't provide me an upgrade path, I'm - shockingly - NOT going to upgrade. Unbelievable that big companies can't put that through their heads. Especially with desktop market shrinking to notebooks and given that upgradeability is one of the biggest advantages of having a desktop.

RE: lame
By Silver2k7 on 8/7/2007 3:10:31 AM , Rating: 1
Stop bitching about your socket.. or perhaps give it a go at AGP too while your at it.

I don't know if you ever read about Socket AM2 working with Socket AM2+ CPU's and perhaps also beeing backwards compatible with Socket AM3.

I doubt your intel socket will be backwards compatible with their next socket. but alot of people upgrade their mobo/cpu/memory at the same time. I guess you will have to do that next time also ;)

it can't hurt
By Quiksel on 7/31/2007 6:20:54 PM , Rating: 2
Releasing these sunset-style processors is still solid business. Can't fault em for that. It may not be the best out there, but for some of those old motherboards (or the holdouts), every bit of life that can be breathed into these platforms is another few months of quite usable life. I still recall the good ol' K6-3 450 proc for my Super7 platform... What a great chip, even though Athlon was just around the corner!

Kudos to AMD, now we wait for Phenom!

RE: it can't hurt
By rhog on 8/5/2007 8:47:31 PM , Rating: 1
I agree,
Right now AMD is doing the right thing. I have seen that according to Mecury Research AMD has increased their market share by 4.5% in the 2nd quarter and are up to 22.x percent. What AMD did to compete was to drop the price and crank the clock up using their most tried and true manufacturing methods 90nm. This puts the following processors in competition with each other:
X25000+ - E4xxx series
X25200+ - E63x0
X25600+ - E64x0/E6550
X26000+ - E6600
X26400+ - E67x0 - of course they have to release this processor!
Quads Cores processors belong to Intel
The E68x0 processors are again are in their own class.

But the Intel motherboards are more expensive and have less features at the same price points. Also any C2D faster than the new 6750 are expensive.

I suppose the new Phenom is what AMD is expecting to compete with these faster Intel processors.

Remember this is just my opinion and I came to these conclusions from direct ownership of most of these processors.

I think AMD has done fine except that they are a bit weak against the E6750 which is why I hope they will bring out the X26400+ as this would make them more competitive.

One interesting side note:
I have also built a new system with an X2 4600+ (65 watts version) and with a 690G chipset and there is nothing from Intel to compete with this setup for a HPC. I don't even need a system fan (although I do have one running just in case)

I am currently building a HPC with AMD's new X2-BE-2350 it is outstanding runs very cool, cooler than the X2 4600+ 65Watt and again nothing currently from Intel competes.

“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” -- Bill Gates on the Mac ads
Related Articles
AMD Reveals Phenom Model Numbers
July 28, 2007, 12:19 AM
AMD Prepares 45-watt "Brisbane"
May 30, 2007, 1:00 AM
AMD Announces Athlon 64 X2 6000+
February 20, 2007, 1:38 PM
AMD Announces "Brisbane" 65nm Processors
December 5, 2006, 1:27 AM

Most Popular ArticlesTop 5 Smart Watches
July 21, 2016, 11:48 PM
Free Windows 10 offer ends July 29th, 2016: 10 Reasons to Upgrade Immediately
July 22, 2016, 9:19 PM

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