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

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.

"I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it." -- Bungie Technical Lead Chris Butcher
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 ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

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