AMD Phenom Quad

[jeffy777]

Don't you think it's silly that the older AMD dual cores are outperforming the new AMD Quad core? And of course that means that the Core 2 Duos/Quads are still on top.

The Phenom may be cheaper, but come on AMD, get with the program!





Full Article:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/11/...eaves_its_web/

[awdrifter]

It's not only that, they are now saying the errata bug is more serious that previously thought, so they are ordering a stop ship on all K10 cpus.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...021&highlight=

So no more Phenom until at least next year.

[Vette Boss]

Not even significantly faster than my S939 Athlon X2.. well done on that one, AMD.

[awdrifter]

Yep, that's why I"m not upgrading yet. My Athlon X2 @ 2.81ghz is not much slower than the best AMD dual core offering.

[Goose+]

[Shadowness]

God I remember ages ago, AMD were the kings! I thought I would never go back to intel, but the core2's certainly shat on AMDs parade!

[lamboman]

It wasn't that long ago lol, only just under 2 years.

[Wizegui]

I loved the S939 CPU's, they had great overclocking potential and the pricing was good as well. Unfortunately the same can't be said about the AMD chips of today. Maybe i'll have to go Intel for my next computer.....

[Lilleput]

Why does AMD even release CPUs like that? Where they hoping no one would notice?

[awdrifter]

They have to release them, because it's already been delayed a few times, and they probably wanted to release higher clocked version, but the TLB errata bug prevented that.

[Silverstar]

Such a pity that AMD is falling behind. I bought my AMD FX-51 system back in '04 and it was top 3 for a good year or so, (even made AMD_FX51 as my forum name over at pcper.com ). But even I had to give up and switch over to Intel (X6800), and I'm happy I did. Looks like it's staying up top, even with the newer Quads and E series chips out.

Though the pricing definately favors AMD at the moment.

[Gman333-X-ferrari]

Intel = Performance
AMD = Price

Intel > AMD

[breakfromyou]

Originally Posted by Gman333-X-ferrari

Intel = Performance
AMD = Price

Intel > AMD

That doesn't really work anymore, considering that you can get an E2140 for $60. It'll outperform the $80 AMD processors, and will overclock better...

I miss my old AMD

[chaos386]

Originally Posted by breakfromyou

That doesn't really work anymore, considering that you can get an E2140 for $60. It'll outperform the $80 AMD processors, and will overclock better...

I miss my old AMD

E2140 (Allendale) - $70
X2 4000+ (Brisbane) - $58

The 4000+ is faster in most benchmarks. AMD doesn't have anything to compete with in the mid to high end, which is a shame, but at least they're still a reasonable choice in the low end.

[MadCow809]

Originally Posted by chaos386

E2140 (Allendale) - $70
X2 4000+ (Brisbane) - $58

The 4000+ is faster in most benchmarks. AMD doesn't have anything to compete with in the mid to high end, which is a shame, but at least they're still a reasonable choice in the low end.

dont even start. with the standard cooler you can oc the E2140 to 300ish FSB and smoke the living shit out of the AMD.

with an aftermarket fan and a descent mobo, 400 FSB will destory all low/mid end AMD cpus.

and the new celeron is gonna get duo core as well, which will make AMD look silly in the low end market as well.

70 bucks for a core 2 is just bang for the buck, pay 70 bucks and you get like 200 bucks performance.

as for the non overclockers, yeah.. AMD is cheaper and faster to run, but 80% of the ppl who buy an E2xxx or E4xxx end up overclocking, and its not that hard, as long as you have a descent mobo to play around with.

[chaos386]

Originally Posted by MadCow809

dont even start. with the standard cooler you can oc the E2140 to 300ish FSB and smoke the living shit out of the AMD.

with an aftermarket fan and a descent mobo, 400 FSB will destory all low/mid end AMD cpus.

and the new celeron is gonna get duo core as well, which will make AMD look silly in the low end market as well.

70 bucks for a core 2 is just bang for the buck, pay 70 bucks and you get like 200 bucks performance.

as for the non overclockers, yeah.. AMD is cheaper and faster to run, but 80% of the ppl who buy an E2xxx or E4xxx end up overclocking, and its not that hard, as long as you have a descent mobo to play around with.

I think you've got it the wrong way round with the % of E2/4xxx owners who overclock. Most overclockers are enthusiasts and want higher-end stuff than that. Especially since a decent overclock should be paired with a decent motherboard, decent cooler, decent power suppply, decent RAM, etc., which kinda negates the cost savings of a cheap CPU. Rather than spend the extra money on a fancy cooler and overclocking-friendly mobo to get $200 performance, you could just buy a $200 CPU (which can get you a quad-core CPU mind you, one you could just as easily overclock) and get the same performance but without the stability and reliability worries.

And in an effort to wring this back on topic, the Phenom doesn't look very impressive at the moment, but I still really hope they can ramp up the speeds soon to give Intel more competition in the mid to high end. I want the 3.0 GHz core 2 quads to come down to $250, dangit!

[MadCow809]

Originally Posted by chaos386

I think you've got it the wrong way round with the % of E2/4xxx owners who overclock. Most overclockers are enthusiasts and want higher-end stuff than that. Especially since a decent overclock should be paired with a decent motherboard, decent cooler, decent power suppply, decent RAM, etc., which kinda negates the cost savings of a cheap CPU. Rather than spend the extra money on a fancy cooler and overclocking-friendly mobo to get $200 performance, you could just buy a $200 CPU (which can get you a quad-core CPU mind you, one you could just as easily overclock) and get the same performance but without the stability and reliability worries.

And in an effort to wring this back on topic, the Phenom doesn't look very impressive at the moment, but I still really hope they can ramp up the speeds soon to give Intel more competition in the mid to high end. I want the 3.0 GHz core 2 quads to come down to $250, dangit!

there are tons of overclockers out there who dont want to spend too much money on a quad core or core 2 extreme, why spend money on a E6xxx when you can buy a E2xxx for under $100 bucks. That said, im not saying the 6xxx series is inferior or anything, it actually overclocks better and has more cache than the entry level core2, but it comes at a price, and its not cheap.

E2xxx or E4xxx will do just fine, and you dont need top of the range mobo/ram to get the best result, there is no need to push to the cpu to the limit.

it is that easy to overclock a dual core, which makes a quad core kind of pointless.... unless you are after the ultimate. E2xxx will be enough to run just about everything without much lag.

[PaSSoA]

Did a search and found this thread, just wanted to update on their latest Phenom Processors. Looks like they share the same name with the new Merc-CLK

By Antone Gonsalves, InformationWeek
July 1, 2008

AMD Debuts Three Quad-Core 'Phenom' Desktop Processors

The processors are billed as energy efficient and ideal for small and sleek PCs that can help cut down on energy consumption.

The X4 9950 Black Edition features what the company calls "clock multiplier control" technology that enables users to boost clock speeds.




Advanced Micro Devices on Tuesday introduced a trio of Phenom desktop quad-core processors, including a flagship model for gamers and PC enthusiasts.

The X4 9950 Black Edition features what the company calls "clock multiplier control" technology that enables users to boost clock speeds. The processor also comes with AMD OverDrive software, a Windows-based performance-tuning utility.

Along with the 9950 BE, AMD introduced the X4 9350e and 9150e, which consume a maximum of 65 watts each, according to the chipmaker. The processors are billed as energy efficient and "ideal for development of small and sleek form factors that can help cut down on energy consumption, take up little space, and operate with low noise."

The 9950 BE is aimed at enthusiasts and gamers building new systems or looking to upgrade their current AMD processors, such as the previous-generation X4 9850 BE. The 9950 BE runs a bit faster than the older chip at 2.6 GHz versus 2.5 GHz, and consumes a maximum of 140 watts of power. The price of the new chip is $235.

The 9350e and 9150e are designed for mainstream computer users who are also digital media enthusiasts looking for more power to drive editing tools and players for video and photos. The 9350e has a clock speed of 2.0 GHz and is priced at $195. The 9150e runs at 1.8 GHz and is priced at $175.

All of AMD's current chips are built with 65-nanometer transistors. Processors with 45-nanometer technology are expected this year. Starting late last year, Intel moved its product line to 45 nanometers, which means more transistors on a chip to deliver better power-to-performance ratios.

Nevertheless, resellers are reporting that servers with AMD's quad-core Opteron processors have been selling well, including high-end, four-socket servers.

On the desktop side, AMD in April made its debut in the corporate desktop market with seven processors that come with business-class support. The new products represented AMD's initial lineup in a market that had been left to Intel.

Errmmm.... I have no idea what 80% of the article meant. I was thinking of getting the Intel Quad9450 2.66GHz. Is the new black faster or the Intel Quad 9450 still worth getting?

[awdrifter]

It means the 9950BE will have unlocked multiplier. AMD is going to release SB750, which is supposed to somehow allow better overclocking. AMD claims with their AOD software and SB750, 3.2ghz is very easy to achieve. I'm not sure how true it is though, because as of right now, people are only hitting around 2.8-3.0ghz stable. There are a few people who hit over 3.5ghz, but it's only for a screenshot, not even benchable.

[PaSSoA]

Holy cr@p! I must be outta it today, I have no idea what anything means, too much boobies in my head I guess

So the new chip allows better overclocking? But if I get it stock will it be overclocked as well? If I don't want to overclock, should I get the Intel Q9450 instead, since it seems both are running at 2.6GHz?