AMD Comes Out Swinging With 2 Quad Chips and a Triple-Core

Status
Not open for further replies.

TRDCorolla1

Golden Master
Messages
12,592
Location
California
They have 3-impressive new chips that looks very pleasing and for the first time in awhile, they are finally competing with Intel.

"The CPUs by themselves are good to see, but the most important part is that AMD just came out with their 700 series graphics," said Jim McGregor, an analyst at In-Stat, in Scottsdale, Ariz." Now you're talking about the ability to have integrated graphics and hybrid graphics. Suddenly, it's attractive again. AMD has got a more competitive and compelling solution now than they've had."

  • Phenom X4900 processors for high-end desktop systems
  • 65-watt quad-core Phenom X4 9100e
  • Phenom X3 8000 triple-core processors

Why 3 cores?

Coming out with a triple-core processor makes sense for both the company and for consumers looking for multiple cores but holding off on making an investment in four cores -- especially when most software still isn't designed to take advantage of all those cores.

Lowest energy consumption to date at a max rating of 65 watts while consuming 25 watts a majority of the time. Read more of the article. Interesting read:

PC World - AMD Comes Out Swinging With 2 Quad Chips and a Triple-Core
 
3 cores is a bad idea, but nice catch on the news

I say 3 cores is bad because now is the age of dropping quad core prices... we see the q6600 at 200 and soon it will be even cheaper...

but otherwise, thank god, finally AMD cleared out their heads... looks like Intel finally has some competition
 
I could go either way on the triple cores. They sounded like a great idea last year when quad was expensive but with those prices dropping so low now it doesn't look very promising and it's more of a short term solution. Good way to recycle those quad cores that come off the assembly line with only 3 cores working, though, like the article said. Reduce waste and provide a sellable product.
 
AMD's been dead in the water for a long time with all their delays and problems. It's exciting seeing that the spark is still there, hopefully fueling the competition even more. AMD is working on 45nm, but it would be wise that they perfect their 65nm technology first. Intel is already ahead on route with 45nm so there's still a lot of ground to cover for AMD.
 
AMD is working on 45nm, but it would be wise that they perfect their 65nm technology first.
Actually, it makes more sense to work on 45nm, because that's what their processors are going to use next.
If they put money into 65nm, it's still going to take time for improvements to happen. Then it'll go to waste after their 45nm chips come out.
 
AMD is investing heavily into the 45nm arena because Intel's on top of it. I think it's a bold move for them though because their transition from 65nm to 45nm is fairly quick. Lets hope its for the best though. I want them back to being head-to-head on things. That tight. Man, can you imagine the processor wars starting over again? With great competition comes great innovative means of advancing technology.......or is it "with great power comes great responsibility"? Oh well, its good to have comeptition.

Intel has really invested a lot in R&D as you can see from their financial reports as compared to AMD. I'm still waiting for more news on the "Optic CPU" they're developing.............to be continued.
 
After reading more about the Phenom architecture, it seems there are some things - other than refining the 65nm process for better clocks - that they didn't have enough time to work out properly, which is hindering their IPC.

I think one area where Agena is being hindered is their ALU's, which are actually not getting instructions fed into them quickly enough.
If that's true, then it's probably due to their prefetchers and branch predictors not being as accurate as they should.

AMD are working on addressing issues like this, so Shanghai and Deneb, as well as being 45nm, should have higher IPC's than Barcelona and Agena.

I believe AMD's 45nm Phenom's should be significantly better refined than their 65nm Phenom's. They've been working with IBM to improve manufacturing processes, as well as transistor design, and will implement a lot of the improvements they didn't have time to do with 65nm.

[off topic]IBM and AMD are working together on a lot of areas, including manufacturing processes, and transistor design. And it's a very good thing they are, for both companies.
AMD needs good manufacturing processes and transistor design, which IBM can help them with, and IBM needs good architectural designs for their CPU's, which AMD can help with. And it's in both companies interests to be competitive with Intel.[/off topic]


Anyway, the 65nm Phenom's did bring a needed step forward, and considering the difficulty for AMD to not only bring out a new architecture, but also have a native quad design, and on a 65nm process, the Phenom is a lot better than it could have been.
But, they didn't have time to refine it like Intel had with the Conroe.

Basically, AMD relies on having a competitive product. But Intel, even when their behind in terms of price, performance, price/performance, and performance per watt, can still outsell their competition (and that's part of why I don't like them).

Anyway, the Phenom is an impressive product considering the difficulty AMD faced when making it. But, there are issues, which AMD didn't have time to fix initially, that need to be worked out.

I am pretty sure that AMD's 45nm chips will improve in IPC, as well as power efficiency, and overclockability, as AMD are working to address some of the issues with the initial release.
 
after looking at some reviews the x4 9850 BE runs very closely to the Q6600, But only beat it when it came to gaming. On the down side it uses alot more power.

Also on one review an 18% OC(easy to do with the Unlocked Multi) they showed a 25% performance increase.

3dmark_cpu.jpg

cinebenchr9.jpg
 
after looking at some reviews the x4 9850 BE runs very closely to the Q6600, But only beat it when it came to gaming.

The review from AnandTech shows Q6600 performing better in photoshop, video encoding and 3d rendering. Those are much more important in my opinion than CPU mark, or Cinebench etc

Also, even though photoshop and most of the video encoding softwares can take the advantage of 4 cores, Intel dual core wolfdale was able to compete with Phenom in those applications.


On the down side it uses alot more power.

At idle they are very close but Phenom consume much more power at full load.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom