Printable View
Don't get too stingy. Unlocked multipliers, especially on a serial interconnect backbone, at 300 bucks or less is a gift. If AMD has done one thing well over the years is catering to the enthusiast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandwidth
Unlocked multies is a gift, and getting them at low prices shows AMD's commitment to the advanced DIYer ... Intel should do a better job of embracing that market segment.
Regarding Phenom II 2.8GHz AM3 being rated 95W compared to 125W on the AM2+ version it might be caused by yet another revision of 45nm chip. Remember that AM3 part will be rev. C3! AMD might either bring more power savings thanks to revision changes or it simply expects to advance in manufacturing on this node before releasing AM3 SKUs.
If AMD was in the lead it would be 999-1499$ unlocked only.Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
Its just illusional different when your top CPU is a few 100$.
umm, the lower heat dissipation would be because it's clocked lower, and probably less voltage....Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandwidth
They'll be lower binned aswell....
*edit*
disregard that, it didn't register that you were comparing an AM3 chip to an AM2+ chip. Man, I should go to sleep, it's past 5.AM....
If those slides are true, my next CPU is a PII 940 for sure.
But then again, even if they're not quite true, my next CPU would still probably be a PII 940 anyway.
Very good point ... FX60, 62 were unlocked -- and as top dogs at their time were $1K cpus.. AMD produced the unlocked multi at the low price point for this very reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
I remember when Intel and AMD locked up the multipliers, and there as a huge moan and groan from the enthusiast market. :) .... rightly so... then they realized it could be made into a selling point... hence, $1K CPUs with unlocked multies.
The relationship between frequency and power is P=C*V^2*F, Fmax (max frequency) is related to the quality of the silicon as the inherent variability in each step toward making the CPU will cause subtle differences wafer to wafer or die to die.Quote:
Originally Posted by Apokalipse
As a result, Intel and AMD bin the CPUs based on various voltage, fequency max, and other criteria. But the general power relationship will always hold. If a CPU is not meeting the stability, error rate standards at 3.0 GHz but does at 2.8 GHz, then it bins there... the power naturally will come out lower overall.
Depending on the Vcc and fequency, that total power can fall within a certain power envelop. So TDP ratings are power bins, just like frequency bins ... within the TDP bin different processors will produce different thermals, but to get within that bin they simply need to be at or less a certain power mark (i.e. TDP minus an engineering margin of error).
That's what I was thinking too, the PII 925 AM3 could be a newer stepping, and it's the highest clocked AM3 part, so they should unlock it too :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
If the past holds true with the newer Deneb core, the AM3's are lower wattage due to being set to use DDR3 memory. Since DDR3 uses less voltage than DDR2, they can run the NB at a lower voltage. Remember part of the problem with b2 phenoms burning out the nb because of the voltage difference between the nb and ram, especially when the Nb was run at lower than stock volts? I'm guessing the reason that there is only 1 BE proc on that line up is due to the fact that it's the last AM2+ proc for Deneb. The Phenom FX was suppose to be AM3, or G34, and will likely depend on whether it's performance competitive with what Intel has out.
Your '999$' part is a lot more correct than your '999-1499$' part though. You do however have a point there, but I never saw FX's above 1K really. That's Euro though, but we know how hardware prices were in those times compared to dollar prices. Shops obviously found dollar:euro= 1:1:rolleyes:. Intel however goes nuts on certain Extreme Edition prices, even when AMD was the leading one. Then again Intel has different levels of their Extreme Editions (now) as well, you're not forced to pay >=1K to get one;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
IMO, the pricing argument doesn't hold water. Intel was and is dictating the sku pricing, especially on desktop. When AMD was charging $1000 for their top of the line cpu's, Intel was charging $1000+, and selling LOADS of them. At that time, prior to litigation, Intel had a free reign on what prices they charged, and until AMD has the 30% MS they are targeting, they have to follow. It would have been pretty silly of them not to charge $1000 for their top of the line cpu, when they would have sold no more if they charged $500.
This is really good news for AMD (and the enthusiast consumer) if true. But you guys might want to curb your enthusiasm a little. These are just slides after all, not benches.
Finally!!! I can't wait.
Time to save my cents :D
Thanks for posting this! :toast:
Very interesting info, looks pretty good :cool:
Oh and that shows you for the Newbee you are LOL!Quote:
Originally Posted by azraeel101
History!
P3 450
P3 550 (won it)
Athlon Classics
700
900
1GHz Tbird
1GHz P3 Cumine
1.3GHz TBird
1.7GHz P4
2GHz P4 B
AthlonXP 2300+
NW 2.6C
3500+
4400+
C2D E6600
C2D E8400
A few others I had for short times or built and didn't use much.
I hope we get some new AM2+ mobos.
I'd love one that's similar to the Rampage Extreme/Maximus II in looks and performance :)
Pity the ddr3 mobos don't launch same time as Phenom 2 940
Phenom 2 920 and 940 doesnt support DDR3. Hence their AM2+ package.Quote:
Originally Posted by N19h7m4r3
But the new 925 and 945 will.
They might be Hiding the FX realse with AM3...which would be the Unlocked version...It then might be a 125w variant. That's my guess...Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandwidth
Yeah I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
I'd love i7 but the extra cost doesn't warrant the extra speed that may be neglible. If AMD can come up with something competitive, then I'll jump ship :up:
Yeah, i got DFI LPUT X38, so i'm gonna consider the alternatives of going with Q9650 upgrade or platform changing upgrade with Deneb 940, when the time comes. I don't think Q9550 cuts it for my 4 GHz clock target, and 790GX/FX boards are quite reasonably priced, so if Deneb 940's priced aggressively against Q9650, i can see myself going back with AMD this round -if the cost is around the same, and the performance is comparable, i will support the underdog.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
Well, your defensive/offensive posting a long time back, which Im happy about, didnt really give a reason that you'd get an AMD anytime soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
Maybe I say it wrong... It's like you made make us, or me at least, think you trash the CPU manufacturer you dont use as your main system at that point.
But as said, luckily that was quite a while ago already, and this post does not give you any permission to do it again, be it Intel or AMD:p:
PS, I still didnt know how to explain my point, but maybe you more or less know what I mean heh. I do know you had an AMD system though:rolleyes:
I will believe a 4 GHz OC when I see bench screenshots. Like is always stated here... "Screenshots or it didn't happen". Validated Screens too, and not some bench or tool that nobody uses.
I've heard this too many times over the years and it has never materialized. If they pull it off great, and that's awesome.
I wouldnt call AOD 'a tool that nobody uses' though, shame that, AFAIK, indeed validation was missing.
Someones already done 4Ghz on a current 65nm Phenom.:p:Quote:
Originally Posted by T_Flight
(Yeah it wasn't stable or anything, but there are screenshots)
I really hope AMD can pull it together here. I haven't used anything since a Athlon XP 2500+ so it would be sweet to have a 'whoa this is fast' from AMD. I only went C2Q cause it's be touted so highly.
Off course it will do 4ghz, it already has done 4ghz. Don't you guys remember the Shangai/Deneb overclock @ coolalers forum?