AMD Phenom appears in pricelist

[saaya]

cpus will be named HD and 9700?
so amds branding department was fired and replaced with atis?

[BeardyMan]

Indeed i wonder with excuses shinati wil come up when he sees K10 on par with penryn
and it pwned current quad like i stated.

Link

already posted but i like to bolt it

going to make it my sig lol ^^

[MAS]

hmm

C2Q in Vista
and
Opteron in 2003

that's not right comparison

[BeardyMan]

hmm

C2Q in Vista
and
Opteron in 2003

that's not right comparison

2003 is slower.

[MAS]

2003 is slower.

where? you mean weak SM2/3 results in 2003? that can be because of different drivers, different directX versions, background processes etc

everybody knows Vista eats much of cpu MHz

Actually Q6600 reaches 3700-3800 cpumarks in tweaked NT 5.1

[KTE]

HD9600WCGDBOX CPU Desktop Phenom X4 9600 (4MB,95W,AM2) box $278.00

That used to be a 2.3GHz part: http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/1893/23ghzx4sn0.jpg

Phenom 9500 2,2 GHz nov. 2007
Phenom 9600 2,3 GHz nov. 2007
Phenom 9700 2,4 GHz dec. 2007
Phenom 9800 2,8 GHz Q1 2008

That's different to what I've heard. I heard:

November 19th:
9500 2.2GHz
9600 2.3GHz (maybe now changed to 2.4GHz to meet new roadmap)
9700 2.6GHz (125W)

9800 2.8GHz (maybe by mid-January)

Dirk said in mid October that November is Phenom launch at higher than 2.5GHz, like here: http://www.tcmagazine.com/comments.p...=16488&catid=2

3GHz Penryn 45nm 1333FSB is at 130W TDP @ 1.208V: http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/7...zpenrynkn3.jpg

3GHz Phenom 65nm 1.488V (HT is wrong because of bug, its double): http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/4...zphenomlo3.gif

At 1600FSB/3.2GHz Penryn 45nm DP breaks 149W barrier: http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/885/45nmus0.jpg

AMD and Intel current design for future architectures:

This is why there was a huge cry of "foul" in the industry when Intel revealed their new plans. You can see the similarity.

[BeardyMan]

where? you mean weak SM2/3 results in 2003? that can be because of different drivers, different directX versions, background processes etc

everybody knows Vista eats much of cpu MHz

Actually Q6600 reaches 3700-3800 cpumarks in tweaked NT 5.1

win2003 is for 3dmark like windows 2001 is for superpi, it's slow.

Vista is actually a proper os when it comes to 3dmark06/05/03 it sucks only for 01

[justapost]

That's different to what I've heard. I heard:

November 19th:
9500 2.2GHz
9600 2.3GHz (maybe now changed to 2.4GHz to meet new roadmap)
9700 2.6GHz (125W)

9800 2.8GHz (maybe by mid-January)

That roadmap changed last week.
Beside the numbering-changes the TDP for the 2,4GHz version rose to 125W.
With that new numbering the highest cloked 9xxx-phenom should be an 9900 at 2,6 GHz. Will they use 10xxx for higher clocking versions or will they use non linear numbering in relation to the frequency beyond 2,4GHz?

FZ posted a pre-order link today. There the 9700 is not available before 14. Dec.

Dirk said in mid October that November is Phenom launch at higher than 2.5GHz, like here: http://www.tcmagazine.com/comments.p...=16488&catid=2

Maybe he had fx-phenoms in mind.

[KTE]

That roadmap changed last week.
Beside the numbering-changes the TDP for the 2,4GHz version rose to 125W.
With that new numbering the highest cloked 9xxx-phenom should be an 9900 at 2,6 GHz. Will they use 10xxx for higher clocking versions or will they use non linear numbering in relation to the frequency beyond 2,4GHz?

That Phenom GP-9600 2.3GHz B2 was a release sample and it was reported at 89W TDP in EVEREST. Nothing for Phenom is in concrete before retail samples though, not even for Penryn.

[madcho]

http://www.isorm.com/index.php?cPath...b201a0bfd5bbf6

this is concrete

[knightwolf654]

prices are a bit high there.

[justapost]

http://www.isorm.com/index.php?cPath...b201a0bfd5bbf6

this is concrete

So only 2,3 GHz in November. Link

[KTE]

Yeah that says 2.4GHz for December. Release prices are always higher than MSRP or /1000 prices, or compared to those a few weeks after, and especially when the quantities are low near Xmas.

Honestly, if I see that as final, the business manager liaising with my uncle's corp has been lying and bluffing all along, which would be a different story all altogether but make me think of them as pretty damn sad and disingenuous at all levels.

If only 2.4GHz FX/X4 is released this year (nothing higher), then despite what they say, they are having problems with TDP.

Bit like how Penryn >3GHz had problems with TDP since January. So did Barcelona just at 1GHz lower.

[Hornet331]

hmm i still have difficulties to see how this quads form amd can competent. Right now it seems they are ranging from 260-320$ but they are only max @ 2.4ghz, so it seems its positioned against the cheapst quad of intel right now (the Q6600 for 266$).

everyone who changed to conroe last year wont change to phenom cause they have a drop in solution. (budget)Gamers would rather buy the upcoming E8400 for 183$ and get better performance than with a quad phenom or quad intel.

Im really curious to see how this quads will sell.

[hollo]

Im really curious to see how this quads will overclock >:D

[justapost]

Yeah that says 2.4GHz for December. Release prices are always higher than MSRP or /1000 prices, or compared to those a few weeks after, and especially when the quantities are low near Xmas.

Honestly, if I see that as final, the business manager liaising with my uncle's corp has been lying and bluffing all along, which would be a different story all altogether but make me think of them as pretty damn sad and disingenuous at all levels.

If only 2.4GHz FX/X4 is released this year (nothing higher), then despite what they say, they are having problems with TDP.

Maybe they have problems with B2's. I think the lower clocked modells are B1/BA'2, this would also illustrate that hight TDP at 2.4 GHz.

Well, hope dies last.

[PhilDoc]

Only 2.3G at launch and then 2.4G in December. That's discouraging. Hopefully, that wont be the case, but its probably correct. The only thing I can think of good about that, is I would have to wait until q1 for the Yorkfield model I've been looking at, which, for me, gives AMD 'til then. Too bad I was hoping to play with one of these. On the other had if it clocks well and performs well, I may pick one up just for fun and I do have some people close to me that could use an upgrade if I decide to ditch it later.

[KTE]

If they don't have 2.6GHz retail by December, I'm going to have to get the bang4buck Yorky in Q1 instead TBH and I don' see myself changing platforms near after either.

[StealthyFish]

I think many people will like an idea to have nehalem-like cpu into their computer for only 250-300 USD and if to recollect the price of descent am2 mobo...

Keep dreaming. Nehelem is nothing like X4's. If a yorkfield can compete//beat a phenom, I don't even want to think about what a Nehelem will do to it. I've seen the chips. They aren't even Socket T. Socket B anyone?

That and I highly doubt AMD will be able to sustain those prices for long. They're taking some heavy losses due to horrible yields. Too much to swallow for AMD all at once, especially when they start cutting fabs too. There's only so much you can out-source for production.

[justapost]

I would switch platform if the new arch is around 50% faster than the old one. I want to feel the boost during normal daily work. This 5-10% advantage in speed is not worth switching. I'll wait for nehalem vs. sandtiger before i move to a new platform. Meanwhile I can replace my X2-3800 with a Phenom-X4 if i really need four cores. (Might be usefull for all my virtual machines).
I'm interested how much power a phenom will require in an AM2 board under normal workload and how the new virtualisation functionality will perform.
Overclocking is not an issue for me, but this forum is definately an interesting playground to learn more about hardware internals.

[Motiv]

Most people who buy cpus to integrate into systems, rarely buy anything over a £200 model. To spend more is for the more affluent sector of the community or those going for 100% performance and top Overclocking.

If AMD can make a cpu range that from a range of £100 to £200, perform with a couple of percent the same as the intel priced equivalent. Then I and many others will buy AMD (well if it overclocks like a Dog I wont).

I can't say if this will keep AMD afloat but having budget, desktop, mainstream and parts of the server market means they will be competative against Intel. They may not have the top end desktops (and top end 2u systems) but they probably are competitive in every other sector, once these suckers hit the streets.

[KTE]

Most people who buy cpus to integrate into systems, rarely buy anything over a £200 model. To spend more is for the more affluent sector of the community or those going for 100% performance and top Overclocking.

I agree fella. Most earthlings look at price first and have a budget. Just like you have a car budget and you don't all buy SSC Ultimas or F1s do you? Rarely. That doesn't include those who compete in races though, such as Button, Makinnen, Schumacher and so on in the motor world ala Coolaler, Shamino, Vince, George, Marcus and so on in the computing world.

[nemrod]

Bit like how Penryn >3GHz had problems with TDP since January. So did Barcelona just at 1GHz lower.

TDP is only for giving a thermal solution.
Power at full charge comparison:
http://www.matbe.com/images/biblio/a...0000063321.png

If tdp of yorkfield was so bad, there would not be a lot of report saying 4GHz in air is "easy"

As for phenom, 9500 should be a little bit below 95W, 9600 just below, 9700 just over. It doesn't mean there is a real difference of 30W between 9600 and 9700

[KTE]

Yes I know. But TDP is what all companies look to, to realize a hotter running component and it matters very much when the company itself promotes "green" left right and center. So they try for the lowest TDP rating possible and it shows abilities of the arch.

Top Yorkie TDP was bad because Intel made it clear they had to run watercooling for 3.2GHz Skulltrail oc'd to 4GHz and it was still giving memory problems so they couldn't bench it, remember? If they could release higher within a decent TDP, damn you me they would do it.

If *ANY* MFG can keep overall CPU TDP down, they won't label it higher, believe me. They label the TDP envelope the lowest possible with maximum load testing for a given SKU (so all of them, the good bad and mediocre remain within that TDP). Some products from that SKU be towards the top end of the TDP and some at the low end.

TDP for Intel was a massive problem since a long time that I knew and some sites reported, they were stuck at 3.33GHz since January 07. And TDP was a problem with AMD Family 10h, they were stuck at 2.3GHz for a long time too. For AMD it was the IMC, its speeds and HT speed being the major hog, and for Intel it was the FSB speed and caches.

Jumping from 65nm to 45nm and not lowering the TDP at same MHz is stalling in the improvement trend of computing technologies. Do I think AMD will have their 45nm product at 130W for 3.0GHz? Who knows, I hope not judging from their excellent TDP differences from 2-core to 4-core at the same node with a new architecture.

[nemrod]

Top Yorkie TDP was bad because Intel made it clear they had to run watercooling for 3.2GHz Skulltrail oc'd to 4GHz and it was still giving memory problems so they couldn't bench it, remember? If they could release higher within a decent TDP, damn you me they would do it.

Obviously not, they have no reason to sale far better processor now, there is no competion... If they have done that they would have kill their conroe stocks...
AMD can at this moment only sale a phenom about equal to a Q6600... The price of 9700 at 289$, 10$ below Q6600 is a clear indication of that...