Higher Clock Speeds, No TLB Issues and Better Pricing: The New Phenom
by Anand Lal Shimpi on March 27, 2008 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
3.0GHz: Where Are You?
AMD ran a controversial demo of a quad core Phenom in July of last year:
The demo ran at 3.0GHz and was designed to set expectations for Phenom. The problem is that when Phenom launched, it did so at 2.3GHz. Even today we're only at 2.5GHz. Allow me to quote, um, myself:
"In a demonstration designed to prove that Phenom isn't broken, AMD featured a quad core Phenom X4 processor, with standard cooling, running at 3.0GHz. While Phenom won't be anywhere near that clock speed when it launches at the end of this year, AMD expects to be at 3GHz within the first half of 2008. "
AMD told some members of the press that there was nothing special about these 3.0GHz Phenoms that were demoed, which begs the question - what happened?
There's nothing particularly magical about the 3.0GHz number, but the problem is this: Intel gives you two options at $266, you can purchase a Core 2 Duo E6850 (3.00GHz, dual core) or you can purchase a Core 2 Quad Q6600 (2.40GHz, quad core). The difference in clock frequency is 600MHz but you get two more cores, for the same price.
With AMD, the decision isn't as simple. At $178 you can purchase an Athlon 64 X2 6400+ Black Edition (3.2GHz, dual core), or at $195 you can buy a Phenom X4 9550 (2.2GHz, quad core). Not only do you have to spend a little more to get four cores, but you give up 1000MHz in clock frequency. Thankfully Phenom has some architectural enhancements that help narrow the performance gap, but it still does make AMD's job of competing much more difficult - forcing it to dramatically reduce prices.
Phenom could scale much higher, after all the individual cores aren't all that more complex than those in an Athlon 64 X2. We get the impression that there are some speed paths that could be optimized on the current B2 and B3 Phenoms that simply aren't because of a very sensible thought process. AMD is still on track to begin shipping its first 45nm Phenom processors (Deneb core) by the end of this year and it doesn't make sense to waste time and resources respinning a 65nm Phenom, when presumably these clock speed issues are addressed at 45nm.
AMD is expecting, clock for clock, 45nm Deneb based Phenom cores to offer up to 15% more performance (we're skeptical of that number). AMD also committed to matching clock speeds of 65nm Phenom processors when the 45nm parts launch. If Phenom is at 2.7GHz when 45nm launches, the first 45nm parts will come in at 2.7GHz (as well as models lower/higher obviously, but the point is that there will be clock speed parity with the move to 45nm).
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
65 Comments
View All Comments
ap90033 - Thursday, March 27, 2008 - link
Amen brother, I had the Athlon 64 when it ruled, but now i have E8400 since it smokes AMD's best...So I guess I am an AMD/Intel Fan BOY!!!
No offense but this artlicle had a very strong slant towards AMD, even though Intel destroys their newest and best with a 1+ year old chip. Dont you find that the least bit odd....? If anyone is sounding like a "Fanboy" I would say it would have to be you Mr. Crusader for AMD. LOL
Dude when you get to where I am you will see, it doesnt matter what the fluff is, get the FACTS and decide with your dollars there... Sheesh...
AssBall - Thursday, March 27, 2008 - link
I thought it was a very well written article. I didn't get any OMGAMDFTW out of it like you apparently did. Your "Man" would not be up already if AMD wasn't still churning these new procs out. Good luck finding those special Intel prices then.Olaf van der Spek - Thursday, March 27, 2008 - link
> We get the impression that there are some speed paths that could be optimized on the current B2 and B3 Phenoms that simply aren't because of a very sensible thought process.I'm wondering why those speed paths haven't been fixed before the first launch. Certainly it wasn't good for AMD to only introduce them at low clock frequencies.
Visual - Thursday, March 27, 2008 - link
It's really disheartening for a "fanboy" like me to see AMD beaten all over the board again.I may very well build a system or two with AMD parts because of the 780G chipset and its great budget video performance, but for a full-blown performance system i'll certainly go with Intel now.
AMD better hurry up with their 45nm tech, its way overdue.
Griswold - Thursday, March 27, 2008 - link
"AMD better hurry up with their 45nm tech, its way overdue."You're right, Intel has been selling 45nm parts for like a year now... oh wait, no they havent.
If you meant overdue as in they need it to (hopefully) achieve higher clock speeds and lower power consumption in addition to lower production cost, then you got that right.
If they keep their schedule with 45nm, they will have narrowed the gap between process shrinks vs. intel a bit again - which is good. But things like that dont happen overnight.
MoonRocket - Thursday, March 27, 2008 - link
Can anyone identify the case on the 3ghz where are you page?Looks interesting.
AmberClad - Thursday, March 27, 2008 - link
It looks like the CoolerMaster Stacker 830 to me.dnz - Thursday, March 27, 2008 - link
We musn't forget how great an overclocker the Q6600 is. My system is running at 3.2GHz (8x400) and I'm using cheap DDR2-800 RAM. The Q9300 may have some advantages but overclocking it is going to require some VERY expensive RAM.Griswold - Thursday, March 27, 2008 - link
First you'll need an good mobo that can deliver high FSB for these 45nm quads. RAM is secondary (can always use a divider if needed).ui5200 - Thursday, March 27, 2008 - link
Maybe this will cause intel to finally release the latest Dual and Quad core chips (oh like the E8400 that's been 'out of stock' for months)? Or is this another paper launch ?