Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

AMD Restructures Entire CPU Lineup

Last response: in News comments
Share
February 11, 2011 8:58:26 PM

another naming scheme again? confusing...
February 11, 2011 8:59:19 PM

can i have a diagram tom?
Related resources
February 11, 2011 9:10:33 PM

The new naming scheme 'should' eliminate some of the confusion that is out there now. The only problem is that all the chips we have now will still be on the market and there will be some overlap as always in terms of performance.

To bad we can't go pack to the simple Athlon days. The xp1700 is fast, xp1800 is faster xp2500 is even faster. None of this 3-4 different series of chips being outed crap!
February 11, 2011 9:22:54 PM

AMD has been making good decisions lately. It's nice to see them moving up.
February 11, 2011 9:26:26 PM

I don't what to say except this ----> T.T
February 11, 2011 9:27:17 PM

Quote:
The reason is that AMD reportedly wants to emphasize its corporate AMD Vision trademark and focus consumer attention to its corporate brand.


I wonder if AMD is throwing in the towel as far as consumer processors go...
February 11, 2011 9:29:45 PM

Quote:
two or four cores and an ATI Radeon HD 6000-class graphics core


Uhh, this should be an "AMD Radeon" correct? Didn't they drop the ATI naming scheme? With that said, simple typo or is this claim bogus?
February 11, 2011 9:33:21 PM

Who cares what they name the end product I just want to know if Bulldozer is going to end up being as fast as an i7 core to core.
February 11, 2011 9:34:54 PM

retrigI wonder if AMD is throwing in the towel as far as consumer processors go...


No, they're not. What this does, though, is divide the upcoming technologies we're going to be seeing from AMD.

The new APUs sound very intriguing :) 
February 11, 2011 9:55:25 PM

It is confusing now but this will simplify things down the road. The idea is to take more of the thinking and research out of the equation for the common consumer. Right now a Phenom, depending on which model could fall into at least two of those categories.
February 11, 2011 10:01:47 PM

They should focus on releasing chips, not names. Who cares what they want to call it?
February 11, 2011 10:03:51 PM

The new naming scheme helps convey the appropriate performance level of AMD CPUs.

FX= Slow
A Series= Slower
E Series= Slowest
February 11, 2011 10:04:27 PM

Unless the AMD articles are about the release date of Bulldozer, it's tl,dr.
February 11, 2011 10:05:42 PM

AMD was at their best with the FX lineup which leads me to believe they have something great. Not a fan of either company. I just want the best product for the dollar.
burnley14Uhh, this should be an "AMD Radeon" correct? Didn't they drop the ATI naming scheme? With that said, simple typo or is this claim bogus?

February 11, 2011 10:10:37 PM

kcorp2003another naming scheme again? confusing...

Really? You are actually confused? Or are you just trolling?
a b à CPUs
February 11, 2011 10:19:12 PM

I wish Intel would murder their Pentium name (and line).
a b à CPUs
February 11, 2011 10:27:36 PM

Seems like a sound strategy, although naming the mid range systems and top end with the same AMD Vision Ultimate moniker certainly does confuse things...
February 11, 2011 10:30:13 PM

Ahhh...*sniff* everything is starting to smell so fresh and clean....
February 11, 2011 10:35:04 PM

"Vision is AMD's contribution, which comes with the intention of simplifying the purchasing for folks who know what they want to do with their PC and don't care to learn the intricate sub-component technical nuances to make a buying decision. Will we do the same with Llano and Zambezi? You'll have to wait and see."

I dont like this, naming schemes need to informative to people who know the "technical nuances" as well as simple to the idiots.

a produce number should incorporate these things:
# of cores
clockspeed
generation
some sort of indication of cache if needed

Phenom II x4 965 does ok at this
-second generation phenom
-clockspeed differences between chips can be interpreted (965 vs 955)
-quad core shown by x4
-9 series means 6 megs of L3, 8 series means 4 megs of L3

an improvement would be something like:
Phenom II 4634 = 4 cores, 6 meg L3 cache, 3.4 Ghz
or just drop the 6 as its not that important
Phenom II 434
if there was a version with less cache then you could add a "B" to it or something

434>432>328
easy for consumer^
February 11, 2011 10:39:11 PM

fishruleThe new naming scheme helps convey the appropriate performance level of AMD CPUs.FX= SlowA Series= SlowerE Series= Slowest


But good prices and good overclocking potential = a smart decision to go with AMD ;) 

But yeah 4GHZ sandbridge i7 ftw.
February 11, 2011 10:48:45 PM

fishruleThe new naming scheme helps convey the appropriate performance level of AMD CPUs.FX= SlowA Series= SlowerE Series= Slowest

lol
February 11, 2011 11:20:21 PM

At least it isn't as complicated as amd GPU naming
February 12, 2011 12:08:49 AM

Why the hell would I want to pay a premium for an APU core that will include a graphics processor that I'll never even use? No way AMD! Oh well, I hope they continue their GPU technological evolution and not throw the baby out with the bath water -- so-to-speak!
February 12, 2011 12:14:18 AM

why not cores/speed/cache?

b3506 for a dual core 3.5 ghz 6 mb l3 core

c for tricore, d for quad, f for six, etc. or just the number even for cores too?
a b À AMD
a c 79 à CPUs
February 12, 2011 12:18:45 AM

Its no more confusing than nvidias naming...oooo the gtx480 outperforms the gtx560.....oooo "contraversy" "im so confused because 560 is a bigger number than 480"....is what you would be saying if it was AMD. what bullplop! you can figure out the naming using 1% of your brain, i suggest you use it and do some research.
a b À AMD
a c 79 à CPUs
February 12, 2011 12:21:56 AM

pinkfloydminnesotawhy not cores/speed/cache?b3506 for a dual core 3.5 ghz 6 mb l3 corec for tricore, d for quad, f for six, etc. or just the number even for cores too?

the general consumer does not know what cache is, i think that is what they are trying to appeal to as per the last sentence of the article.
a b à CPUs
February 12, 2011 12:55:21 AM

kashtr0_305Why the hell would I want to pay a premium for an APU core that will include a graphics processor that I'll never even use? No way AMD! Oh well, I hope they continue their GPU technological evolution and not throw the baby out with the bath water -- so-to-speak!

Intel did the same thing with Sandy Bridge.
February 12, 2011 1:20:20 AM

fishruleThe new naming scheme helps convey the appropriate performance level of AMD CPUs.FX= SlowA Series= SlowerE Series= Slowest


No. The C series is slowest.
February 12, 2011 1:35:18 AM

There is hardly a point in trying to make codes that general consumers understand. They will get confused with about everything unless it is blatantly obvious.
If they want their line to make sense to consumers they will have to simplify their line to just a few products, three for example; The AMD Basic, AMD Fast, AMD Very Fast. It says right in the name how fast the chip will be to minimize confusion as to how fast it should perform, since that's all consumers care about.

I think what intel did with their i-series makes sense for the most part and is a good compromise. The code says:
-Generaly how the chip performs in the lineup with the i3/i5/i7
-The first number to note the generation
-A couple more for relative clock speed, features and TDP.
It's a little disorganized but not too bad.

Amd should have a similar logical naming scheme:
-FX, A, E denoting relative speed with a number denoting generation attached
-1 or 2 numbers denoting core count
-2 numbers denoting stock frequency
-a number denoting and special features, like Black edition
-a m at the end if the chip is mobile
So a first gen high end Black edition chip with 10 cores at 3.4 ghz would be an AMD FX-1034B and a mainstream second gen 6 core chip at 2.8ghz would be an AMD A2-628.

February 12, 2011 1:35:29 AM

What people fail to notice is that with new multithreaded and multimedia applications, APU's with higher core counts as you go up in processor models, will result in higher performance. As someone said, no average consumer knows what any of this means -- AMD Vision is good enough and has already done very well in the marketplace. Pricing and the OEM's marketing make up the rest.

Intel already used the Core iX YYY model number system, and yet it tells you nothing about core count, cache, or processor speed. Now they're moving to a four-digit numbering system. What's next? YY3Y and YY5Y numbering? End the numbers in a 1? Intel has done this all before while just confusing consumers. It didn't work for Core 2 chips, and it doesn't work now.
February 12, 2011 1:41:44 AM

Why not just go like:

Phenom III FX (High-mid range)
Athlon III (Mid-low range)
Sempron ? (server)

Keep things simple, and as they are now. I like the Phenom name (Not just because I just bought one lol), always liked Athlon. My first 2 PC's were Athlon XP's, a 1500 and 3200.
February 12, 2011 1:45:16 AM

Here's some trivia:

What is newer: A Core 2 in the 7000 series or 6000 series?

Which is newer: A P8400 or a T8500? Which is faster?

Which Core 2 processors had vPro? Which Core iX processors?
February 12, 2011 1:49:34 AM

Bluestar2k11Why not just go like:p henom III FX (High-mid range)Athlon III (Mid-low range)Sempron ? (server)Keep things simple, and as they are now. I like the Phenom name (Not just because I just bought one lol), always liked Athlon. My first 2 PC's were Athlon XP's, a 1500 and 3200.


Um, they pretty much did. A-series replace Athlons, and FX series replace Phenoms (which themselves replaced the old Athlon FX's). E-series are the "everyday APU's". C is for compact consumer electronics (ie. Tablets and cheap netbooks).
February 12, 2011 1:53:43 AM

Also, Semprons are dead. The E series replaces it, which is good, because for the price of an 880G motherboard and Sempron 140/145 single core processor (which is pretty fast for the ~$30 cost), you can get a motherboard with an E-350 dual core processor with much better video.
a b À AMD
a c 123 à CPUs
February 12, 2011 2:11:22 AM

RicheemxxThe new naming scheme 'should' eliminate some of the confusion that is out there now. The only problem is that all the chips we have now will still be on the market and there will be some overlap as always in terms of performance. To bad we can't go pack to the simple Athlon days. The xp1700 is fast, xp1800 is faster xp2500 is even faster. None of this 3-4 different series of chips being outed crap!


I think the naming scheme is pretty simply from AMD. Yu have Sempron, lowest of the low. Athlon II, mid range and then the X2/3/4 indicaing number of cores and then the number indicating the clock speed level. Then Phenom II which follows the Athlon II the same way but is their high end.

This could be something like AMD Vision Black FX X8 9000 or something.....
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
February 12, 2011 2:43:28 AM

"Call it a banana if you want"
February 12, 2011 3:03:27 AM

Forget the naming scheme, I don't care.

I just want bulldozer to I7 comparisons so I know what rig I'm going to be building here soon......
February 12, 2011 4:39:19 AM

I understand that.
But my point was I liked the full names ^^

Athlon has been around since.... ever almost. Phenom is a lot newer but I like it. Never cared for sempron lol. But the names of the models should stay, in their full term. Customers are used to those names, and some like me, are "emotionally" attached to them.

I don't want to buy an AMD CPU and it says: AMD Vision FX 1050 (Or whatever) on the side, I want to see Phenom, or Athlon.

Not that I have much of a choice of course. But I can still object^^

WaethornUm, they pretty much did. A-series replace Athlons, and FX series replace Phenoms (which themselves replaced the old Athlon FX's). E-series are the "everyday APU's". C is for compact consumer electronics (ie. Tablets and cheap netbooks).

February 12, 2011 5:08:28 AM

fishruleThe new naming scheme helps convey the appropriate performance level of AMD CPUs.FX= SlowA Series= SlowerE Series= Slowest

lol
February 12, 2011 5:21:15 AM

They probably have marketing execs running the show instead of making fast CPUs.
February 12, 2011 5:26:37 AM

fishruleThe new naming scheme helps convey the appropriate performance level of AMD CPUs.FX= SlowA Series= SlowerE Series= Slowest


why do you think AMD CPUs are all over the place...

FX = bang for the buck
A Series = affordable
E Series = dirt cheap
February 12, 2011 5:59:57 AM

Come on Amd you can get up the hill. Amd I can Amd I can choo choo up the hill.

Please Amd start producing cpu's again. My mobile phone is about to get a 2.5ghz quad core like the test in China has, you can do better than mobile phone cpu's by Dec 2011 or at least try to compete with desktop cpu's at the same speed and power.

Please AMD make us Desktop CPU proud again and get us out of this horrible CPU dark ages, the world is round if you have not found out yet so you won't fall off if you try.
February 12, 2011 6:05:47 AM

i guess they have to refresh the name, but it will still be the same crap
a b à CPUs
February 12, 2011 6:15:04 AM

I still hope they have a BE version for them all............
February 12, 2011 7:47:12 AM

Bluestar2k11Sempron ? (server)

Maybe I missed something, but isn't Sempron the low-end processor? I thought the server processor was Opteron.

But beyond that, I agree with you. I personally don't see whats wrong with the current naming scheme. I wouldn't mind if they changed the names, but I think there should be a larger separation between the high-end CPUs and the APUs other than just an "FX" at the end.

fishruleThe new naming scheme helps convey the appropriate performance level of AMD CPUs.FX= SlowA Series= SlowerE Series= Slowest

Maybe. But I'll sacrifice a few microseconds here and there to keep that $80-$150 bucks in my pocket.
February 12, 2011 1:06:30 PM

Athlon and Sempron names where getting old. So I guess it's a good thing.
Reminds me of another company who changed to i3, i5 and i7.
February 12, 2011 2:29:00 PM

Quote:
Why not just go like:

Phenom III FX (High-mid range)
Athlon III (Mid-low range)
Sempron ? (server)


Well those old are basically same with different cache configurations etc.

There are so many variation with AMD new portfolio that they have to reduce "artificial" variation between their models.
The naming model sound reasonable good, ofcource the final judgement can be said after second generation of these upcoming prosessors. How first and second generation prosessors in this new naming system are differentiated etc.
They have a "clean" table ones more... Let see if they can do it right...

The performance and the prize means more to us... rest is marketing and customer support. We can not say what "ideology" has more weight at this time...
February 12, 2011 3:21:59 PM

hannibalThe performance and the prize means more to us... rest is marketing and customer support. We can not say what "ideology" has more weight at this time...


Who here actually builds AND SELLS computers to end users? I do, and the vast majority of consumers don't know what type of processor to buy. They need good advice from respectable retailers, and AMD is simplifying the retail naming for them. We use comparison charts to show the difference between what is a Vision system, a Vision Premium, Vision Ultimate, and Vision Black. People understand that easily. None of the everyday consumers cares specifically how much RAM or what clock speed it has except to price shop to know that they aren't getting ripped off. It's the same for number of cores and cache size, etc. What they want to know is if what they buy is a good value, and if it does what they want it to do within the budget that they set.

More technical users should do what they always do: make themselves familiar with the components, read benchmarks, and make an informed decision. This is not what the general populous does, which is: get word-of-mouth reviews, be loyal to brands, and take trust in the retailers opined solution offering.

So in other words, if you don't like the naming scheme: TOO DAMN BAD! Learn it anyway. AMD is changing it for the mass market, and if you're complaining, that market isn't you.
February 12, 2011 3:24:10 PM

BTW: just gonna throw this out there: has anyone ever seen a mini-ITX Opteron mobo before?
!