Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD BE-2350 Benches

Last response: in CPUs
Share
June 5, 2007 6:15:34 AM

Hothardware tests AMD's new low-power BE- series processor. They must have begun testing before the Pentium E21x0 series was released, because they said there was no close Intel parts(price-wise) to compare to. Basically, the BE-2350 is a low-wattage x2 4000. It would be a good shootout pitting it against the Pentium E2160. :) 


LINK

More about : amd 2350 benches

June 5, 2007 7:07:05 AM

ya...read that...i think thats gonna last only till intel launches E21x0 series...it is bound to fall apart after that...
June 5, 2007 7:44:27 AM

Another product launch where AMD actually manages to bring performance down a little. Way to go AMD! :?
Related resources
June 5, 2007 8:11:30 AM

It doesn't really look like it'll be a very good overclocker. I notice they were using 1.50v to get it to run @ 2.5GHz....that's a pretty big bump up from 1.15/1.20v. I think their temp monitoring HW is on the fritz....or they're tesing at the North Pole. :D  Idle temp of 15C/load of 31C?? What's the ambient temp, if it's idling at 15C, or is the stock HS/F now a TEC. :o  That said, it is a step in the right direction WRT lower TDP's.
June 5, 2007 9:17:19 AM

Quote:
Another product launch where AMD actually manages to bring performance down a little. Way to go AMD! :?


the product is not designed to be a high performance part, it has its own purpose such as a quiet HTPC or people that do not demand huge processing power. You don't need a QX6800 to surf and post on this forum or other sites, or to run MSN messenger, yahoo, AIM etc, or open up Excel, Word and Outlook. :) 
June 5, 2007 9:24:29 AM

Quote:
Another product launch where AMD actually manages to bring performance down a little. Way to go AMD! :?


the product is not designed to be a high performance part, it has its own purpose such as a quiet HTPC or people that do not demand huge processing power. You don't need a QX6800 to surf and post on this forum or other sites, or to run MSN messenger, yahoo, AIM etc, or open up Excel, Word and Outlook. :) Your right, just buy a Sempron then. :roll:
June 5, 2007 9:28:35 AM

yeah, was just checking the sempron price last night, apparently you could get an AM2 board and a Sempron for like €60, or newegg (you american's fav) have deals for X2 3600/X2 3800 and mobo for $80

thinking back a few years you couldn't get a Pentium MMX for less than $200 :lol:  :lol: 

Tech is really flying!
June 5, 2007 9:55:39 AM

Quote:
Another product launch where AMD actually manages to bring performance down a little. Way to go AMD! :?


the product is not designed to be a high performance part, it has its own purpose such as a quiet HTPC or people that do not demand huge processing power. You don't need a QX6800 to surf and post on this forum or other sites, or to run MSN messenger, yahoo, AIM etc, or open up Excel, Word and Outlook. :) 

It doesn't mater, lower performance isn't acceptable even when you lower power consumption, it's a step back, performance needs to increase all the time and not just performance/watt.

What AMD tries to do and which is to only increase performance per watt while decreasing performance, isn't the right thing to do because it ignores the raising demand for computing power that brought the industry here in the first place. I don't recall any other company doing the same thing and being successful, ever.

What they don't seem to understand is that if you decrease performance you also decrease performance/dollar in the end (leaving electricity bills aside) and you price your products way more based on performance than performance/watt (my guess is 80/20).
June 5, 2007 10:43:37 AM

but judging from the benchmark it is faster than the original X2 4000 65nm part :D  it showed a slight increase?

I would agree if you point out the competition the Pentium Es will be giving AMD, AMD would end up with no market at all when Intel start to sell sub $80 dual cores
June 5, 2007 11:48:52 AM

Quote:
but judging from the benchmark it is faster than the original X2 4000 65nm part :D  it showed a slight increase?

I would agree if you point out the competition the Pentium Es will be giving AMD, AMD would end up with no market at all when Intel start to sell sub $80 dual cores


x2 4000+ and BE-2350 should be of same batch as they both carry G1 stepping.
June 5, 2007 12:48:16 PM

Quote:
Hothardware tests AMD's new low-power BE- series processor. They must have begun testing before the Pentium E21x0 series was released, because they said there was no close Intel parts(price-wise) to compare to. Basically, the BE-2350 is a low-wattage x2 4000. It would be a good shootout pitting it against the Pentium E2160. :) 


LINK




For under $100 that will be hard to beat. 31 degrees is possible since it's only using 104W. I'm happier that they got rid of that silly PR rating.

The only place I saw it worse than the original Brisbane or Windsor was latency, but right below that chart it actually does better in Mem/Cache.

It's a cool little chip for HTPC. I thought they were positioning Turion for the Live Home Cinema, but these chips would work well too.
June 5, 2007 1:06:51 PM

Live Home Cinema? Is that another useless bit of marketing technology like Viiv and Live!, or something that is actually useful?
June 5, 2007 1:20:17 PM

Don't think they make a dual core Sempron yet.

wes
a b à CPUs
June 5, 2007 1:26:19 PM

Looks like it would be an ideal HTPC cpu coupled with a decent AM2+ mobo and passive cooled PCI-E low profile graphics card - something with a Zalman cooler like the old 6600 unit that Gigabyte had. It wasn't too bad.

I have a HTPC here for the lounge but have ditched it for a V2000 laptop ... much quieter but not as neat as a decent HTPC unit ... or flexible.

I think this will be the right market for this chip ... AMD needs to look cloesly at their place in these sorts of markets whlst they don't have any high end parts to generate any "halo" effect for their mid range and low end parts.

They need that sort of marketing approach just to survive at present.

With ATI and the Fab expansion they bit off more than they could chew ... consequently the sharks are circling.
June 5, 2007 1:42:35 PM

Quote:
Live Home Cinema? Is that another useless bit of marketing technology like Viiv and Live!, or something that is actually useful?


It's a new thing they're doing with MS. It's part of the Live Home Server thing. You haven't heard about it? HP is supposed to drop boxes as soon as MS releases the OS.
June 5, 2007 1:49:49 PM

No, its actually news to me. Haven't really been keeping up the past few weeks.
June 5, 2007 1:51:17 PM

better option with a blue-ray player is PS3 for $699.

You couldnt build a HTPC with sempron for which includes a blue-ray player and a 7800GTX for that price :lol:  and thats as much of use as the PS3 can be :cry: 
June 5, 2007 2:21:12 PM

Quote:
Don't think they make a dual core Sempron yet.

wes


@ Wes: I was being sarcastic.

@Baron: Yeah, 31C is possible and believable.....15C isn't. Either the room is colder than 15C(F'n freezing) or the chip is idling below room temp(very highly unlikely).

@NovaThunder: My basement only gets down to 18C(and that's in the summer with the central-air crankin' away.....20C in winter). A 15C room is very cold...59C....Burrrrrrrr . He must be a cheapskate with the heating. :wink:
June 5, 2007 2:48:49 PM

Quote:
Don't think they make a dual core Sempron yet.

wes


barcelona is a quad,

intel's quad is consuming over 200 watt. you need to change the stock cooling while it's on full load.

barcelona should be able to use 70 watt and get up to 2.7ghz while

also, don't forget that intel's core duo most important point before the benches were out was it's performance/ watt ratio.

then, these technology leads to performance improvements on both low power technology, normal power technology and high power technology

then, if a business can save over electricity cost over a year, they'll choose low power parts.
June 5, 2007 4:12:14 PM

@tanker....

so was I..... :lol: 

Just thought I would give you some crap..... since the opportunity presented itself :twisted:

wes
June 5, 2007 10:01:02 PM

Quote:
It doesn't really look like it'll be a very good overclocker. I notice they were using 1.50v to get it to run @ 2.5GHz....that's a pretty big bump up from 1.15/1.20v. I think their temp monitoring HW is on the fritz....or they're tesing at the North Pole. :D  Idle temp of 15C/load of 31C?? What's the ambient temp, if it's idling at 15C, or is the stock HS/F now a TEC. :o  That said, it is a step in the right direction WRT lower TDP's.

None of the Energy Efficient Athlons is from all the reviews I have seen up to now...From what I can understand, these are chips that have not been binned to higher frequencies (so they're natively BAD overclockers) but are given a try @ low voltages and some are selected to be sold as EE versions,... these are mostly used in HTPCs and since these are not exactly an overclockers' toy, they're just fine; different assignment, slightly higher price. So at the end, the EEs are definitely the worst OC-ers for sure.
June 6, 2007 3:52:58 AM

Quote:
It doesn't really look like it'll be a very good overclocker. I notice they were using 1.50v to get it to run @ 2.5GHz....that's a pretty big bump up from 1.15/1.20v. I think their temp monitoring HW is on the fritz....or they're tesing at the North Pole. :D  Idle temp of 15C/load of 31C?? What's the ambient temp, if it's idling at 15C, or is the stock HS/F now a TEC. :o  That said, it is a step in the right direction WRT lower TDP's.

None of the Energy Efficient Athlons is from all the reviews I have seen up to now...From what I can understand, these are chips that have not been binned to higher frequencies (so they're natively BAD overclockers) but are given a try @ low voltages and some are selected to be sold as EE versions,... these are mostly used in HTPCs and since these are not exactly an overclockers' toy, they're just fine; different assignment, slightly higher price. So at the end, the EEs are definitely the worst OC-ers for sure.Yeah, i know that's been the concensus with the EE's before, but i guess maybe i figured that the 65nm process would have matured, and given lower wattage parts...that didn't need to be the "bad overclocking" bin. :wink:
June 6, 2007 5:34:53 AM

Quote:
It doesn't really look like it'll be a very good overclocker. I notice they were using 1.50v to get it to run @ 2.5GHz....that's a pretty big bump up from 1.15/1.20v. I think their temp monitoring HW is on the fritz....or they're tesing at the North Pole. :D  Idle temp of 15C/load of 31C?? What's the ambient temp, if it's idling at 15C, or is the stock HS/F now a TEC. :o  That said, it is a step in the right direction WRT lower TDP's.

None of the Energy Efficient Athlons is from all the reviews I have seen up to now...From what I can understand, these are chips that have not been binned to higher frequencies (so they're natively BAD overclockers) but are given a try @ low voltages and some are selected to be sold as EE versions,... these are mostly used in HTPCs and since these are not exactly an overclockers' toy, they're just fine; different assignment, slightly higher price. So at the end, the EEs are definitely the worst OC-ers for sure.

Tell that to my EE 8) :wink:
June 6, 2007 6:07:45 AM

What's not making much sense to me is how much energy these guys are getting on their power consumption.



http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=300...

My X2 3600+ HTPC system takes 80W from the wall fully loaded with folding@home on both cores. I've paired the processor with an AMD690G-based motherboard, and I have one 7200.10 HDD and one DVD burner (not being used at the 80W measurement time). The HDD isn't spun down, and I'd guess it's using 8-10W. I have 2x1GB 800 MHz RAM, which is probably using about 10-15W total. Considering that my PSU is about 80% efficient, 64W of power is being delivered to the electronics, so of this budget I have at most 46W left for the CPU, motherboard, and wireless adapter. Again, the 80W figure is at full CPU load.

The reason Anand's power requirements are so high must be that they've used a 8800GTX graphics card. This card alone can consume twice as much power as my entire computer, so actually I'm impressed that Anand's power consumption numbers aren't even higher. Who's going to run a 8800 and care about the 45W versus 65W TDP rating on the CPU?
June 6, 2007 7:19:39 AM

I'm not seeing the value in these new CPUs. An E4300 can be bought for $100 OEM. I'm not sure what the OEM price of these will be, but I'd take an E4300 for a few dollars more. Same is true of the new E2xxx CPUs. I'd pay a few extra dollars for the extra L2 cache.


@pete4r
I can build a dual core HTPC/gaming system with an HD-DVD drive for under $699. Mine would work on 1080i TVs too!
June 6, 2007 7:28:10 AM

I could easily be swayed towards the E4300, but mostly for overclocking. In that case, energy efficiency isn't the greatest concern anyway, so long as I can manage to keep the CPU cool enough.

Does the $699 figure include the price for Vista? My HTPC runs on ubuntu, but I don't think an HD-DVD drive will be much use to unbuntu users like myself.
June 6, 2007 7:37:25 AM

I think I could include the OS at that priice, Vista premium is about $80.
June 6, 2007 7:45:55 AM

Quote:
It doesn't really look like it'll be a very good overclocker. I notice they were using 1.50v to get it to run @ 2.5GHz....that's a pretty big bump up from 1.15/1.20v. I think their temp monitoring HW is on the fritz....or they're tesing at the North Pole. :D  Idle temp of 15C/load of 31C?? What's the ambient temp, if it's idling at 15C, or is the stock HS/F now a TEC. :o  That said, it is a step in the right direction WRT lower TDP's.

None of the Energy Efficient Athlons is from all the reviews I have seen up to now...From what I can understand, these are chips that have not been binned to higher frequencies (so they're natively BAD overclockers) but are given a try @ low voltages and some are selected to be sold as EE versions,... these are mostly used in HTPCs and since these are not exactly an overclockers' toy, they're just fine; different assignment, slightly higher price. So at the end, the EEs are definitely the worst OC-ers for sure.

Tell that to my EE 8) :wink:o verclocking results are all over the map.

1. HH got 2.5GHz.

2.Viper Lair got 235FSB :wink: x10.5=2468 stable.

3.Anandtech's ..."wouldn't even break 2.4GHz".

4.Tech Report must have got a "golden chip"...as they overclocked theirs to 3003MHz 8O ....though they say "relatively stable"...(not sure what their idea of stable is, though it ran some benches). :wink:
June 6, 2007 8:41:55 AM

ROTF nearly PMP. MMX200, 12xCDP, 64meg, 4Mb Graf, 13"CRT, only 2200 bucks WOOhoo. We toss in 14.4K modem for free!, or 28.8K for 50 dollah. :p 

f61
June 6, 2007 10:27:52 AM

Quote:
I'm not seeing the value in these new CPUs. An E4300 can be bought for $100 OEM. I'm not sure what the OEM price of these will be, but I'd take an E4300 for a few dollars more. Same is true of the new E2xxx CPUs. I'd pay a few extra dollars for the extra L2 cache.


@pete4r
I can build a dual core HTPC/gaming system with an HD-DVD drive for under $699. Mine would work on 1080i TVs too!


1080i is a lot different to 1080p, And HD-DVD is different than Blue-Ray, despite all the differences between the 2 HD format, I would go with Blue-ray for less hassles due to too many standards of manufacturing to HD-DVD. :) 
June 6, 2007 8:04:38 PM

Quote:
It doesn't really look like it'll be a very good overclocker. I notice they were using 1.50v to get it to run @ 2.5GHz....that's a pretty big bump up from 1.15/1.20v. I think their temp monitoring HW is on the fritz....or they're tesing at the North Pole. :D  Idle temp of 15C/load of 31C?? What's the ambient temp, if it's idling at 15C, or is the stock HS/F now a TEC. :o  That said, it is a step in the right direction WRT lower TDP's.

None of the Energy Efficient Athlons is from all the reviews I have seen up to now...From what I can understand, these are chips that have not been binned to higher frequencies (so they're natively BAD overclockers) but are given a try @ low voltages and some are selected to be sold as EE versions,... these are mostly used in HTPCs and since these are not exactly an overclockers' toy, they're just fine; different assignment, slightly higher price. So at the end, the EEs are definitely the worst OC-ers for sure.

Tell that to my EE 8) :wink:o verclocking results are all over the map.

1. HH got 2.5GHz.

2.Viper Lair got 235FSB :wink: x10.5=2468 stable.

3.Anandtech's ..."wouldn't even break 2.4GHz".

4.Tech Report must have got a "golden chip"...as they overclocked theirs to 3003MHz 8O ....though they say "relatively stable"...(not sure what their idea of stable is, though it ran some benches). :wink:

You're right i was just messin lol, but seriously, i was impressed. Actually thats a lie, at first i was impressed, then i got it up to 2.95ghz and it loaded winows but wouldn't run any programs without crashing. Once i got there, i felt like I'd been robbed of my newfound 3ghz goal lol.

When i first bought it, my goal was 2.4, and i blew that away. 8)
June 6, 2007 8:12:50 PM

That looks pretty odd even to me. This contrasts with many other reviews, including the latest one on THG on power consumption; X2s ALWAYS consume less power idling because C'n'Q goes as low as 1.0GHz while SpeedStep stops @ 1.6GHz.
June 6, 2007 8:29:53 PM

I think what we're seeing is that the overall power consumption numbers for all systems are fairly high because the 8800gtx is in there, and then we're seeing that the idle power of the x2 systems are a little high because the p965 chipset is quite efficient (I don't know much about the n590 chipset).
June 6, 2007 9:26:02 PM

Power consumption tests are really hard to put together; even a non-identical PSU can be a very determining factor, not to count the chipset itself like you mention or the even more weighting fact that some motherboards, slightly overvolt the CPU and/or other components like RAM and GPU, producing totally deformed power consumption projections for the CPU.
June 6, 2007 9:32:34 PM

Good point. I'm not saying that AMDs 3600+ is wrong to be rated at 65W... that at least means that OEMs are on the hook for supplying adequate cooling. Also, it makes sense that my particular mobo/PSU may be very good at voltage stability and are setting the right value. My lesson for the week is just how much value a high-efficiency PSU is. I figure I could save 40W by switching out my DT's 65% efficient PSU for one that's 80% efficient.

I suppose the only way I could draw a hard conclusion about these new 45W parts, then, would be to see the tests for one in an identical system to my own. If they can shave off a few watts from what I've got here, then power to them.
!