Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What s the difference between the phenom 9500 and 9600 besides .1 ghz?

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Chip
  • AMD
  • Phenom
  • Product
Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 8, 2007 1:12:19 AM

What s the difference between the phenom 9500 and 9600 besides .1 ghz?

Im sooo confused, u mean to tell me AMD put out another phenom chip that its only difference is .1 ghz and about 50 bucksss???!!!

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=E...

Im sad now...and does anyone know when the 3.0 ghz phenom is coming out???

More about : difference phenom 9500 9600 ghz

December 8, 2007 1:20:34 AM

9600 also has a special feature that 9500 doesn't have: higher probability of meeting the TLB errata.

3.0Ghz Phenom? I guess you'll have to wait until AMD implemented HK/MG on their 45nm process, before 3.0Ghz stock Phenom chip is feasible.
December 8, 2007 2:37:48 AM

amd is really starting to annoy the SH@T!!!! out of me how does a company make a 2.3ghz desktop processor. What are people even doing with this thing? A bunch of processes really slowly. It doesn't make any sense to me. If an AMD person was here their shin would really hurt cause I would have kicked it hours ago...
Related resources
December 8, 2007 2:38:41 AM

boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
December 8, 2007 2:39:20 AM

AMD I still love U...just be better and stop making me look bad! :) 
December 8, 2007 5:29:36 AM

Spamming as always I see...even in your own thread :) 

I agree that the 9600 is pointless. It should be at least .2ghz difference, but I think AMD is trying to make as much money as possible. Or there could be a large batch of chips that couldn't clock to 2.4ghz or higher so they left it at 2.3ghz.
December 8, 2007 2:26:30 PM

yomamafor1 said:
9600 also has a special feature that 9500 doesn't have: higher probability of meeting the TLB errata.

3.0Ghz Phenom? I guess you'll have to wait until AMD implemented HK/MG on their 45nm process, before 3.0Ghz stock Phenom chip is feasible.



Yeah because they can't possibly cherry-pick enough of the 3GHz chips they've been demoing for 3 months.
December 8, 2007 2:28:36 PM

ryanthesav said:
AMD I still love U...just be better and stop making me look bad! :) 



How could a CPU company make you look bad? Don't you mean this is happening because the Brood HAS to tell dumb jokes now that AMD is a LITTLE slower but still fast enough to make most "wins" hardly noticeable in use cases.
December 8, 2007 2:30:14 PM

Evilonigiri said:
Spamming as always I see...even in your own thread :) 

I agree that the 9600 is pointless. It should be at least .2ghz difference, but I think AMD is trying to make as much money as possible. Or there could be a large batch of chips that couldn't clock to 2.4ghz or higher so they left it at 2.3ghz.



I wouldn't say pointless. $40 can make a difference. Some people will choose 9500 and put the $40 elsewhere and some will buy the 9600 and one less game or something.
December 9, 2007 6:20:01 AM

BaronMatrix said:
Yeah because they can't possibly cherry-pick enough of the 3GHz chips they've been demoing for 3 months.


So Baron, how many 3Ghz chips does AMD have at the moment?
December 9, 2007 6:37:46 AM

yomamafor1 said:
So Baron, how many 3Ghz chips does AMD have at the moment?


Didn't you hear? Rahul Sood is hoarding them all. Apparently, it's a 'stone cold killer'. :lol: 

December 9, 2007 10:35:14 AM

Don't bother with either, just get a superior Intel Q6600.
December 9, 2007 1:27:55 PM

Must really suck to be an AMD Fanboy right now....

How's about ya'll ditch your preferences and instead purchase what performs best at a certain price point that meets your budget?

Phenom.. pffft.. it's the crappiest product since rubber crap started making the rounds in joke/novelty stores.
December 9, 2007 4:11:22 PM

AnGeLuS69 said:
How's about ya'll ditch your preferences and instead purchase what performs best at a certain price point that meets your budget?

Well, some people are fanboys for a reason. For example, maybe in the past they bought an intel and had a really bad experience from them...like their pc caught on fire and burned the house down :D  In that case, that person would swear never to buy Intel again. So what other cpu manufacturer is there besides Intel? AMD...
December 9, 2007 4:27:24 PM

ryanthesav said:
What s the difference between the phenom 9500 and 9600 besides .1 ghz?
Im sooo confused, u mean to tell me AMD put out another phenom chip that its only difference is .1 ghz and about 50 bucksss???!!!


Hey... it could have been worse... They could have charged $10 per 10mhz... think of it that you got half off. :oops: . o O (oh nm)
December 9, 2007 4:31:34 PM

i'm not exactly a fanboy but i do have a very strong preferance. ****, for 56 dollars i can get a 3800+ with the f3 stepping and overclock it to outperform a 6400+. what's intel got like that for $56??
December 9, 2007 4:39:12 PM

lambofgode3x said:
i'm not exactly a fanboy but i do have a very strong preferance. ****, for 56 dollars i can get a 3800+ with the f3 stepping and overclock it to outperform a 6400+. what's intel got like that for $56??


I'm guessing you mean this. I don't know if I've ever seen it OC'd to the 6400+ level, but if it can do that then congratulations.

This would be Intel's equivalent offering. Which by the way, should reach something like 2.66 - 3.2 GHz (depending on how good the processor is). That would give that 3800+ and even the 6400+ a run for it's money in most benchmarks.
December 9, 2007 4:46:33 PM

ryanthesav said:
Im sad now...and does anyone know when the 3.0 ghz phenom is coming out???


45nm perhaps?
December 9, 2007 4:47:59 PM

lambofgode3x said:
i'm not exactly a fanboy but i do have a very strong preferance. ****, for 56 dollars i can get a 3800+ with the f3 stepping and overclock it to outperform a 6400+. what's intel got like that for $56??


A dual core Celeron coming out next month. Supposed to be quite the performer.
December 9, 2007 4:50:15 PM

BaronMatrix said:
How could a CPU company make you look bad? Don't you mean this is happening because the Brood HAS to tell dumb jokes now that AMD is a LITTLE slower but still fast enough to make most "wins" hardly noticeable in use cases.



LOL.

That's funny Chrissy.


If AMD won all those benchmarks by the margin that Intel's quads beat AMD's quads you'd be running through the streets of New York City naked.


But since AMD is the one that is lagging behind and RECALLED you say that it is unnoticeable. Nice.
December 9, 2007 4:52:32 PM

lambofgode3x said:
i'm not exactly a fanboy but i do have a very strong preferance. ****, for 56 dollars i can get a 3800+ with the f3 stepping and overclock it to outperform a 6400+. what's intel got like that for $56??

Pssst... I betcha the 3800+ couldn't do this that the 6400+ can achieve:

CPU : AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400+

Heh.. wonder what cooling they did, and how stable it is. Still nice OC.
December 9, 2007 5:22:00 PM

Grimmy said:
Pssst... I betcha the 3800+ couldn't do this that the 6400+ can achieve

What makes you say that? Because of the 65nm architecture leaks?
December 9, 2007 6:00:52 PM

Evilonigiri said:
What makes you say that? Because of the 65nm architecture leaks?


Umm... not my fault 65nm needs to go to the bathroom when its pushed.... :sweat:  . o O (Oh.. nm)
!