"Athlenom X2 divined, benchmarketed" (TheINQ)

[dattimr]

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,658316/PCGH_Review_AMD_Phenom_X2_GE-6600_GE-6500_and_GE-6400/?page=1

FOLLOWING NEWS OF AMD’s imminent launch of Phenom X2s or Athlon X2 with Phenom cores (things are still a bit confusing, it seems), PC Games Hardware has come up with a way to demonstrate performance on this new processor. They knocked off two of the cores in an X4 and ran the tests as 6400-, 6500- and 6600 rated CPUs… and you know what? It wasn’t at all bad. PCGH says a 2.3GHz Phenom-based X2 will match the performance of the Athlon X2 6000+. You should take this with a grain of salt, as from what we’ve seen, the X2’s HT is lower than higher-end Phenom X4s (ie: 3600 vs 4000), so performance isn’t just cutting the cores in half and benching them. Read about it here.

Quote and title are courtesies from The Inquirer (http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/09/01/dailywibble-01-09-2008).

 

[jimmysmitty]

I like the title hehe. Athlenom. Funny.

So its about on a clock per clock basis with the older Core 2 on the 1066 FSB? The 6500 is just behind the C2D E6600.

But then again it did say that the HT on these will be lowe and that may affect the performance a bit so what we se here may not be the real performance but just like with the Phenom X3 early reviews, just a guesstimate.

 

[Mathos]

The HT difference wont effect too much, more dependent on the IMC speed still being 1800mhz or 2000mhz. If it's on clock for clock competition with the older conroe core2's thats not bad actually. And with an SB750 board maybe we can even see some decent OCes out of them. Maybe one running at 3ghz or so could put up a fight for the newer penryn models if it's the right price.

 

[turpit]

I find that pretty sad. If its remotely accurate, the "new" AMD dual cores only barely "compete" with Intels 3 year old C2Ds, and are still bested by AMDS own 90nm tech.

I hope they are priced accordingly as at this point, they are entry level only. No one with an older X2 6000 will see these as an upgrade.

 

[amdfangirl]

^ In some apps it may be, but not in most...

I like the title hehe. Athlenom. Funny.

So its about on a clock per clock basis with the older Core 2 on the 1066 FSB? The 6500 is just behind the C2D E6600.

But then again it did say that the HT on these will be lowe and that may affect the performance a bit so what we se here may not be the real performance but just like with the Phenom X3 early reviews, just a guesstimate.

You don't really know... I'd wait for real K10 Athlon X2 benchmarks before I decide anything... this kinda stuff can easily be faked or inaccurate... by benchmarks I mean real world stuff...

 

[Hellboy]

I find that pretty sad. If its remotely accurate, the "new" AMD dual cores only barely "compete" with Intels 3 year old C2Ds, and are still bested by AMDS own 90nm tech.

I hope they are priced accordingly as at this point, they are entry level only. No one with an older X2 6000 will see these as an upgrade.

Hey Turpit,,

Maybe its a Quad core with two duff cores.... and Thunderman will come on and say how much of a technological advancement it is....

Its sad that if these scores are true that a 6000+ beats a "6400", cant wait for the black edition then...


Not even worthy of the Athlon name in imho...

Should be the new Sempron... at least it would be more dignifiable as a low end chip and not try to make it something it is not...

How about a Semphenom...

 

[B-Unit]

I find that pretty sad. If its remotely accurate, the "new" AMD dual cores only barely "compete" with Intels 3 year old C2Ds, and are still bested by AMDS own 90nm tech.

I hope they are priced accordingly as at this point, they are entry level only. No one with an older X2 6000 will see these as an upgrade.

*Scratches head*

2.3Ghz = 3.0 Ghz is now 'bested'? WTF are you smoking and why do you not share?

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Thats about current difference between new Intel and old athlons, 700mhz. If this is true, itll be a good cpu, provided it gets above 2.6

 

[radnor]

*Scratches head*

2.3Ghz = 3.0 Ghz is now 'bested'? WTF are you smoking and why do you not share?

He does not share, because we are already many, and it is getting scarce.

I guess for its specs it is a good CPU. Shouldn't get too much overclock of it, unless you buy a BE. Anyway should have a very low TDP, and in a competitive pricing substituting the 90nm and 65nm parts. Again, i see no bad in this logic.

They might not make much of a profit in these X2, but i can see them increasing the total margins. If they were scraped, they were a total loss. Now, they get some (if not all) money back and can increase production. Producing Barcys, Tolimans, and these...Athlons. All in the same wafer.

Seems good.

 

[trinix]

It's more the question what cpu is it. Is it the brisbane 6500 X2 or is it the phenom 6500. I heard both of them, one at 2.3 ghz and one at 3.3/3.4 ghz. Let's wait for the real thing to arrive.

 

[radnor]

It's more the question what cpu is it. Is it the brisbane 6500 X2 or is it the phenom 6500. I heard both of them, one at 2.3 ghz and one at 3.3/3.4 ghz. Let's wait for the real thing to arrive.

Yeah, well. Lets hope it is the Phenom part. Can't see any advantage in changing production lines and change design. Even if it was a 65nm part. But hey, like ya said, lets wait and see.

 

[turpit]

*Scratches head*

2.3Ghz = 3.0 Ghz is now 'bested'? WTF are you smoking and why do you not share?

The increase in IPC is great, but go to the store and buy the best Phenom X2 (when they are released) and the best Athlon X2, benchmark them and see whats faster. If this 'divination' is anywhere near accurate (which is highly questionable) then the best the Phenom X2s will be will be bested by the 90nm X2s, so yes it is pretty disapointing.

Now, if (and it is an if) they can and do release higher clocked Phenom X2s, then there will be a point to them. For the moment, at these clocks, there doesnt seem to be a lot of point unless they are selling the current lot at clearance sale prices....below the 90nm X2s. This is certainly possible because of the reduction in die size, but that assumes these are masked die duals and not crippled quads. It should be a masked die, but at those clockspeeds, honestly, they look like crippled B2 stepping quads. As I said in another thread, the "native" dual cores were on the road map, so no real point in guessing or marking assertions until more information is released....if it is released.

For that fact of the matter, even this divination, no matter how they performed it, it suspect and therefor the actual parts may be better or worse. We wont know until the actual retail parts hit the shelves.

But as it sits based on this, why bother buying a slower CPU unless its cheaper? I havent seen prices yet, have you?

 

[shaundwm]

IMO I just see this as a way for AMD to sell off it's defective Quads and make some turnover while offering additional cheap low-end solutions to customers who do not want to invest in a Quad.

It can only be a good thing for both parties, AMD increases it's 'effective' yeild of chips, and consumer gets another cheap CPU option