AMD Athlon II X4

Nashsafc

Distinguished
May 13, 2009
1,142
0
19,310
Does any one have any information on this processor. By that i mean whether it is better than the current phenoms at the same frequency? If these new Athlon II X4s don't have a new better architecture compared to the current phenom's then they are truely rubbish, lol. There is no way how they can compete with Intel's speed performance, they end up just raising the frequency and still don't understand why intel processors are faster. Unless they have been brought out at a cheap price and have good performance for their price, or that when they come out they decrease the prices of the currently top Phenom 955 and 965 processors I would see the point in them. I'm neutral, i see the uses of both AMD and Intel.
 

Helloworld_98

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2009
3,371
0
20,790
what are you on about?

the Athlon II X4 is just a Phenom II with a lower clock, lower wattage and no L3 cache.

and the Phenom II's aren't rubbish, it's competing with the i7 920 in nearly everything.

 

Nashsafc

Distinguished
May 13, 2009
1,142
0
19,310
I mean that AMD should not come out with processors any worse than the current phenoms. The current phenoms are good but i really want them to be improved upon so that they can at least come close to the intel i7 920 without just having to increase their processors' frequency speed.
 

Nashsafc

Distinguished
May 13, 2009
1,142
0
19,310
O right i thought the Athlon II x4s were something new, but why would they need to produce new slower processors? Are they any better than the current phenoms at the same frequency speed. Is it just that they are more energy efficient?
 

Nashsafc

Distinguished
May 13, 2009
1,142
0
19,310
I thought that there were many processors out there like the cheaper phenoms, core 2 quads which did the job. Couldn't they decrease the prices of those, or are these new athlon processors actually meant to be better than the previous AMD processors like the phenom 9650. Are they any much of an improvement in performance or at a cheaper price compared to the older phenoms? Otherwise it wouldn't make much sense if an Athlon II X4 which runs the same speed as an older phenom and costs pretty much the same was brought out. Is it pretty much the same architecture as well?
 


AMD is just trying to address the low-end. Intel does the same thing, they come out with processors that are slower, with less cache than existing ones.

I do think that the low-end is rather well saturated, especially because AMD is just now getting to the upper-midrange with their Phenom two offerings. Phenom II does offer a great alternative to Core I7 because of motherboard pricing and choices.
 

Nashsafc

Distinguished
May 13, 2009
1,142
0
19,310
Do you know if this year AMD will be bringing out any faster chips, faster than the Phenom II 965? I think that if they are thinking of producing any better processors, they should think about producing a new architecture. AMD still hasn't really matched core 2 Quad's architecture, as they have to produce higher frequency processors to be able just to par with the q9650. Hopefully in the coming months or next year it will be interesting, or even frustrating to see if AMD are going to produce a new architecture for their processors to at least be behind the i7 920 a bit for mass multi-tasking and games. The difference between Intel and AMD's best processor is massive, huge, i still think AMD should still be trying to appeal to the most demanding customers.
 
AMD is going to be stuck in the current architecture for a while (1 to 1.5 years I believe). There's a lot of research and investment that goes into developing one.

The majority of the market is low end to low-mid range products. This would be all the Dell's, HP's, and Lenovos of the world that gobble up chips. The issue with AMD is that they are not profitting currently. They are selling their top-binning desktop processors for $200, and everything else is going for even less. Intel sells the top binning processors for $1000+ and the stuff that didn't make the cut competes against AMD in the $200 range. Intel also has a nice upper-mid range (the Core I7s that are sub $1,000).

I do agree, AMD needs to be much more competitive so they can be a industry performance leader, but their main issue right now is finding a way to profit. Some disagree with me, but I think AMD is on the endangered species list and needs to break even. If they continue losses of 250M and 300M each quarter I don't see how they'll make it to see 2011.
 

amnotanoobie

Distinguished
Aug 27, 2006
1,493
0
19,360
I do agree with TC, it may be in AMD's best interest to create something new and something faster, but their wallets are telling otherwise.

I think AMD may be trying out Intel's strategy, introducing a hell-of-a-lot of models to saturate the market in order for them to be less forced to drop prices on their premiere products. Or they could just be trying to saturate the lower end market as that is where the money could be going in these tight times. But that's just me conspiring :D
 

sanchz

Distinguished
Mar 2, 2009
272
0
18,810
I do see the point in releasing Athlon II X4 CPUs, I think they'll be the same as Phenom I in terms of performance but with a much needed TDP decrease. They will do great with OEMs, and I think AMD should definitely release a Turion II X4 (mobile version) based off these Athlons, since there'll be 2.3GHz 45w desktop models!!!
 

Nashsafc

Distinguished
May 13, 2009
1,142
0
19,310
Quoting "But their main issue right now is finding a way to profit. I think AMD is on the endangered species list and needs to break even"

I like the way you say finding a way to profit and endangered species lol. But how are AMD doing on the graphics side, AMD own ATI do they not? Do they recieve all the profits or just own a percentage of the company ATI? I think AMD are doing slightly better on the graphics side than the processor side, maybe because Nvidia are overpriced. .
 

Upendra09

Distinguished
when are they releasing the Athlon II x4? i have been waiting for one, they said it would be released on the 23rd but not yet.

AMD is going to get their money from the DX11 cards that ATI will be coming out with soon.

AMD really needs to speed up bulldozer and lower the prices on the Athlon II and up range, just a bit more to appeal to more cinsumers, and get something out that competes against the e5200, then they would get some big sales.
 


Yes, AMD really does need to get their new stuff out quickly, but lowering prices is a catch 22:

AMD needs to profit. To profit they need more market share. To get more market share they lower prices, but that makes them profit even less... They need to break the cycle with an architecture that competes with Intel in every segment (mainly referring to high end).
 

Nashsafc

Distinguished
May 13, 2009
1,142
0
19,310
As i heard something wise someone said. "If it weren't for AMD, Intel's prices would be soo high it would be unbearable, it's thanks to AMD that Intel keep their prices that they are now". Did the single core AMD processors use to be faster than the single core Intel processors?
 


Back in the pre- Core 2 Duo days AMD was king. They had better products at lower thermals and the performance crown as well. Both AMD and Intel drove innovation with their fierce competition. That competition was nearly dead and it wasn't until Phenom II that we saw signs of life from AMD.

Of course, this is all in my humble opinion.
 

radnor

Distinguished
Apr 9, 2008
1,021
0
19,290


Cacheless phenoms seems a good Idea. Lack of L3 and L3 related systems should reduce Die size alot. Their binning/harvesting seems to be improving on Shangai 45nm, and ive read on unrealiable sources (Ex. Fudzilla) that thy will be priced sub 100$.

A Sub 100€ Quaddie ? OEMs rejoice !!!

Now if they pulled this stunt on the laptop arena was really cool.
 

Nashsafc

Distinguished
May 13, 2009
1,142
0
19,310
But i thought Athlon x2 was really rubbish. I had a Athlon 5000+, the Core 2 Duo at the same frequency was much better. Oh do you mean in price terms, that AMD had much cheaper processors for the same frequency? But the performance was still massively behind. It seems like with Intel you pay more for a better processor. The core 2 duo is much better than the Athlon x2, regardless to how much cheaper the athlon x2 costs.
 

Nashsafc

Distinguished
May 13, 2009
1,142
0
19,310
Oh yeah right you mean pre core 2 lol. Silly me. You mean for the same frequency processor AMD had a faster processor compared to intel. Celleron must have been really *** lol, if it was the cheaper version of the intel, and sempron must have been as good as a pentium, or slightly inferior?
 

radnor

Distinguished
Apr 9, 2008
1,021
0
19,290


Brisbane wasn't that bad for the price. The New K8 45nm are excelent for the price.

They are competitive for the price. On the other hand my new 955@3.5ghz Stock VID is pretty handy at cracking PDF passwords. atm, for my Mrs that is a life saver. Dam those demons from the office that can't type.