New 45nm AMD CPUs Coming in Q3 2009
AMD plans to move its production line to the 45nm manufacturing node in Q3 while releasing a few new 45nm processors before the end of the year.
In an attempt to reduce costs, AMD plans to move its production line to the 45nm manufacturing in Q3 of this year. The Sunnyvale, California-based chipmaker already has two products currently using the next-generation processing: the quad-core Phenom II X4 800 and 900 series (Deneb), and the triple-core Phenom II X3 700 series (Heka). From a price and performance standpoint, these two processors have helped AMD compete against its main competitor, Intel, in the CPU market currently dominated by the rival chipmaker.
However, AMD is moving additional CPUs over to the 45nm processing as well, starting with the dual-core Phenom II X2 500 series (Callisto), and the Athlon II X2 200 series in June. By September, AMD will have added the quad-core Athlon II X4 600 series and triple-core Athlon II X3 400 series (Rana) processors. These should help AMD fend off Intel's assault when the rival company launches its three quad-core Lynnfield CPUs in the third quarter.
In addition to moving its desktop CPUs over to 45nm, AMD also has plans to launch several CPUs between Q2 and Q3 2009, most notably with the dual-core Phenom II X2 550 and 545 hitting the market by the end of the second quarter. The third quarter will see a large helping of new AMD releases: the quad-core Phenom II X4 945 (95W) and 8xx (95W), the triple-core Phenom II X3 7xx (95W), the quad-core Athlon II X4 630 and 620, the triple-core Athlon II X3 435 and 425, and the dual-core Athlon II X2 250, 245, and 240.
According to DigiTimes, there are also plans to release ten low-power consumption CPUs as well, including AMD's Phenom II X4 905e, Phenom II X3 705e and Athlon II X4 605e. These round out to a relatively great release schedule for the second half of 2009. A little competition between companies only means better products for the consumer.
Go yell at Intel's marketing team for not releasing info, not Toms for not making sh*t up.
lol dude the mainstream does not need an i7 or even a high end i5,heck a gamer would be very well satisfied with a 940 be,the phenom 2 processors offer optimal performance at solid price points,the i7 really only beats the phenom 2 in multi tasking and most ppl dont even notice these differences in the real world unless they r enthusiasts or professional video editors,you talk as if just because the i7 is more powerful everyone should buy that,you are probably one of those moronic "gamers" who goes out and buys the gtx 295 to play on a 17 inch monitor,fuk outta here
I stopped reading right there because you obviously have no clue what you are talking about. The Phenom II is a excellent processor and is very competitive with current Intel processors in performance at their current price ranges.
I just purchased a X4 955 BE because it was killing Intel processors at the same price segment and actually comes close to or outperforms the i7 in the areas that matter to me. (Gaming and multimedia are the X4 955's strong points.) I could not justify an extra $150 to buy the i7 when the performance that matters to me is very close between the two.
Get your facts straight before coming on here and spouting you senseless rantings.
but really Tom's - it is nearly the end of the month and I still haven't seen news on the new core i7's that I thought were supposed to be released at the end of May. Do we really have to wait until the day they come out to hear about them and research them? Is it that bad to tell us about them a little bit early so we can start making decisions on them? grrr - I've been waiting for THAT news for a while which I thought this article was about at first split second glance then read the 3rd word - AMD.
According to a couple different sources, the difference will be that the Phenom line with have an L3 cache, when the lower end Athlons will not.
Go yell at Intel's marketing team for not releasing info, not Toms for not making sh*t up.
L3 cache. read my previous post.
I was under the impression that the new Athlon II processors lacked L3 and are based on the original Phenom design, not the Phenom II. Could some one confirm if this is the case or not at Tom's?
The i7 ass-rapes anything AMD can produce, and there's really no way for AMD to compete. It's not just better, it's so much better, and it's not even any bigger. AMD has a seriously bad design on their hands, so more iterations of this bad design are not going to really cause Intel to lose sleep. AMD will get the crumbs Intel does not want, like a scavenging dog hiding under the table hoping something will fall.
When the i5 is released, and moves downstream, AMD will have to move even lower on the food chain. They should stop trying to compete against the Nehalem, for the simple reason they can't.
I'd like to see them put some real effort in dual cores, real dual cores, not sodomized quad-cores that are too expensive to sell profitably as a dual-core. Although a PoS design, the Phenom II comes closer to the Penryn than it does the Nehalem, and with a big cache, and some high clock speeds, they might eek out an existence there until they can come out with the Bulldozer, which hopefully can compete in a meaningful way.
They should try to win market share where the processor doesn't matter. Where the processor is important, Intel will win because it's much better. Much better. But, if they can make the processors cheap enough, they can still sell them cheap enough and make money. They also make good integrated graphics platforms, so that gives them a real advantage over Intel in the platform. But, really, they should forget about performance and focus on cheap right now. When the Bulldozer comes, then move back up. With the pathetic Phenom II, it's just not going to work. It's amazing it's the same size as the i7, and gets destroyed by it by such a wide margin. It's shameful.
I stopped reading right there because you obviously have no clue what you are talking about. The Phenom II is a excellent processor and is very competitive with current Intel processors in performance at their current price ranges.
I just purchased a X4 955 BE because it was killing Intel processors at the same price segment and actually comes close to or outperforms the i7 in the areas that matter to me. (Gaming and multimedia are the X4 955's strong points.) I could not justify an extra $150 to buy the i7 when the performance that matters to me is very close between the two.
Get your facts straight before coming on here and spouting you senseless rantings.
lol dude the mainstream does not need an i7 or even a high end i5,heck a gamer would be very well satisfied with a 940 be,the phenom 2 processors offer optimal performance at solid price points,the i7 really only beats the phenom 2 in multi tasking and most ppl dont even notice these differences in the real world unless they r enthusiasts or professional video editors,you talk as if just because the i7 is more powerful everyone should buy that,you are probably one of those moronic "gamers" who goes out and buys the gtx 295 to play on a 17 inch monitor,fuk outta here
There is a big difference between enthusiast and fanboi.
You’re as bad as those who justified buying Intel chips during the net burst era.
There was nothing fanboyish about my comment. Go read the reviews here at Tom's and other sites and you will see what I wrote is absolutely correct.
BTW, I own Intel processors too.
I will be looking forward to the new price points. I don't know if anyone has the links, but Xbits has the dual core specs and a few benchies here
@ta152h...Not everyone wants to pay twice the price for a 20% or 30% increase on benchies. We live in the real world.