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.
- Media Companies to Pirate Bay: We Want More $$
- Microsoft Cancels EU Antitrust Hearing
- Apple Faced With Protesters in Taipei
- QOTD: What's the Oldest Console You Still Play?
- Cool Your PC or Laptop with Ionic Wind
- Researchers Find Way to Put 1.6 TB on a DVD
- Microsoft Penalized $200M for Word XML Patent
- Pirate Bay Bias Reviewer Removed for Bias
- Firefox Changing Logo to be More Fiery, Less Hairy
- U.S. Marshals Run Outdated Antivirus, Get Infected
- Intel's Linux-based Moblin 2.0 OS Goes Open Beta
- QOTD: Which Steve: Ballmer or Jobs?
- • Women Attracted to Scent of Anti-Static Bags
- • 7 Gaming Systems that Were Epic Failures
- • Teachers Twitter Lessons for Jaded Youths
- • AMD to Win Cyberdyne Systems CPU Contract
- Tom's Hardware Italy Lands 3DMark Hall of Fame
- Microsoft to Invest $80M in Advertising "BING"
Ok so I know this an AMD article and this announcement is cool and all -
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.
Whats the difference between these new dual core phenoms x2 and athlon x2? It seems theres gonna be a lot of options for cpu buyers. It seems kinda confusing right now.
Whats the difference between these new dual core phenoms x2 and athlon x2? It seems theres gonna be a lot of options for cpu buyers. It seems kinda confusing right now.
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.
Ok so I know this an AMD article and this announcement is cool and all - 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.
Go yell at Intel's marketing team for not releasing info, not Toms for not making sh*t up.
OH YAYAYAYAY 45NM I'M SO HAPPY I CANT WAIT TILL THEY COME OUT!! I'M GOING TO SWITCH MY WHOLE SYSTEM OVER TO AMD!!!!!! YAAAAAAAAAAY
What, a quad-core Athlon! This is starting to look pretty damn good, but I wonder how they'll differentiate the Phenom X4 and Athlon X4, and what the prices would be.
Jesus, they plan launching alot of CPUs lol ... i dont even know what to get now omfg .
What, a quad-core Athlon! This is starting to look pretty damn good, but I wonder how they'll differentiate the Phenom X4 and Athlon X4, and what the prices would be.
L3 cache. read my previous post.
I may be wrong, but I believe I've also heard the Phenom II has better clock efficiency compared to the Athlons.
I may be wrong, but I believe I've also heard the Phenom II has better clock efficiency compared to the Athlons.
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?
Athlon Quads eh? Now I actually wouldnt mind going up to a Quad.
The AthlonII chips are PhenomII's with no L3 cache.
How is this more competition? AMD is going to release more processors based on a bad design, and this going to make life more difficult for Intel?
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.
ta152h said it right, Sadly. The only "real" thing that AMD have against Intel is the integrated Graphics.
How is this more competition? AMD is going to release more processors based on a bad design
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.
Good they need to stop using up all that silicone making their obese sized chips vs to intel quad cores..
How is this more competition? AMD is going to release more processors based on a bad design,
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
@soonerproud
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.
@guk
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.
Definetly interesting...
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.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/c [...] x2_2.html] I don't know why the link didn't pop up. Hopefully it works this time.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/c [...] -x2_2.html
SOrry about that. Here is is. Don't know what happened to the url tags when you use the link button. Sorry for the repeat posts.
From the sounds of this we will be able to put together some spectacular budget overclocker systems this summer. I don't think that AMD is even aiming to out perform the Core i7 at this point, their engineers probably work with sensibility in mind. Whats the point of making a car that can move 300mph when so few people are capable of driving one that fast.
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.
Sooner, no offense, but you don't know anything about processors. The Phenom II is the same size as the i7, and doesn't even approach the performance of it. It's roughly as expensive to make, can not clock as high, and has much lower IPC. How is that anything but a bad design?
AMD has to price them very low, and against Intel's previous generation. The problem is, they are losing money by doing so. It's because the bad design forces them to do this. It's so inferior to the i7, and as Intel moves the Nehalem mainstream it's going to get even tougher. The Phenom II can't even compete clock normalized with the Core 2, and it's a much larger chip.
So, really, try to learn before you post.
Sooner, no offense, but you don't know anything about processors. The Phenom II is the same size as the i7, and doesn't even approach the performance of it. It's roughly as expensive to make, can not clock as high, and has much lower IPC. How is that anything but a bad design? AMD has to price them very low, and against Intel's previous generation. The problem is, they are losing money by doing so. It's because the bad design forces them to do this. It's so inferior to the i7, and as Intel moves the Nehalem mainstream it's going to get even tougher. The Phenom II can't even compete clock normalized with the Core 2, and it's a much larger chip. So, really, try to learn before you post.
I am very aware of the deficiencies of AMD's processor design and don't need schooled on the subject. AMD is behind Intel on process technology, but considering the lack of resources compared to Intel the PHII is a very well designed processor. If AMD had Intel's resources, don't you think they would have these issues worked out already? Besides, AMD is not positioning these processors against Intel's high end. They are positioning them against the mainstream segment, which they are very competetive with.
One point you are incorrect on is in some areas the PHII does approach the i7 in performance. If AMD added SMT much like Intel's HT technology, it would be very competetive with the i7 in a lot more benchies.
You should be less condescending to people because they may know more than you think they do.
@sooner
"I am very aware of the deficiencies of AMD's processor design"
"If AMD added SMT much like Intel's HT technology, it would be very competetive"
"AMD is behind Intel on process technology"
Knowing all this you said
"I just purchased a X4 955 BE"
And you don't think you're a FANBOI???
@sumgk
The only people coming off as fanbois are you condescending and arrogant posters.
I purchased the X4 955BE because IT WAS THE BEST PERFORMING PROCESSOR IN IT'S PRICE RANGE AND WAS A EXCELLENT VALUE! With this economy, I could not justify the extra $150 it would cost to upgrade to the X58/i7 platform for very little to no and sometimes LESS PERFORMANCE in the areas I care about. Only fanbois would knock someone for making a wise purchase. I looked at Intel processors in the same price range and they were LACKING IN PERFORMANCE COMPARED TO THE PHII. To get the same performance on the LGA 775 platform, I would have to spend more money I did not have to spend.
Please stop responding to my post if you aregoingto resort to name calling and confront me with a condescending attitude. I will not answer post from you Intel fanbois if you are goingto be rude.
wow.... who actually cares about the news? its all AMD or INTEL!
and just annoy the **** out of everyone who DARES to comment...
what for? at least some people are giving usefull information
@soonerproude
You lit the flames by responding (to someone who wasn't even talking too you) when you posted
"I stopped reading right there because you obviously have no clue what you are talking about"
And
"Get your facts straight before coming on here and spouting you senseless rantings"
And you did this, all in the name of justifying your purchase (of what you clearing concede is an inferior product)
As far as using the lame "in this economy" argument.
If you are broke, no big deal. But instead of trying to be an enthusiast
"Dude, you should have bought a Dell"
How is this more competition? AMD is going to release more processors based on a bad design, and this going to make life more difficult for Intel?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 love it when nerds try to compare dick sizes
@sumyco: My beef is not with ta152h as he posted in kind to the way I posted to him, but was not calling me names or accusing me of being something I'm not. I never called him names or a fanboi.
My beef is with posters like you who put people down and resort to name calling.
Again, it is not an inferior product to the processors it is in direct competition with. I never conceded it was inferior to the Intel processors in it's price range. Stop trying imply something I never said to begin with.
If you are broke, no big deal. But instead of trying to be an enthusiast
"Dude, you should have bought a Dell"
This is precisely the condescending and arrogant attitude I am talking about here. I am an enthusiast and I know many enthusiast, including Intel fans that love these processors from AMD. Just because you are blinded by loyalty to anything Intel, does not mean the rest of us should be. You should be grateful that there is competition in the CPU market. Do you honestly think that you would have the Core 2's or the i7 processors without the pressure AMD put on Intel a few years ago?
The economy argument is not lame when there is 8.9% unemployment and people are trying to stretch every dollar. It is only lame to insensitive people who could care less about the suffering of others.
If Dell built a PC the way I wanted at the price I was willing to pay for it, I would buy one in a heart beat. The reality is I got far more PC for my money than Dell could provide at the same cost I paid.