If AMD doen't match Intel's Core i7's performance then they shouldn't charge high prices for the Phenom FX processor.It would be a bad move and AMD will sell very few of them.If a 3 Ghz Phenom FX has slightly less performance than a $300 2.66 Ghz Intel Core i7 the price should match it's performance in other words it should be around the $250 price range.

maybe they hope to have chips that'll be competitive on the performance side as well. Otherwise the usage of the FX suffix wouldn't really make any sense... well we'll see

well thats a good point but if this processor is made off of denab and if denab can oc well. the fx processor will be a hit with its unlocked multiplier. but still i think the processor should be under 350 if it is just as good as core i7

Part of the rumor states that the Phenom FX chips will over clock between 4.0-4.4Ghz on iar while using the HT3 interconnect. If that is true then AMD could charge a premium for these chips. Keep in mind that cherry picked 65nm Phenom's from early last year could run 3.0Ghz on air with no issues. So although it sounds far fetched, there could be some truth to the rumors.

I forgot to mention that most of the current Phenom Processors can easily clock to 3.2-3.4Ghz on the 790 chipset. Without exotic cooling.

Engineering samples of the Denebs only overclock to about 3.6 GHz so far, at least from what I have seen. That will probably change slightly by the time they're actually for sale, but let's be realistic here. They are still the same architecture that hasn't fared too well against Core 2. Their tri-cores aren't even as good as lower end dual-core Core 2s. This isn't going to compete with Core i7, overclocked or not. Considering how long it's going to be until they come out now, I'll be surprised if it even matches 45nm Core 2s, as those have already matured at this point, and will have over a full year lead by that time.

It's probably just high binned chips with a different socket type for a new dual CPU socket desktop board. To my knowledge, that's what the Phenom FX line was intended to be to begin with, before it was delayed.

AMD has watered down the term "Black Edition" so much with chips that did not really offer anything more than non "BE" chips since their stock speeds were close to max. As a result the "Unlock" did not help much.

Now it will be up to AMD to put some actual oomph behind this "FX" chip.
If not, it will just be another meaningless moniker like "BE" has.

mid 09!? common, i was hoping for Q4 08. so much waiting......

Ha, by summer next year I'll be building my i7 computer that's will be 30 faster per clock and has a 30% higher overclock speed. That's 90% faster for a few bucks more.

Amazing how 30+30=60 to pei-chen. Also a overclock doesn't mean it will still be as good a non-overclocked CPU with that same speed.

The denebs are already close to 10% faster clock per clock than previous phenom with the extra cache. If AMD puts even more level 2& 3 cache for the FX version they might give Intel a run for their money.

The pricing hasn't even been released, you dont know how big the price difference is between a Core i7 and AM3.

That sounds great. Rather like core i7. (Only we all know this fx line will be slower) and released 6 months later. I thought AMD bought ATI for a reason, GPU CPU Fusion? Instead they offer us shared L3 cache. Amazing. That is really innovative.

They need to come out with something that is faster than the oposition and they need to do it quickly. My aging Athlon 64 3000+ is feeling really slow now and and my only upgrade options are in the blue corner. Sadly i'm not the only person that realises this

If AMD successfully pulls this off I will be impressed. People seem to forget the AMD VS Intell is truly a David vs Goliath situation. It is disappointing that it is taking this long for AMD to strike back in the CPU department.

Shared L3 cache. Amazing. That is pure innovation. What happened to GPU CPU fusion? Someone remind me why they bought ATI again? Intel are already on a mature 45 nm fab process. AMD is a cycle behind. Q4 this year core i7 will be released and we all know it will be faster than this fx line. Every member of staff at Intel could go on holiday for 9 months and they would still be ahead of AMD. My aging AMD 64 is getting really slow now and all my upgrade options are in the blue corner. Sadly i'm not the only person who realises this check out the AMD share price over the last 2 years.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/A [...] ,6303.html

oh man i'm really tired. I'm going to post this eventally.. AMD share price take 4...

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s [...] z=m&q=l&c=

i'm almost as rubbish as AMD at the moment.

LOL if you want to talk stock prices

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=NVDA&t=2y


nvidia according to everyone link to quality and stock prices should be crap.....

to many fanboys humping intel when 3 years ago it was AMD that you humped..

well let's hope what they did to Nvidia is what they can do to Intel. Bring the darn prices down. I hope AMD dose well. And from what I herd the Core i7 is not going to far any better in gaming than the current Core 2 Quad's http://www.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=480

I proved this was just BS trying to get more hits to their website. Read this thread:

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/ [...] eld-beater

I looked way into it and 1. The article that was put up on the UK site was taken from a OC screen that was posted on a OCng site and 2. the OC screen from that site itself was photoshopped to make it look like it was at 4GHz when it was not true.

Current Phenoms based on Ageina can only clock to 4GHz with LN2. Deneb may be able to clock higher but in truth I don't think it will get to 4GHz stable and easily.

Core i7 has yet to be tested for gaming on a finished system with finished drivers. The only one site that tested Core i7 for gaming didn't have the drivers installed correctly for the PCIe so it wasn't fully functioning.

Also on that thread I posted a roadmap from AMD and it does show Phenom FX that will be based on the 45nm Deneb core and it will have the FX-80 @ 2.8GHz and the FX-90 @ 3GHz. Problem is we do not know how well it will OC right now and taking current Phenoms as a preface I would think not as much better.

From preliminary info though we can see that Deneb is anywhere from 7-15% faster clock per clock than Ageina Phenoms so that would put it roughly on par with Kentsfield based C2Qs and still a bit behind Yorkfield based C2Qs. Core i7 in multithreaded apps show 2-30% gain in performance clock per clock over Yorkfield and single threaded apps is about 10-15%.

1.3 * 1.3 = 1.69 so your theoretical speed advantage is 69 per-cent.

Bravooo AMD + ATI RADEON !
Nice Job !

any one remember K7? I think Phenom is an early K7 chip with a lot of head room to improve.

Read martel80's comment above to learn basic math. I hope one day you’ll be working for ESA.



Yep, I just estimated it without actually calculating it. Thanks for calculating it for me.

Don't see how an FX phenom will help AMD?? Clock/clock a Yorkfield is already faster than a Phenom and a QX9770 already hits 4Ghz easily. I don't see an FX XX or whatever getting anywhere near that speed, let alone a Nehalem.

Well, it's nice that AMD is going to launch the processor in the 45nm manufacturing process. But there's a one problem. The Intel have done it about 8 months earlier, so they have earned a huge money for thier processors and they did it first ... The AMD has a very serious problem with a technology. I It's bad the didn't take fully advantage in thier Athlon 64 constructions to invest in technology ... I hope they can still survive the bad times and return to compete with intel. I'll be happy to see the new rise of AMD.

@warezme ahh where is your QX9770 over clocked to 4Ghz easily?

The Alienware Area-51 ALX has a QX9770 over clocked to 4Ghz its "maximum stable output" And they are using a liquid cooling solution. That does not sound like an easy over clock to me. People need to be more realistic when talking about over clocks. That goes for both AMD and Intel people. We won't know what these chips can do until they are released.

Core i7 doesn't appear to be that great, that "first look" article said it all. AMD could easily catch and even pass Intel on this round. The main clock speed disadvantage was due to the IMC and it's power consumption and thermal dissipation(although the wattage is subracted from the chipset, it still limits clockspeed by means of thermal dissipation), now that Intel is moving to an IMC, the clockspeed playing field will be more level.

And Cows can fly....
Have you heard of turbo mode?

3 Ghz next year...?
I'm running 3 Ghz today on my Phenom 9850 and 780G Mainborad. I just changed the multiplier to 15x. Kept the core voltage to standard 1.360V. Everything works fine. So why don't AMD release 3 Ghz today, when it actually works already?

You shouldn't be running a Phenom X4 9850 BE on a 780G motherboard.
Haven't you heard that a 9850BE and a 780G will burn out and you will lose probably both your board as well as the CPU?
You should be using a 790GX motherboard instead.
I run a 9850BE on a 790FX board.