Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Report: AMD Developing New Kabini and Piledriver Chips

By - Source: Hardware.info | B 39 comments

AMD has unveiled 5 new Kabini APUs based on Jaguar cores and 2 new Piledriver FX Chips.

AMD has unveiled the E1-2100, E1-2500 and E1-3000, three new Kabini APUs based on Jaguar cores (the successor to Bobcat) that are intended for use in "netbooks, thin laptops and all-in-one systems." The Kabini APUs feature a revised memory controller and integrated GPU that results in approximately 50 percent better performance than its predecessors and allows a battery life of up to 10 hours.

The chips all use 28 nm transistors, come in a BGA packaging, and have 1 MB of L2 cache memory combined with an unknown frequency and power consumption. In addition to the aforementioned 3 APUs, the E1-3310 and E1-2210 also have been confirmed, but no information on their specifications are currently available. AMD's Kabini family of chips are expected to integrate features such as AES, F16C and AVX instructions into the processor itself.

AMD has also added two Piledriver FX chips to its product line-up: the FX-4350 and FX-6350. The former chip is a quad-core clocked at 4.2 GHz and 4.3 GHz when only two cores are active. The latter is a hexacore CPU clocked at 3.9 GHz that can be further elevated to 4.2 GHz. Both the FX-4350 and FX-6350 will feature AM3+ sockets, 8 MB of L3 cache memory, a 125 W TDP, and costs roughly $150 (£100).

 

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Display 39 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 41 Hide
    tomc100 , March 14, 2013 2:31 PM
    Please God, let AMD make a profit.
  • 24 Hide
    Dangi , March 14, 2013 2:33 PM
    28 nm at last !!
    Now keep the IGPU kicking and beat Intel processors.

    Also, with PS4 and Xbox720 coming soon with 8-core AMD, I suppose multicore support will be more common and AMD will benefit from that.
  • 21 Hide
    mousseng , March 14, 2013 2:58 PM
    tomc100Please God, let AMD make a profit.

    I think you mean "competitive product." Profits typically follow suit.
Other Comments
  • 41 Hide
    tomc100 , March 14, 2013 2:31 PM
    Please God, let AMD make a profit.
  • 15 Hide
    RADIO_ACTIVE , March 14, 2013 2:33 PM
    Seems like a good buy on the those FX chips
  • 24 Hide
    Dangi , March 14, 2013 2:33 PM
    28 nm at last !!
    Now keep the IGPU kicking and beat Intel processors.

    Also, with PS4 and Xbox720 coming soon with 8-core AMD, I suppose multicore support will be more common and AMD will benefit from that.
  • 12 Hide
    DroKing , March 14, 2013 2:37 PM
    HIP HIP HOOORAY. Time to bring the multi threading benefits into the game!
  • 4 Hide
    childofthekorn , March 14, 2013 2:49 PM
    The only 2 things wrong with the FX chips are IPC latency, Windows Scheduler and wattage. However, the latter doesn't seem to be a huge issue unless your going for overclocking. Turning off Core Parking seems to alleviate some scheduling issues and allow the cores to remain active seeing that windows does not know the different between Hyperthreading and modulated cores. (please correct me if I'm wrong)

    Personally I'm waiting for steamroller seeing that its the last reported CPU from AMD to use AM3+.
  • 21 Hide
    mousseng , March 14, 2013 2:58 PM
    tomc100Please God, let AMD make a profit.

    I think you mean "competitive product." Profits typically follow suit.
  • 3 Hide
    azraa , March 14, 2013 3:02 PM
    Dude, what's with all the downrating going on. It just some people cheering up for a neat development.
    Fucking Tom's filled with fanboys
  • 13 Hide
    samwelaye , March 14, 2013 3:09 PM
    moussengI think you mean "competitive product." Profits typically follow suit.


    They do have some competitive products. The fx-6300 for instance, is amazing at its price point. Beats intel (in the same price range) in any task that is threaded well. it goes for between 120-140$. Not the best for gamers, but for many other tasks it cant be beat for under 150$
  • 3 Hide
    thecynicalmonk , March 14, 2013 3:13 PM
    Well damn, I just bought a FX 6300 :-\ same thing happened to me when I bought my Galaxy Note 2 and TWO days later they announce the Galaxy S4!*sigh* screw keeping up with the " Jones 's", it's waay too costly! :-P
  • 3 Hide
    dragonsqrrl , March 14, 2013 3:27 PM
    azraaDude, what's with all the downrating going on. It just some people cheering up for a neat development.Fucking Tom's filled with fanboys

    It's the down voting trolls. They seem to be unusually prevalent lately, and that's saying a lot. The voting system is rarely used for its intended purpose, but despite how often it's misused Tom's still continues to openly support it. I really think commenting worked better back when the voting system was broken.
  • 5 Hide
    twelve25 , March 14, 2013 3:48 PM
    thecynicalmonkWell damn, I just bought a FX 6300 :-\ same thing happened to me when I bought my Galaxy Note 2 and TWO days later they announce the Galaxy S4!*sigh* screw keeping up with the " Jones 's", it's waay too costly! :-P


    The FX-6350 is a 125W TDP and more expensive, and they all likely OC to the same point, so I'd say little reason to go 6350 anyway.

  • 2 Hide
    acerace , March 14, 2013 3:56 PM
    dragonsqrrlIt's the down voting trolls. They seem to be unusually prevalent lately, and that's saying a lot. The voting system is rarely used for its intended purpose, but despite how often it's misused Tom's still continues to openly support it. I really think commenting worked better back when the voting system was broken.


    Downrating makes someone's post look bad, even though it has a very good point. Like you said, downrating troll, and the system is very broken.
  • 15 Hide
    scifi9000 , March 14, 2013 4:26 PM
    I hope AMD's CPU business hangs in there and competes with Intel at the high end again... an Intel monopoly sound rather expensive for the consumer and will stagnate innovation. I'm not a fanboi, but in a 2 horse race, you have to support the underdog to maintain competition and benefit all.
  • -6 Hide
    uglynerdman , March 14, 2013 4:28 PM
    Pertaining to the mobile news only, being 50% better than the last? Im actually not impressed, unless its really on par with a i3.. let alone a i5 mobile chip from last generation. i dont see the reason to buy them other than the fact that they might cost less or that the user is ignorant to performance/games beyond 13xx x 7xx resolutions.

    i mean were not talking abot a a-10 here its saying better than brazos. They said thin notebooks and i think "ultrabook" i already see previews of 600$ haswell laptops/ultrabooks.

    the i3 is already in alot of tablets. im a little tired of everyone supporting that amd isnt going to compete at all in any bracket of performance except for ultra low end in the mobile market.
  • -5 Hide
    ta152h , March 14, 2013 4:42 PM
    childofthekornThe only 2 things wrong with the FX chips are IPC latency, Windows Scheduler and wattage. However, the latter doesn't seem to be a huge issue unless your going for overclocking. Turning off Core Parking seems to alleviate some scheduling issues and allow the cores to remain active seeing that windows does not know the different between Hyperthreading and modulated cores. (please correct me if I'm wrong)Personally I'm waiting for steamroller seeing that its the last reported CPU from AMD to use AM3+.


    IPC latency? Were you drinking when you made that up? It makes no sense.

    They basically castrated the integer units for the Bulldozer and Piledriver, and then added another one to make a pair. Consequently, the only way to get good integer throughput is to use two threads per core, or you just have a lousy processor. But, of course, the decoder can't keep up with two threads at the same time, so basically you have this crummy processor that performs worse at everything compared to the Intel processors.

    On top of that, AMD still hasn't learned how to make a cache. They have a puny 16K L1, but it's still slow, and makes the processor much more dependent on the L2 cache. The L2 cache is catastrophically slow, and is only exceeded in ineptness by their L3 cache implementation.

    In short, AMD's Bulldozer/Piledriver chips suck donkey balls.

    So, if you meant their cache latency is killing the processors, and exacerbating already poor IPC caused by castrating the integer unit, I'd agree.

    It's a remarkably poor implementation, being quite large, very slow, and consuming massive amounts of power. It took a lot of engineering talent to make a modern processor that bad. Piledriver helped, but the basic design and slow cache limit this lousy processor severely.

    Steamroller could fix a lot of sins with a better decoder, restoring the ALU in each integer unit, and making a cache system that works. The latter of which is nearly impossible, since AMD has no idea how to implement an efficient cache, but maybe with Jim Keller there's hope. I'm pretty sure they'll improve the first two, but if the cache continues to blow, it's going to severely limit the performance of the processor. I'd settle for even a moderate improvement, which is possible since the BD/PD has significantly lower performance than the Thuban had. Just get us back to Thuban, and it will help a lot.


  • 1 Hide
    madjimms , March 14, 2013 4:51 PM
    ta152hIPC latency? Were you drinking when you made that up? It makes no sense.They basically castrated the integer units for the Bulldozer and Piledriver, and then added another one to make a pair. Consequently, the only way to get good integer throughput is to use two threads per core, or you just have a lousy processor. But, of course, the decoder can't keep up with two threads at the same time, so basically you have this crummy processor that performs worse at everything compared to the Intel processors.On top of that, AMD still hasn't learned how to make a cache. They have a puny 16K L1, but it's still slow, and makes the processor much more dependent on the L2 cache. The L2 cache is catastrophically slow, and is only exceeded in ineptness by their L3 cache implementation. In short, AMD's Bulldozer/Piledriver chips suck donkey balls. So, if you meant their cache latency is killing the processors, and exacerbating already poor IPC caused by castrating the integer unit, I'd agree. It's a remarkably poor implementation, being quite large, very slow, and consuming massive amounts of power. It took a lot of engineering talent to make a modern processor that bad. Piledriver helped, but the basic design and slow cache limit this lousy processor severely.Steamroller could fix a lot of sins with a better decoder, restoring the ALU in each integer unit, and making a cache system that works. The latter of which is nearly impossible, since AMD has no idea how to implement an efficient cache, but maybe with Jim Keller there's hope. I'm pretty sure they'll improve the first two, but if the cache continues to blow, it's going to severely limit the performance of the processor. I'd settle for even a moderate improvement, which is possible since the BD/PD has significantly lower performance than the Thuban had. Just get us back to Thuban, and it will help a lot.

    You forgot that Intel's compiler is extremely biased toward its own chips & many software companies use it. "Not genuine"...
  • 0 Hide
    Teeroy32 , March 14, 2013 5:00 PM
    Would it be worth upgrading from my FX-6100 to a FX-63xx or just save for a FX-83xx?
  • -1 Hide
    tomfreak , March 14, 2013 5:10 PM
    Will this quad core sell as cheap as pentium class Ivy bridge?

    Because the core 2 quad are still ridiculous expensive. Any new dual core from Intel isnt really an upgrade from core 2 duo 3GHz. Would be nice if they can be bench with core 2 quads. About time we get a quadcore @ intel's dual core pricing.
  • 0 Hide
    thelvyn , March 14, 2013 5:20 PM
    Is there much of an improvement from the fx6100 (I have a 6100 at 4.0ghz) to the 6350 ?
    I was just planning on buying the 8350, I have a Asus Sabertooth 2.0 with the 6100 currently.
  • 5 Hide
    blazorthon , March 14, 2013 7:00 PM
    tomfreakWill this quad core sell as cheap as pentium class Ivy bridge? Because the core 2 quad are still ridiculous expensive. Any new dual core from Intel isnt really an upgrade from core 2 duo 3GHz. Would be nice if they can be bench with core 2 quads. About time we get a quadcore @ intel's dual core pricing.


    Dual core Celeron G1610 is available for about $50 and it's about 50% faster than a Core 2 Duo at ~3GHz. Intel has many options available that kick the crap out of Core 2 Duo and some of them have been around since Sandy Pentiums/Celerons came out.

    Teeroy32Would it be worth upgrading from my FX-6100 to a FX-63xx or just save for a FX-83xx?


    Unless you are doing some highly-threaded work, it'd be better to skip out on the eight-core models for now and wait until the next generation to see what is available. The FX-6350, although better than the FX-6100, isn't so much better that I'd recommend upgrading to it unless you feel that what you currently have is inadequate. Although not the only advantage, the main advantage that the 6350 has over the 6100 seems to be clock frequency- overclocking a 6100 (even on stock voltage) should cover most of the lost ground.

    uglynerdmanPertaining to the mobile news only, being 50% better than the last? Im actually not impressed, unless its really on par with a i3.. let alone a i5 mobile chip from last generation. i dont see the reason to buy them other than the fact that they might cost less or that the user is ignorant to performance/games beyond 13xx x 7xx resolutions. i mean were not talking abot a a-10 here its saying better than brazos. They said thin notebooks and i think "ultrabook" i already see previews of 600$ haswell laptops/ultrabooks. the i3 is already in alot of tablets. im a little tired of everyone supporting that amd isnt going to compete at all in any bracket of performance except for ultra low end in the mobile market.


    Are you seriously demanding that AMD's competitors for Atom get anywhere near Core i3s in performance and saying that if they fail to do so, they are a product with no purpose? WTF are you smoking? Brazos was already better than Intel's competition for it, Atom, and if Kabini is really that much better at 50% all-around better than Brazos while being incredibly more efficient and such, then it could be a product with a wide and lucrative range of markets to work with.
Display more comments