Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

AMD Adds FM1 CPUs Athlon II X4 638 and Athlon II X4 641

By - Source: AMD | B 32 comments

AMD quietly released two additional socket FM1 CPUs that slot in between the Athlon II X4-651 and 631.

The new models 638 (2.7 GHz, 65W) and 641 (2.8 GHz, 100W) integrate 32nm Llano cores with inactive graphics units. AMD is selling both processors for a tray price of $81. In comparison, Intel's cheapest quad-core CPUs are the i5-2390T (2.7 GHz) and the i5-2400s (2.5 GHz) for $184. AMD is riding the value train as $81 buys at Intel just Pentium processors (G850 with two cores and 2.9 GHz for $75, for example).

AMD is offering Athlon II X4 processors also for socket AM3 at 45nm: the 645 (3.1 GHz, 95W, $102) and 640 (3.0 GHz, 95W, $98).

Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 17 Hide
    alvine , February 9, 2012 12:50 PM
    go AMD
  • 13 Hide
    Anonymous , February 9, 2012 5:57 PM
    It's the same thing they've been doing with tri-cores.

    Defective graphics chip = Llano based Athlon.

    Why throw it out when you can sell it as a quadcore at a cheaper price?
  • 12 Hide
    rpgplayer , February 9, 2012 1:39 PM
    I know they are in different chipsets, but naming the 2.8ghz the 641 and the 3.0ghz the 640 is kind of misleading.
Other Comments
    Display all 32 comments.
  • -3 Hide
    icemunk , February 9, 2012 12:48 PM
    I would if it will be possible to activate the graphics cores on some of these units
  • 17 Hide
    alvine , February 9, 2012 12:50 PM
    go AMD
  • 2 Hide
    billybobser , February 9, 2012 1:01 PM
    Looks interesting, but the disparity between a quad AMD and a dual core Pentium means the Intel is the value leader in anything remotely consumerist.

    And if you're a professional, not a consumer, you'll need something pricier (maybe).

    Not to mention that FM1 without a graphics core is a particularly odd choice (although, the FM1 boards are very feature rich) given that you're limiting your options taking this route.

    My view, if one of these AMD quads could be clocked to compete with a bottom i3, it would be an interesting option.
  • 2 Hide
    CaedenV , February 9, 2012 1:03 PM
    meh
  • 4 Hide
    wiyosaya , February 9, 2012 1:06 PM
    Interesting. At least they are trying to maintain a competitive stance in the CPU arena.
  • 4 Hide
    GreaseMonkey_62 , February 9, 2012 1:07 PM
    Quote:

    Not to mention that FM1 without a graphics core is a particularly odd choice quotemsg]
    Agreed. The graphics core is likely the best part of the Llano processors. But other board manufacturers have found ways to unlock processor cores, maybe they can have boards that unlock the graphics cores.
  • -8 Hide
    mcd023 , February 9, 2012 1:14 PM
    What I'm wondering is what kind of performance we'll see when the x86 Win8 tablets come out. So far, I'm eying something like the Samsung series 7 slate with a core i5 at 1.6GHz, but I wanna see the cpu/gpu/battery life in one of those.
  • 1 Hide
    bustapr , February 9, 2012 1:38 PM
    Im not sure, but if the Llano CPU is stronger than a normal Athlon 2, it should be a great budget buy. Sad to see AMD killing off the phenom 2 line.

    the thing i really dont understand is, why would AMD make a faster CPU, but also include deactivated graphics, thats undoubtably taking up space. Why not include some L3 cache and make it a budget phenom 2 on FM1? I may be talking jibberish, but I really want AMD to be competitive performance-wise in this area, because the new pentiums are pretty good
  • 12 Hide
    rpgplayer , February 9, 2012 1:39 PM
    I know they are in different chipsets, but naming the 2.8ghz the 641 and the 3.0ghz the 640 is kind of misleading.
  • 7 Hide
    Onus , February 9, 2012 2:15 PM
    I am concerned that Domin8er is probably correct, although I'd like to see some more [multithreaded / multitasking] applications benchmarks, not just games as in the recent sub $200 CPU review.
  • -1 Hide
    SteelCity1981 , February 9, 2012 3:03 PM
    I just wish AMD and Itnel would get their marketing act together. I mean intle has Core i7, Core i5, Core i3 then Pentium and Celeron, Atom.

    AMD has FX series 8xxx, 6xxx, 4xxx Athlon and Fusion.

    Intel needs to just do away with Pentium, Celerons and Atoms.

    AMD just needs to do away with the Athlon.

    All of these cpus closely resemble each other in the bottom tier now. The Athlons are Fusions and the Pentiums are lower grade Core i3's. While the Celerons are even lower grade Pentiums. The Atom is the lowest of all the grades in the Intel lineup and it just needs to go altogether.
  • 7 Hide
    jestersage , February 9, 2012 3:10 PM
    Hmmm... the 638 is a 65w true quad? interesting...
  • 3 Hide
    geekapproved , February 9, 2012 4:12 PM
    I don't get the low clock speeds, without active graphics these things should be running at least 3.6ghz.
  • 3 Hide
    soidier37 , February 9, 2012 5:18 PM
    Kind of wonder who would go for the 641 if it is only 100mhz faster than the 638 but with a 45 watt higher tdp.
  • 5 Hide
    esrever , February 9, 2012 5:31 PM
    Quote:
    I know they are in different chipsets, but naming the 2.8ghz the 641 and the 3.0ghz the 640 is kind of misleading.

    The llano is probably slightly faster even with the 200mhz lower clock speed so it positions pretty well.
  • 1 Hide
    verbalizer , February 9, 2012 5:46 PM
    what's this, a last ditch effort to save face or rid of older stock.?
    it's all about Trinity and Llano is about to be put to rest.
    if anything let's go back and re-work the Phenom II and make it Phenom III;
    yank Bulldozer and fine tune Piledriver for it's release.
    any other news than these things and I'm not interested.
    thanks.
  • 13 Hide
    Anonymous , February 9, 2012 5:57 PM
    It's the same thing they've been doing with tri-cores.

    Defective graphics chip = Llano based Athlon.

    Why throw it out when you can sell it as a quadcore at a cheaper price?
  • -2 Hide
    iam2thecrowe , February 9, 2012 6:40 PM
    Maybe they should make an "Athlon FX" for this socket with more/faster cache and more cores and drop their AM3 FX range. Its ok to admit you made a bad CPU with bulldozer AMD. The sooner you stop production of that horrible cpu, the better. Its just money down the drain.
  • 2 Hide
    jgutz2006 , February 9, 2012 6:48 PM
    Can someone help me understand these 2 models? 2.7ghz @65w or 2.8ghz @100w??? Does this mean that the 638 has no overclocking headroom as its walking the power envelope line? or will the 641 just be a beast with the Overclocking with plenty of power overhead
Display more comments