I think it's pretty clear that the new naming scheme was influenced by Intel's i7 naming patterns. Looking at how the numbers line up, I am wondering if AMD is naming these processors in terms of relative performance to their i7 counterpart (i.e the X4 920 is roughly equal to the i7 920). That'd be a pretty large performance jump for AMD, but I don't think it's out of the question, especially looking at how well their newest server chips perform.

Regardless, this naming scheme is much clearer than what they had originally planned for the next-gen Phenom, so I think it's a good move.

Dirka dirka!! nice strategy, AMD , with the chip model #'s just like i7(Intel)!! that was no mistake!! I bet it will change again because they cant figure #*$^ out!! THey should stop worrying and changing the names and get something tangible to challenge at least ONE line of chips from intel!! gesus!!!

It's pretty much how they did it in the P4/Athlon 64 days. AMD 3000+ was roughly equal to the P4 at 3.0Ghz.

If they are doing that again, I hope they're accurate.

8MB L3 Cache? Is this true?

I can't see it in the picture on Expreview reports article

lol I highly doubt the 920 deneb is even close (with in 20%) of the core i7 920... if its in 10% i'd say the numbers are fine but i don't think its even close

I like the fact that they are nearly simultaneously releasing AM2+ and AM3 processors. Sounds like the perfect time to upgrade to a Phenom when the AM2+ motherboard prices start to drop. Unless someone can come up with a benchmark that shows real-world benefit from DDR3, I think I'll just skip it. I paid more than enough upgrading to DDR2 thank you very much.

just got my gigabyte am2+ mb for $99.

will am2+ boards be compatible with am3 chips? i want the 940 or 945.

intersting...early reviews tested the deneb cores with 6mb of L3. i wonder how they perform with 8mb of L3? if those numbers are true.

That is the total cache: 4*512Mb + 6 Mb = 8 Mb (L2+L3)
But not too bad in anyway.

i don't like this, it makes them seem desperate.. unless intel and amd have some side agreement, than this seems very smart

I think deneb will be close in performance clock-by-clock with Nehalem and Core 2 on games, since there isn't much difference between the two of them in that department. AMD is probably capitalizing.

All in all, I'm actually pretty excited about Deneb (Even though I don't have an AMD platform), more than I was with Core i7 until I heard gaming performance was the same.

Yes, the amount listed in the table is total cache.

That may be true, but AMD did it for different reasons.
The P3 chips and AMD chips were superior clock-per-clock to the P4 chips (interestingly the core 2 architecture is closer to P3 than the P4). However for intel the P4s were superior to the P3s because they could clock alot higher. As part of their marketing Intel put out that higher clock speeds meant better processors, whilst it is true in a given family, it isnt an actual comparison. Nobody (mainstream) would listen to AMD saying it isnt a fair comparison, so AMD named the processors with the X000+ designation to make them sound as though they had a similar clock.

Want to know what I like about AMD right now? They have the only desktop motherboard that has an internal RAID controller that can support SAS Drives. Thats 15000RPM drives from Hitachi that are cheaper then Raptors.

I hope MSI adds it to its AM3 motherboard.

Doubt it, Nehalem's gaming performance is similar to C2D because of smaller L2 cache. Phenom II has the same L2 cache as Phenom I.

BTW, anyone noticed the AM2+ version requires more power than AM3 version; TDP 125w vs. 95w. I wonder if my 690G AM2 board will require more power if it works at all.

Orangedrink,

No the AM2+ mobo's will not take the AM3 CPU's

AM2/AM2+ is specifically for DDR2 memory
AM3 is for DDR3

my general thoughts,

DDR3 is a long way from being worth it (IMO) dollars to performance DDR2 wins

and regards to the naming system, they all suck but they gotta do something, i wish they'd just use Phenom X4 2800 for a 2.8 GHz but unfortunately peeps are dumb and think GHz is everything so they (AMD) needs to make it competitive to Intel, so they came up with this crap

while AMD might be a little over zealous with trying to compare their cpus to intels you really cant expect either Intel or AMD to be 100% honest can you? otherwise we prolly wouldnt need Tom's then

Personally, I like AMD, and I'm sick of Intel's lies from the old days claiming that the old AMD XP chips were unreliable, I have respect for AMD and that they're fighting Intel, if it werent for AMD we'd prolly all be uses a 2.0 GHz P4 right now

so if your an intel fan boy, or and AMD fan who cares what who calls a CPU, at least AMDs have been easier to figure out what proc is what compared to intels cryptic naming scheme, at least intel is changing it too

and yes i can comment about intel for those that might whine, I have both AMD and Intel CPU's here at home and at my business, while I prefer AMD/ATI i still can buy Intel or nVidia, thank goodness for competition

nB

Meh, we'll find out when the chips come out. Anyway, since the new chips will have both DDR2 and DDR3 memory compatible controllers, I would think it would make sense to stick to the original plan of allowing AM3 cpus to fit into AM2 boards. It seems like this was the original plan since early pictures show the new CPUs with two fewer pins. Oh well, so long as they put out good AM2 cpus for now I'll be happy.

yeah but phenom II has a larger L3 cache, and these processors are on a 45nm manufacturing tech so they use less power.



i think the AM3 cpus will still have a ddr2 controller, so you might be able to put them on am2+ motherboards

I think amd might suprise us this round , finnally since theya re gettgin down to 45nm i expect these chips wil perform as good as intels as well as overclock a lot more than amd's first phenoms, my only questions is can the new am3's work ina am2 + main board ?

Maybe Intel's Penryn chips, but not Core i7.

Yes... the AM3 chips will work in an AM2+ board because they will have both ddr2 and ddr3 MC in them. Now about the performance ... i won't jump to conclusions that fast randomizer. Just remember that Nehalem and it's "brand new" architecture is pretty similar to AMD's (hence the quotes )..QPI < HT3 ,integrated MC (when AM3 comes out the memory bandwith will be quite the same). I'm happy AMD decided to put a lot more cache in these CPU's and hopefully with their shared cache system+HT3+45nm+Higher clocks+other tweaks will crush some Penryns and come as close as they can to Core I7 in perf/watt. My next configuration will be AMD based (helping them as i can to get back on their feet and see some real competition next year). I think i should sign-up on this scrollbar-handicaped site and not post as anonymous anymore

Well the 3 # change is better - the previous plan was to expand things to 5 #'s.

The marketing folks need some help though:
1) Go for a completely independent #'ing scheme that doesn't attempt to lineup to Intel's - this further defines AMD in terms of Intel. AMD will continue to be obscured by Intel's shadow if they define their chips by Intel's numbering scheme.
2) They screwed up model # consistency:
- They have the AM3 versions as xx5 for the top bins, and xx0 for AM2 (makes sense to tell them apart), but then on lower bins the xx0 are AM3?!?! So 0 means AM2+ on some chips and AM3 on others!?!?
- 910 to 920 represents a 200MHz jump, then the next 200MHz should obviously go to 930? No of course not it skips it and goes to 940 to make it sound better and like more of a difference...again no consistency!
3) Phenom II? Really??? More cache and some minor architectural changes warrants a move from Phenom to Phenom II? While this is probably done to get people to forget about the Phenom "I" and try to put some distance, changing the core marketing name 1 year after it was launched doesn't imply stability and reinforces the Phenom disaster - save the change for a substantial architecture change like Bulldozer or just change the name altogether (don't just add a II to imply 'better')

Also are those power #'s TDP's or ACP's?

It's pure marketing dude and the numbers are not final yet.Of course they want us to forget about Phenom 1 ...it was kind of a disaster.

What motherboards have that integrated RAID controller that support SAS because i've been looking for those too but i can't seem to find one (at least in my country)

I think it may be a close one here if the application supports up to 4 threads and no more. But if it supports up to 8 threads that is where Core i7 will come in hand sence both Core i7 and AMD Phenom II is basically the same archutecture just that one has hyper threading and more cache.

Hmm, AMD's new Opterons are very competitive with their Intel counterparts, so hopefully their desktop processors will be as good or better.

Amd is starting to gain on Intel once again, or at least, they have quickened their pace. The intel's biggest bottleneck is the programs. Who notices the difference between 1 second and less than 1 second? In some software you will see a clear advantage for the new i7, but in a lot it will only be noticeable in synthetic tests.

The Phenom I started bad, got back on his feet and started throwing punches, but it wasn't strong enough. Let's hope the Phenom II has the power to compete evenly with the i7.

And if I remember correctly the first shipment of AM3 proc will support am2 and +. After a while, they will launch a "new" proc with only ddr3 support. But it shouldn't be any of these.

MSI K9A2 Platinum

Why AMD did not use DDR5 Controller in new processors?

AM3? I think AMD should focus on making some 45nm AM2+ Phenom II to at least beat the current Intel's E8000 and Q9000 cpus. The consumers doesn't want spend to upgrade to AM3 just yet. And AM3 supported mobos are still hard to find in most parts of the world. If AMD wants to earn big next year I think AM2+ is still the way to go.