The History Of AMD CPUs

AMD K8: Gradual Improvement

In 2004, AMD introduced its new 90nm transistor process, which enabled the company to increase the performance of its Athlon 64 processors while also reducing power consumption. AMD produced a total of four 90nm Athlon 64 chips to cover the desktop market.

Venice became the last Athlon 64 processor released for AMD's Socket 754, and it also was the highest-performing chip available on that platform. AMD's San Diego ran at similar clock speeds, but was targeted at the Socket 939 platform and had a larger 1 MB L2 cache.

To target more efficient systems, AMD introduced the Winchester core around the same time, which had a lower TDP of 67 W. It was the most energy efficient Athlon 64 processor for several years until the release of the 62 W TDP Orleans in 2006 and the 65nm 45 W Lima in 2007.

AMD Athlon 64 Winchester, Venice, San Diego, Orleans and Lima

AMD K8: Sempron

Alongside the K8 Athlon processors, AMD also updated its Sempron product line with the new K8 architecture. Just like the first Sempron products, these CPUs typically had less cache and lower clock speeds than their Athlon counterparts.

AMD K8 Sempron

AMD K8: Athlon 64 X2

Just as it did two years prior, AMD pulled another shocker in 2005 with the introduction of a consumer-oriented dual-core processor based on the K8 architecture. Although the two processors were incapable of working on the same thread simultaneously, the second CPU core could handle other tasks and increase multitasking performance.

AMD produced a total of six CPU configurations in the Athlon 64 X2 product line, but the first five are all relatively similar to each other, varying only in L2 cache size and clock rate. The sixth Athlon 64 X2 design was the fastest in the series and the most energy efficient, owing to the move to 65nm transistor technology.

AMD Athlon 64 X2

AMD K8: Turion And Turion X2

AMD introduced a new mobile product line called "Turion" in 2005. These processors used the same architecture as AMD's desktop product, but thanks to careful core binning, they were able to operate with less power. AMD introduced dual-core variants as well, dubbed "Turion X2." 

AMD K8 Turion and Turion X2

AMD K10: Quad-Core Phenom

AMD's next architecture, K10, was a rather ambitious design. It is closely related to the K8, but it had several enhancements to the core and associated cache and memory controller. IPC was improved compared to K8, but K10's greatest advantage was its quad-core design that enabled it to run laps around the K8 dual-core CPUs in heavily-threaded applications.

Unfortunately, the K10 ran into problems early on. The first K10 processors were based on the Barcelona configuration and sold as Opteron server processors. But a flaw in Barcelona (known as the TLB bug) could cause the CPU to lock up. AMD was able to release a software patch to keep the TLB bug at bay. However, it imposed a sizable performance hit. Owing to the power requirements to run multiple CPU cores simultaneously, the K10 Phenom processors also struggled to run at higher clock speeds. The fastest quad-core model was limited to 2.6 GHz, whereas dual-core K10 processors sold under the Athlon brand name manged to reach just 2.8 GHz.

It should be noted that all first-generation K10 processors used the Agena die with part of the core disabled. Toliman, the triple-core variant, is actually the Agena die with one core disabled. The dual-core die was codenamed "Kuma," which is an Agena die with two cores disabled. Barcelona is identical to the Agena die as well, except that AMD fixed the TLB bug on Agena before releasing them to retailers. They were sold under the "Phenom," "Opteron" and "Athlon" product lines.

AMD Phenom

AMD K10: Phenom II

AMD managed to overcome the Phenom's shortcomings in the Phenom II. By transitioning to a 45nm process, power consumption dropped considerably, as did the amount of heat generated by the CPU, which enabled AMD to increase clock speed. Quad-core Phenom II processors based on the first Phenom II core, Deneb, managed to hit clock rates as high as 3.7 GHz. Because the die was significantly smaller than Agena, AMD was also able to triple the L3 cache size. Finally, Deneb transitioned to a DDR3 memory controller, but maintained backward compatibility with DDR2.

AMD Phenom II X4

AMD K10: Phenom II X2 and X3

Similar to the first-generation Phenom processors, AMD recycled its semi-defective quad-core CPU die as triple- and dual-core dies. These processors kept the full 6 MB of L3 cache, but they typically ran at lower clock speeds. They were popular among enthusiasts, since it was sometimes possible to reactivate the disabled cores.

AMD Phenom II X2 and X3

AMD K10: Athlon II

AMD also released a series of low-end K10 processors branded Athlon II. To keep production costs low, these processors used CPU dies without L3 cache. The quad-core die was code-named Propus, and the dual-core was called Regor. A triple-core model called Rana used defective Propus dies with a single core disabled.

AMD also used Deneb cores, but with the L3 cache disabled. This hurt performance, but with several CPU cores and clock speeds around 3 GHz, they still offered a reasonable experience.

Because L3 cache increased power consumption of the CPU as a whole, AMD also sold several Propus and Regor dies as mobile Phenom II and Athlon II processors.

AMD Athlon II

AMD K10: Sempron

AMD extended its Sempron line again to serve as the absolute lowest-performance product in the K10 line. The K10 Semprons used the single-core Sargas die, which was harvested from defective Regor cores. The second core could sometimes be activated on these CPUs.

AMD Phenom II X2 and X3

AMD Athlon II X2, Sempron

AMD K10: Phenom II X6

In 2010, AMD stepped up its K10 product offerings again by introducing the Thuban and Zosma CPU dies. Thuban had a total of six CPU cores, and AMD used it in processors clocked as high as 3.3 GHz. AMD also introduced its Turbo Core technology with Thuban, which allowed the CPU to push its clock rate up to 3.7 GHz depending on the workload. This enabled Thuban to surpass Deneb in multitasking performance while also matching it in single-threaded performance.

Zosma dies were harvested from partially defective Thuban cores, making them similar to Deneb, but with Turbo Core technology. Thanks to a matured 45nm process, Zosma and Thuban were also more energy efficient than Deneb.

AMD Phenom II X6 and Zosma Phenom II X4