News
 

Bookmark and Share

(35) 

BIOS updates for mainboards made by Elitegroup Computer Systems and Jetway reveal that Advanced Micro Devices may be preparing a new line of multi-core microprocessors called Phenom II X8. Based on alleged specifications of the products, the new central processing units (CPUs) will be aimed at cost-sensitive segment of the market.

Based on CPU support list of Jetway HA18 mainboard based on AMD 9-series chipset and AM3+ socket, AMD is preparing a series of new microprocessors based on Zambezi design (Bulldozer micro-architecture, 4, 6 or 8 cores) of different revisions with rather low clock-speeds and with 95W thermal design power. Jetway lists the new processors as "engineering samples", but a well-known Japanese observer/blogger Northwood.blog60.fc2.com points to an alleged ECS A890GXM-A2 CPU support list that calls the chips as AMD Phenom II X8.

The list of AMD Phenom II X8 microprocessors includes four models:

  • AMD Phenom II X8 2420: 2.40GHz, 95W, ZD242046W8K43
  • AMD Phenom II X8 3020: 3.00GHz, 125W, ZD302051W8K44
  • AMD Phenom II X8 2520: 2.50GHz, 95W, ZD252046W6443
  • AMD Phenom II X8 2820: 2.80GHz, 95W, ZD282046W8K43

The "Phenom II X8" microprocessors can be actual early engineering samples of chips that now belong to AMD FX premium product line, however, listing of their support now implies that AMD is cooking something new.

Although AMD FX family does not play in the ultra high-performance segment of the market where microprocessors cost $400 or more, the Sunnyvale, California-based company clearly positions the chips as premium products. Therefore, the company is not interested in selling products with relatively low performance under the FX brand.

It is known that AMD does have a lot of Zambezi processors that have all cores functional, but which cannot work on high clock-speeds and therefore provide premium "FX-class" performance, but AMD is definitely interested in selling those chips. In a bid not to harm the appeal of the FX brand, the chip designer may sell low-frequency Zambezi processors with disabled Turbo Core dynamic clock-speed acceleration technology and/or cut-down L2/L3 cache under Phenom II X8 brand. AMD already sells some processors based on Llano APU design with disabled graphics engine under Athlon II and Sempron monikers, thus, a refresh of the Phenom II line should not be a complete surprise.

With low frequencies and without Turbo Core, the new eight-core Phenom II X8 will likely be considerably slower than the existing six-core Phenom II X8 processors based on Thuban design.

AMD, ECS and Jetway did not comment on the news-story.

Tags: AMD, Phenom, Bulldozer, Zambezi, FX, 32nm

Discussion

Comments currently: 35
Discussion started: 12/23/11 06:02:32 AM
Latest comment: 10/27/13 05:37:09 PM
Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-16]

1. 
I want a real Phenom x8 rather than a BD spit shine and a rebage. -_-

8 0 [Posted by: nforce4max  | Date: 12/23/11 06:02:32 AM]
Reply

2. 
Seriously AMD stop going after the core counter... I don't care how much raw performance the CPU give in a situation like a 3D scene render.
I care for the overall performance I get in everyday use, that is until more than half of my software is using more than the 6 cores (which I have now).

I love to do 3d renders, but I need per core performance to compose the scene first.
3 0 [Posted by: nitro912gr  | Date: 12/23/11 07:04:26 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
They cannot compete against Intel single thread performance. They need(ed) throughout.
0 1 [Posted by: Marburg U  | Date: 12/23/11 01:54:44 PM]
Reply
 
actually gooing higher in core count would be really good because we get stuck if they didn't . programmers make there software for 4 cores because no one has 8 cores. so if we go to 8 cores now the software makers will have a reason to higher there thread count.
0 0 [Posted by: massau  | Date: 12/24/11 04:58:23 AM]
Reply

3. 
Too slow frequency...I need AMD Phenom II X8 3060: 3.60GHz( by manufacturer default), ~132W, --> or AMD Phenom II X8 3080: 3.80GHz, 140W! + Overclock to 4.6GHz or more 24/7
LoL supercomputer on my desk
1 1 [Posted by: Anton Markov  | Date: 12/23/11 07:24:38 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
i just wish it has high a number of IPC to get a supercomputer

a good idea for AMD is to not-stop making new Athlons and phenoms while selling fusions and bulldozers

the problem is that some corporations stop some great projects, which are successful and cost billions for no reason, remember GeoCities, AMD geode, .....

maybe the BIOS update means piledriver, the 9XX series chipset support them and they fit in AM3+ sockets, and it's also an engineering sample
0 0 [Posted by: madooo12  | Date: 12/24/11 01:37:58 PM]
Reply

4. 
Looks like they are Zambezi w/o L3.
0 1 [Posted by: Azazel  | Date: 12/23/11 08:29:49 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
Stripping the L3 cache away probably going to do "wonders" for the performance. I'll facepalm if a Phenom II X6 craps all over the X8 and kicks it to the curb.
1 0 [Posted by: Joe Public  | Date: 12/23/11 08:48:04 AM]
Reply
 
Thanks for a suggestion.
1 0 [Posted by: Anton  | Date: 12/23/11 04:59:20 PM]
Reply
 
considering the large L2 I don't think its going to make that much difference on the desktop.
1 0 [Posted by: Countess  | Date: 12/27/11 04:41:50 PM]
Reply

5. 
By the end of decade, are we going to see any AMDs with more than 3.5Ghz freq??? I bet my belt that NO.
0 0 [Posted by: TAViX  | Date: 12/23/11 10:12:45 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
Deneb 975 Quad core 3.6Ghz.
2 0 [Posted by: Reaver960  | Date: 12/23/11 11:25:26 AM]
Reply

6. 
This is not Fhenom II processors. This is are different engineering samples of Bulldoser cores! With my preview post I make a joke with yellow rumor in the article.
1 0 [Posted by: Anton Markov  | Date: 12/23/11 10:52:55 AM]
Reply

7. 
Damn and here i thought AMD came to its senses and shrunk the die and kept the Thuban design and added two more cores. I was getting excited until i saw it was based on BD with no L3 cache.
2 0 [Posted by: SteelCity1981  | Date: 12/23/11 03:25:43 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
just some more optimizations to thuban and it'll be great, who needs bulldozer cores (at least desktop users don't) after they saw it's performance
1 0 [Posted by: madooo12  | Date: 12/24/11 03:26:23 AM]
Reply

8. 
Stupid move; Phenom II / Thuban actually outperforms Bulldozer in terms of single thread performance, so with a die-shrink to 32nm and ISA extensions in store AMD should better add the 2 extra cores to crank up throughput without sacrificing overall performance. BD needs its bottlenecks to be ironed out first.
0 0 [Posted by: sanity  | Date: 12/23/11 05:48:24 PM]
Reply

9. 
i don't understand you people, if you want a supercomputer on your desk, just get a quad socket G34 and put 4 x 16core cpus in it.
I was going to go the C32 path but then bulldozer opteron were released with 8/6/4 module count
2 0 [Posted by: thefumigator  | Date: 12/23/11 08:17:10 PM]
Reply

10. 
Those are not the real Phenom x6 architecture .. its based on bulldozer so its fail. Now they gonna rape the name Phenom just like they did with the Athlon.
1 0 [Posted by: 3Dkiller  | Date: 12/24/11 05:22:49 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
you mean Phenom X8
0 1 [Posted by: madooo12  | Date: 12/24/11 09:10:00 AM]
Reply

11. 
Hey guys take it easy now, the new architecture is good, just not mature enough, they just rushed to make it available.

I believe the bulldozer can be a strong CPU, but not until another year or so.

It is better to improve the new technology that opens a lot of new ways to improve, than to just try to get more from a dieing (from old ages) technology.
2 0 [Posted by: nitro912gr  | Date: 12/24/11 11:14:52 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
a whole new open architecture (or improving one like solaris) is better, but still that isn't bad
1 0 [Posted by: madooo12  | Date: 12/24/11 01:24:11 PM]
Reply
 
Can you suggest any actual improvements that can be applied to the BLD micro-architecture to improve its performance radically (more than by 10%). Process technology switch and clock-speed improvement is now locked for AMD.
0 0 [Posted by: Anton  | Date: 12/25/11 08:56:10 AM]
Reply
 
yes IPC improvements (by using shorter pipelines) are great and die shrinks will improve frequencies, thermals and power usage
1 1 [Posted by: madooo12  | Date: 12/26/11 01:06:43 AM]
Reply
 
The best thing they could do is start cloning Intel chips again.
1 2 [Posted by: GreenChile  | Date: 12/26/11 07:08:43 PM]
Reply
 
yes to get 386 chips performance again due to lack of competition
and at the 22 nm process it's quite hard and time consuming
1 0 [Posted by: madooo12  | Date: 12/27/11 01:57:06 AM]
Reply
 
Yeah, hire you for their engineering team coffee machine boy in Texas.
0 2 [Posted by: bereft  | Date: 12/31/11 10:43:11 PM]
Reply

12. 
AMD STOP WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND LISTEN!!! NOBODY WANTS YOUR PHONY (and I use the term loosely) 8 CORE B.D. ARCHITECTURE CPUS! B.D. IS B.S.,they are not real 8 core processors, they only have 4 cores (2 separate dual core dies) and they don't even compete with your prior 45nm PhenomII CPUs. Why don't you just shrink your old PhenomII quad or 6 core CPUs to a 32nm die atleast then we would have 4 or 6 REAL CORES!!! And don't even try to claim it can't be done,I have been studying microprocessor engineering for the past 5 years, you are just trying to be cheap and scheme people into buying your bogus chips!!!
0 1 [Posted by: Kilobit  | Date: 01/16/12 03:33:29 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
Your an Idiot right
"they are not real 8 core processors, they only have 4 cores (2 separate dual core dies)"

the 8 core BD is comprised of 4 dual core modules which consist of 2 x86 cores an 1 x87 core (shared) per module

so technically they do have 8 cores they just have only 4 x87 cores
0 0 [Posted by: Athlonite  | Date: 01/17/12 03:32:22 PM]
Reply
 
Each set of 2 cores shares part of the pipeline, instruction fetch and decode, so if either of those stall both cores may stall.
0 0 [Posted by: user99  | Date: 01/19/12 11:09:11 AM]
Reply

13. 
BullDozer or BullDust?
0 0 [Posted by: gmn17  | Date: 02/04/12 03:34:42 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
Not BullDust it's Bulldozer.
also Bulldozer is not so fast but Vishera ,Barca and Stream Roller are the fastest cores in the world in the 2013 and 2014 and AMD will create the new 20 nm sixteen core x64 processor until the next few years.
0 0 [Posted by: parham  | Date: 10/27/13 05:37:09 PM]
Reply

14. 
If you want an extremely fast computer with high clock,the AMD Phenom iv 12 core x12 170 barca @6GHz and AMD FX 9590 x8 vishera eight core @4.7GHz are the best choices.
0 0 [Posted by: parham  | Date: 10/27/13 05:17:59 PM]
Reply

15. 
If you want a real super fast computer the AMD Phenom iv 12 core x12 170 barca @6GHz and AMD FX 9590 8 core x8 vishera @ 4.7 GHz are the best choices.
0 0 [Posted by: parham  | Date: 10/27/13 05:21:16 PM]
Reply

16. 
Bulldozer is not good but vishera and barca are the best.
The new AM4 AMD phenom iv x12 170 barca processor has 12 real x64 cores running at 6 GHz and 24 Mega bytes of Level 3 and 12 x 512 Kilo bytes of Level 2 caches.
it is in the new AM4 socket and AM4 is faster than AM3+ and also everything is so brilliant when it uses only 75 Watts of TDP.
0 0 [Posted by: parham  | Date: 10/27/13 05:29:06 PM]
Reply

[1-16]

Add your Comment




Related news

Latest News

Monday, July 21, 2014

12:56 pm | Microsoft to Fire 18,000 Employees to Boost Efficiency. Microsoft to Perform Massive Job Cut Ever Following Acquisition of Nokia

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

6:11 am | Apple Teams Up with IBM to Make iPhone and iPad Ultimate Tools for Businesses and Enterprises. IBM to Sell Business-Optimized iPhone and iPad Devices

Monday, July 14, 2014

6:01 am | IBM to Invest $3 Billion In Research of Next-Gen Chips, Process Technologies. IBM to Fund Development of 7nm and Below Process Technologies, Help to Create Post-Silicon Future

5:58 am | Intel Postpones Launch of High-End “Broadwell-K” Processors to July – September, 2015. High-End Core i “Broadwell” Processors Scheduled to Arrive in Q3 2015

5:50 am | Intel Delays Introduction of Core M “Broadwell” Processors Further. Low-Power Broadwell Chips Due in Late 2014