AMD is releasing the Phenom II, with the major changes being a shrink to 45 nm technology and an increase in L3 cache size from 2 MB to 6 MB. The performance of the new CPUs puts them at par with Intel quad-cores Q9300 and Q9400 with similar prices. Two models are released:

• Phenom II X4 920 - 2.8 GHz (1.8 GHz HT3)
  
• Phenom II X4 940 - 3.0 GHz (1.8 GHz HT3) (unlocked)
  

Pic:



Here's several of the reviews:

• bit-tech.net
  
• AnandTech
  
• Tom's Hardware
  
• X-bit labs
  
• Hexus.net
  
• LostCircuits
  

Looks like AMD is finally back in the performance game. This may prove to be an excellent upgrade for those with an existing AMD platform.

---

Really curious of what it can perform in a S@H platform..

I'm not in line to buy one but for the record mostly..

//Vyper

---

_________________________________________________________________________
Addicted to SETI crunching!
Founder of GPU Users Group

Wow, that's a decent claim if it really can "perform on par" with q9300/9400. If I had a board to try it out on, I would consider giving it a whirl, but I'm Socket F. The 45nm Opterons are still pretty pricey though. They should come down when I get a dual socket board that will do quads (looking at one specific Tyan board).

---

Linux laptop:
record uptime: 1511d 20h 19m (ended due to the power brick giving-up)

Hmm... this would be interesting. I have always been an AMD fan. Maybe I could upgrade my Phenom 9850 to an X4 940. No idea when it will hit the local market though.

Thank you for the links AlphaLaser.
______________

---

Interesting that they called them "920" and "940". Meant to make people think they rank with the similarly named Intel chips?

-Dave

---

Interesting that they called them "920" and "940". Meant to make people think they rank with the similarly named Intel chips?

-Dave

Argh! I knew there was another thought I wanted to put into my first reply.. I guess they finally got tired of the "equivalent P4 rating" model numbers and decided to try to somehow compare the Phenom II's to the i7?

---

Linux laptop:
record uptime: 1511d 20h 19m (ended due to the power brick giving-up)

... decided to try to somehow compare the Phenom II's to the i7?

Just as Windows "7" is levering the i7 name? (Even though "Windows 7" will not have an NT 7 version number!)

All very good confused Marketing to confuse the punters out of their ignorant cash...


Happy crunchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

In response to that - I want all SETIzens to know that I am working on becoming Windows 7 and Core i7 compatible, so I would like to be called OzzFan Core Phenom i7 Ultimate Deluxe OEM Edition with SP1 x4 965.

Sorry, still no linux drivers. :(

AMD is releasing the Phenom II, with the major changes being a shrink to 45 nm technology and an increase in L3 cache size from 2 MB to 6 MB. The performance of the new CPUs puts them at par with Intel quad-cores Q9300 and Q9400 with similar prices. Two models are released:

• Phenom II X4 920 - 2.8 GHz (1.8 GHz HT3)
  
• Phenom II X4 940 - 3.0 GHz (1.8 GHz HT3) (unlocked)
  

[...]

Looks like AMD is finally back in the performance game. This may prove to be an excellent upgrade for those with an existing AMD platform.

Looks very interesting, and good for any AM2+ motherboards.

It will be even more interesting to see how AMD's exclusive L3 cache compares against the inclusive L3 cache of Intel for the performance realised. I suspect that AMD have the better design but how does that compete against the brute force of the larger area of Intel silicon?

How well can (the Lunatics') optimisations take advantage of the cache?


Note that the AM3 stuff is 'just around the corner'...

Happy fast crunchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

In response to that - I want all SETIzens to know that I am working on becoming Windows 7 and Core i7 compatible, so I would like to be called OzzFan Core Phenom i7 Ultimate Deluxe OEM Edition with SP1 x4 965.

Sorry, still no linux drivers. :(

Kind of an old video, but perhaps you would be interested in the video for "Microsoft redesigns the iPod" video. "iPod PRO 2005 XP Human Ear Professional Edition" :D

And regarding Linux drivers.. don't worry, I'm sure somebody will figure out how to run your setup through Wine. :p

---

Linux laptop:
record uptime: 1511d 20h 19m (ended due to the power brick giving-up)

In response to that - I want all SETIzens to know that I am working on becoming Windows 7 and Core i7 compatible, so I would like to be called OzzFan Core Phenom i7 Ultimate Deluxe OEM Edition with SP1 x4 965.

Sorry, still no linux drivers. :(

Kind of an old video, but perhaps you would be interested in the video for "Microsoft redesigns the iPod" video. "iPod PRO 2005 XP Human Ear Professional Edition" :D

And regarding Linux drivers.. don't worry, I'm sure somebody will figure out how to run your setup through Wine. :p

That was funny, but even more hilarious was the video I found on the left: South Park Mac vs. PC and South Park Mac vs. PC vs. Linux.

:))))))))))))) Nice cartoons

I have a system that currently contains a "AMD Athlon64 X2 4800+" and the mobo supports AM2+. So I guess I am the ideal candidate ;)

But it is the beginning of the year.. a lot of bills to pay.. I hope to get around to buying one in one or two months.

---

The SETI@Home Gauntlet 2012 april 16 - 30| info / chat | STATS

In response to that - I want all SETIzens to know that I am working on becoming Windows 7 and Core i7 compatible, so I would like to be called OzzFan Core Phenom i7 Ultimate Deluxe OEM Edition with SP1 x4 965.

Sorry, still no linux drivers. :(

in short,Ocpiu Doe

AMD Phenom II
L1 Cache 64 + 64 KB - L2 Cache 512 KB - L3 Cache 6 MB
MMX 3DNow! SSE SSE2 SSE3 SSE4a
4 threads?
[when will AMD release 8 thread CPUs?]

Intel Core i7
L1 Cache 32 + 32 KB - L2 Cache 256 KB - L3 Cache 8 MB
MMX SSE SSE2 SSE3 SSSE3 SSE4.1 SSE4.2
8 threads


Nice.. but not so well..

The Core i7 is a 8 thread CPU.
The Core i7 have better extensions. Up to SSE4.2
The opt. progs support better the Intels.. (hey, not surprising.. Intel is the manufacturer of this progs)
AMD - max. SSE3. Intel - max. SSE4.1 to now. [opt. apps]
And the opt. progs will never support the higher AMD extensions, or?

How bigger the Cache, so better the SETI@home performance.
I don't know.. they have all (L1, L2, L3) different size..
To now, the opt. apps are L2-Cache optimized?

If we look in the future.. and the new release of opt. apps.. :-)
Which CPU would have the better performance?

I guess the Intels.. :-(

---

... I am working on becoming Windows 7 and Core i7 compatible, so I would like to be called OzzFan Core Phenom i7 Ultimate Deluxe OEM Edition with SP1 x4 965.

Wrapped up with the Mission Statement:

"Resistance Is Futile" ?

Sorry, still no linux drivers. :(

Good. I wouldn't want you to abide by GPLv3 too easily! :-)


Happy crunchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

... SSE4a ... SSSE3 SSE4.1 SSE4.2 ...

If we look in the future.. and the new release of opt. apps.. :-)
Which CPU would have the better performance?

I guess the Intels.. :-(

Why does optimisation never get any easier for the programmers?!

Meanwhile, the different mix of cache and cache latency will make for an interesting contest. The killer question is whether Intel will just use brute force clock speed and cache size and a high maximum heat dissipation to keep racing?

Or do we all go parallel GPU-style?

Happy fast crunchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

... SSE4a ... SSSE3 SSE4.1 SSE4.2 ...

If we look in the future.. and the new release of opt. apps.. :-)
Which CPU would have the better performance?

I guess the Intels.. :-(

Why does optimisation never get any easier for the programmers?!

Meanwhile, the different mix of cache and cache latency will make for an interesting contest. The killer question is whether Intel will just use brute force clock speed and cache size and a high maximum heat dissipation to keep racing?

Or do we all go parallel GPU-style?

Happy fast crunchin',
Martin

Well if the Phenom II is as good as the claims are, and it does compare with the i7 (if HT is turned off), I have a feeling Intel might kick up their "Mega-hurtz" campaign again. They used that in the P4 era and just kept giving it more L2 and more FSB so they could stay on top. Sometimes I wonder why Intel even bothers with multipliers anymore..the FSB is high enough to be the full speed in low-end CPUs.

---

Linux laptop:
record uptime: 1511d 20h 19m (ended due to the power brick giving-up)

Speed kills. AMD figured that out long before Intel wanted to admit it. Higher clock rates will consume disproportionately more power, when compared to more parallelism. Intel's parallelism campaign has a long way to go, where more functional units per core and more cores drive increases in net system performance. And remember that these circuits can be turned off when they drop into NOP's.

With more parallelism, the economic limiter is that of silicon real estate. Which company can produce the larger size chips with greater yield? (Ans. The consistent champion here is Intel.) As transistor scaling becomes more difficult, expect multichip packaging to become more important. Which company has proven capability for complex packaging? (Ans. Intel has almost always led the game here too.)

My prediction is that the Borg will have an i8 or i9 at its core.

All that holds for the generic CPU. Specialty cpu's such as gpu's are a different ball game, in which case high speed clocks are defensible. But don't expect low prices in this case.

... SSE4a ... SSSE3 SSE4.1 SSE4.2 ...

If we look in the future.. and the new release of opt. apps.. :-)
Which CPU would have the better performance?

I guess the Intels.. :-(

Why does optimisation never get any easier for the programmers?!

Meanwhile, the different mix of cache and cache latency will make for an interesting contest. The killer question is whether Intel will just use brute force clock speed and cache size and a high maximum heat dissipation to keep racing?

Or do we all go parallel GPU-style?

Happy fast crunchin',
Martin

Well if the Phenom II is as good as the claims are, and it does compare with the i7 (if HT is turned off), I have a feeling Intel might kick up their "Mega-hurtz" campaign again. They used that in the P4 era and just kept giving it more L2 and more FSB so they could stay on top. Sometimes I wonder why Intel even bothers with multipliers anymore..the FSB is high enough to be the full speed in low-end CPUs.

I don't think PII's will be much of a threat to Core i7s, since they are still clock-for-clock slower than Penryns in the Core 2 brand. However, the end of the AnandTech article suggests that Intel may respond in the short-term with a price drop of their quad cores to force PII to compete with higher performing Intel parts.

---