AMD's first consumer level 3Ghz dual core. The 6000+ X2

[RichUK]

AT Link

It's not that bad of a deal, and the price of the 5600+ and 5400+ is very competitive too, but then again, it's still a K8, so it?d be like investing your money into a netburst chip.

However, for the right person and the right purpose, it could be a good purchase.

 

[dguy6789]

Agreed.

 

[Rommel44]

For someone who isnt overcloking its competitive with C2D - but its better for me to buy 4300 and OC to 2.7 - 3GHz.

 

[RichUK]

EDIT: Perhaps I should thoroughly read the review

 

[secretanchitman]

i wonder how this cpu does in overclocking...i read somewhere that it only went up to 3.2Ghz...

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: secretanchitman
i wonder how this cpu does in overclocking...i read somewhere that it only went up to 3.2Ghz...

3.2GHz is probably the max on air. It's still a 90nm chip and I think AMD has wrestled pretty much every MHz out of the K8 90nm CPU.

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: secretanchitman
i wonder how this cpu does in overclocking...i read somewhere that it only went up to 3.2Ghz...

3.2GHz is probably the max on air. It's still a 90nm chip and I think AMD has wrestled pretty much every MHz out of the K8 90nm CPU.

True. At least we now know for sure that this is the last spin AMD will put on it?s 90nm K8, and the next thing we can expect from AMD is their new K8L core.

Hopefully AMD won?t be too long in releasing its new core. I?m really looking forward to the release; hopefully it should spice things up a bit as things seem to be going a bit stale ATM.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: RichUK

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: secretanchitman
i wonder how this cpu does in overclocking...i read somewhere that it only went up to 3.2Ghz...

3.2GHz is probably the max on air. It's still a 90nm chip and I think AMD has wrestled pretty much every MHz out of the K8 90nm CPU.

True. At least we now know for sure that this is the last spin AMD will put on it?s 90nm K8, and the next thing we can expect from AMD is their new K8L core.

Hopefully AMD won?t be too long in releasing its new core. I?m really looking forward to the release; hopefully it should spice things up a bit as things seem to be going a bit stale ATM.

Yup...it's all 65nm from here on out.
But it's not K8L, it's K10, K10, K10!!! <stomps up and down like the Professer on Felix the Cat>

Explanation of K8L Misnomer by The Inq.

/Rant (for now)

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: RichUK

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: secretanchitman
i wonder how this cpu does in overclocking...i read somewhere that it only went up to 3.2Ghz...

3.2GHz is probably the max on air. It's still a 90nm chip and I think AMD has wrestled pretty much every MHz out of the K8 90nm CPU.

True. At least we now know for sure that this is the last spin AMD will put on it?s 90nm K8, and the next thing we can expect from AMD is their new K8L core.

Hopefully AMD won?t be too long in releasing its new core. I?m really looking forward to the release; hopefully it should spice things up a bit as things seem to be going a bit stale ATM.

Yup...it's all 65nm from here on out.
But it's not K8L, it's K10, K10, K10!!! <stomps up and down like the Professer on Felix the Cat>

Explanation of K8L Misnomer by The Inq.

/Rant (for now)

Thanks, Viditor

I thought I remembered something of a name change for what we knew as K8L, but I couldn?t for the life of my remember what it was.

 

[MotF Bane]

Core 2 Duo is still better, even the E6600 has an edge on that, at... what's the difference? 200 dollars I think?

 

[Regs]

What excites me most is the performance benifits from a 3.0 GHz on 3-4 year old technology. I can only think that the Barcelona will tighten the noose and bring back some form of competition .

As for Penryn I expect more L2 cache might make it an extreme race. I hope AMD is prepared for a long and grueling fight and have something ready for Nehelm. It should be interesting to see if AMD is actually more on track than to just sit back and get beat in the long run again.

Competition is good for innovation sake. As the last 4 years we saw nothing but motherboard advancements.

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: Regs
What excites me most is the performance benifits from a 3.0 GHz on 3-4 year old technology. I can only think that the Barcelona will tighten the noose and bring back some form of competition .

As for Penryn I expect more L2 cache might make it an extreme race. I hope AMD is prepared for a long and grueling fight and have something ready for Nehelm. It should be interesting to see if AMD is actually more on track than to just sit back and get beat in the long run again.

Competition is good for innovation sake. As the last 4 years we saw nothing but motherboard advancements.

I totally agree, especially with the underlined part as this is what I am most interested in. :thumbsup:

 

[RichUK]

I wonder if AMD with K10 will move away from their current naming scheme, as Intel did with Pentium to Core. i.e. no more 6xxx+ 7xxx+ etc.

I personally think they should.

 

[Imyourzero]

Originally posted by: RichUK

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: secretanchitman
i wonder how this cpu does in overclocking...i read somewhere that it only went up to 3.2Ghz...

3.2GHz is probably the max on air. It's still a 90nm chip and I think AMD has wrestled pretty much every MHz out of the K8 90nm CPU.

True. At least we now know for sure that this is the last spin AMD will put on it?s 90nm K8, and the next thing we can expect from AMD is their new K8L core.

Hopefully AMD won?t be too long in releasing its new core. I?m really looking forward to the release; hopefully it should spice things up a bit as things seem to be going a bit stale ATM.

Got that right. Stupid C2D and its superiority...doesn't Intel know that this many ATers aren't supposed to agree on one thing? Why did they have to make a faster chip at an aggressive price? With the reduction of fanboyish flames in the CPU forum, things have gotten a bit boring *yawn*.

At least the R600 should spice things up a bit until AMD can counter with a "C2D killer"

 

[formulav8]

AMDZone.com got his at: 3465. Which is around a 15% increase in clockspeed. Not to shabby for being on the top end. Mhz wise, that puts it right around the c2d oc's. Which, for being on a 90nm process is impressive. Hopefully a mature 65nm process will make the headroom even better.



Jason

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: formulav8
AMDZone.com got his at: 3465. Which is around a 15% increase in clockspeed. Not to shabby for being on the top end. Mhz wise, that puts it right around the c2d oc's. Which, for being on a 90nm process is impressive. Hopefully a mature 65nm process will make the headroom even better.



Jason

Not trying to be negative, but ive been hearing the 65nm engineering samples from AMD arent clocking any better than the 90s. I'm really hoping it's just the immaturity of the process and not some other issue.

 

[formulav8]

Thats why I said hopely a 'Mature' 65nm process will increase the headroom. But there are people getting 3ghz out of the first 65nm chips. 2.8ghz is very common it seems. And they run Very cool. But anyways, hopefully a mature 65nm will be impressive.


JAson

 

[yh125d]

Why no 2x2mb cache? >(

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: formulav8
AMDZone.com got his at: 3465. Which is around a 15% increase in clockspeed. Not to shabby for being on the top end. Mhz wise, that puts it right around the c2d oc's. Which, for being on a 90nm process is impressive. Hopefully a mature 65nm process will make the headroom even better.



Jason

On air?

 

[Hajpoj]

Originally posted by: yh125td
Why no 2x2mb cache? >(

It's a 3-4 year old architecture like the above poster said. It can't handle it.

 

[nyker96]

all I can say is I couldn't ___ ___. but good to know that this new chip is gonna force some price changes through out the system.

 

[Wino]

Originally posted by: formulav8
Thats why I said hopely a 'Mature' 65nm process will increase the headroom. But there are people getting 3ghz out of the first 65nm chips. 2.8ghz is very common it seems. And they run Very cool. But anyways, hopefully a mature 65nm will be impressive.JAson

The sad part for AMD though is by the time their 65nm line 'matures', Intel will have 'immature' 45nm chips shipping.

 

[Dainas]

Well perhaps if they released a socket 939 version for vast majority of their enthusiast base thats still left.

 

[rogue1979]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: formulav8
AMDZone.com got his at: 3465. Which is around a 15% increase in clockspeed. Not to shabby for being on the top end. Mhz wise, that puts it right around the c2d oc's. Which, for being on a 90nm process is impressive. Hopefully a mature 65nm process will make the headroom even better.



Jason

Not trying to be negative, but ive been hearing the 65nm engineering samples from AMD arent clocking any better than the 90s. I'm really hoping it's just the immaturity of the process and not some other issue.

From what I've heard the 3600+ (1.9Ghz) Brisbane is easily hitting 3.0-3.1Ghz on air, that certainly sounds better than the dual core 90 nm. Probably not a C2D killer, but as the 65 nm core matures I would expect to see higher. Maybe 3.3-3.4Ghz in a few months by which time the 3600+ will be well below $100. Sounds like the next 1700+ thoroughbred cpu. A $75 processor that will get close to the E4300 without having to switch motherboards for many. Not to mention socket AM2 motherboards are much cheaper and have memory dividers, so cheap ram will not hold back an overclock.

 

[Yellowbeard]

Originally posted by: formulav8
AMDZone.com got his at: 3465. Which is around a 15% increase in clockspeed. Not to shabby for being on the top end. Mhz wise, that puts it right around the c2d oc's. Which, for being on a 90nm process is impressive. Hopefully a mature 65nm process will make the headroom even better. Jason

From what I have seen and tested, the die process is not the limiting factor here. It's the memory controller. Until AMD gets a substantial improvement in their MC, you won't see much difference in any CPU they make, regardless of 90nm vs 65nm.