You can crush a man with journalism - William Randolph Hearst
|
|
|
AMD releases three more three cores
AMD IS COMPLETING the recent rash of CPU releases today with the new -50 series triple cores. There are three models, the X3 8450, 8650 and 8750.
If you remember back to the golden age of late March, AMD put out a ton of B2 and B3 stepping CPUs. The one thing missing from the mix was a B3 X3, and now we have 3 of them, all B3 X3s. Sorry, had to say that, but at least I didn't point out that there were 2 B2 X3s earlier. In any case, all are the same as the older models, just a newer stepping sans the way overblown TLB bug.
The 8450 is a 2.1GHz model that retails for $145, the 8650 is 2.3GHz that costs $165 while the 8750 runs at 2.4GHz for $195. This last one undercuts it's X4 cousin by $20 MSRP and equals the cost of the 2.2 GHz 9550 X4. Given how few games use a third core much less a fourth, the X3 could be the better gaming option at the price point. All X3s are 95W parts.
Not much else is new, just a B3 version of the parts that came out last month. While most may mock the whole concept, it gives AMD a weapon that Intel can not match in retail for at least another year, and that is worth quite a bit. You can construct a three core X3 system, 780G mobo, CPU and 2GB of RAM for well under $300 now, try that with a quad.
Retail is all about giving the consumer options they didn't know they wanted, and the X3s do just that. Just like in fast food, the mere existence of a triple Whopper makes the double seem quite reasonable. AMD can push the idea of an X3 to people who don't want to spend the money for an X4, and Intel will have nothing to aim at them. If you look at the mouth-breathing, knuckle dragging retail PC buyer, they will go for this logic, never mind that they don't need a second core to begin with.
If you are wondering how they work, the short answer is just fine. I received an X3 8750 from AMD the other day, and it plugged into my 780G and 790G mobos just fine. Switching between it and an X4 9850 worked as expected, but going back and forth from a B2 stepping 9600 made the BIOS flag a new CPU. That was the worst of the compatibility issues encountered.
In testing, we took the aforementioned X3 8750 and two X4s, a 9850 and an early engineering sample 9600, and set them all to 2.4GHz@1.2v. The testing rig was an Asus M3A32-MVP Deluxe with 2G of Corsair Dominator DDR2-800 running at 5-5-5-15, an OCZ Vanquisher fan, Western Digital 500GB RE2 HD and a PC Power and Cooling Silencer 750 PSU. Two ATI 3870 GPUs were added on in Crossfire mode hooked to a Dell 3008 30" monitor.
In the time honoured tradition of simply mucking around with the new toy, there was a lot of nothing that happened. The 8750 X3 played all the games I am currently hooked on, Supreme Commander, Dawn of War: Dark Crusade and Portal without a hitch, there was no noticeable differences between the three CPUs to the semi-trained eye.
In a slightly more instrumented test, some differences were measured. Please remember, all CPUs were set to the same 2.4GHz and all voltages were set at 1.2v just to even things out. At idle, the 8750 sucked 178W, most of that from the GPUs. The 9850@2.4/1.2 took 189W and the 9600 sipped 172W at the same settings.
In 3DMark06 at default settings, the CPUs scored 12169, 12977 and 12898 for the 8750, 9850 and 9600 respectively. They drew 347, 359 and 341W while doing so. With the Valve Map Compilation benckmark, the CPUs took 208, 229 and 210W respectively and turned in times of 3:59, 3:05 and 3:07 minutes.
Given that only one of these is stock, I would caution against drawing any firm conclusions. The X3 performs just about where it should, almost exactly 33% slower than the X4s in CPU intensive tasks, and notably below the X4s in 3DMark. It is just about what you should expect.
In the end, the biggest thing that the X3 line will give AMD is competitive differentiation at retail. There will be a smooth ramp in speed and pricing between 2, 3 and 4 cores, something that all stores like to see. I would be surprised if it doesn't sell quite well, it is reasonably priced and quite a unique part. ยต
Tags: Amd
Share this:
Share
"The X3 performs just about where it should, almost exactly 33% slower than the X4s in CPU intensive tasks..."
Err... Do you mean 25% slower? Or, if you want to say 33%: the X4 is 33% faster than the X3.
have an interesting blurb about the non-arrival of the SB710. The original posting mentioned an SB780 but it turned out to be a typo or confusion with 780 northbridge and has been corrected. 

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6956&Itemid=1
Dave C, your facts are a little off. The Phenom xx50's are ALL B3 stepping cpu's, so getting one is pretty much a given. As for the comments about switching off one of the cores, this makes perfect sense from a business point of view and has been common practice in the GPU industry for decades. No-one complains that their 8800GTS is just a 8800GTX that "didn't quite work" as a GTX now do they. No!!!
Thinking of Games, XBox 360 Uses 3 Cores & keeps its Games Propritary. Maybe 3 cores isn't Just 25% less?

Maybe this X3 is much more complex, as its desktop, not special system. How about some Wacko Top Ender, like 4- 4870(Got to add X2 or X3?Topper.)How does it perform on 3 way CrossfireX Hybrid.

Will this ever really develope, Like into 6 Core. Hey-AMD only Has 13.9% Share of Market, Not like Xbox360, wasn't that ibm & Sony CELL.(AKA Chartered) Yet, Dead Ender.?. 
Will X3 have its Own Happy Face Island to Live Without needless comparisons to Jones Family of eternal Upgrading?As Consules Did.Where Has AMD hidden 2 gig Transistor Units, will they have any 6 cores? I.O.W.(InOtherWords), whats marketing future here?Is it Dunning Dunnington or Playsnaker.HighMeShekTeen told me its Porno Engine,I'm e Sex Fiend often right.
Stewie drashek
Stewart - Get your head out of your ass. If you think Hector owns 49% of AMD, you're dumber than your reflection.

A hostile takeover? You're joking right? Who wants to buy a company worth nothing, with barely any market share, and a huge amount of debt?

There is nothing wrong with productizing a triple core CPU. All semi companys do something similar. Nvidia, Intel to name a few. It's call floor sweeping. Instead of throwing away parts where sections of logic don't work, the parts are binned into a different category.
I was excited for the X3's last August, about the time I was waiting to build a new computer. I ended up building it in November with an 8800 GT. AMD was nowhere to be found, I went with the good 'ol Q6600.

Day late and a dollar short, AMD. I have this sinking feeling that my 3.0ghz Q6600 on stock voltages would still run just fine against these, almost half a year later.

Its a shame too. Haven't had an Intel CPU since my Pentium II 266mhz.
First two post are misinformations, I believe their motives are not fair.
First comment says one core is bad so all cores must be bad. Ummm...
Second poster didn't read the article and still spews these are B2 chips.

Oh my, nothing is further from the truth.
Obviously, AMD isn't making the X3s for performance / picky buyers like yourselves. It is making them for the Average Joe (as stated in the article), and also making a bit of lemonade out of process issues.

If you want the coolest, go drop a grand on an "Extreme" CPU. The unwashed masses, however, will have no ideological issues with a 3 core, and will buy them in spades. 

Here's to hoping that AMD weathers this next year...
is a bunch of aliens running amd? what in the world is going on over there. first lets launch a part that has a error in it, now 2nd its fixed, late, and is 500mhz slower then what we wanted.
also lets really make ourselves look bad and show that we have a terrible manufacturing process so bad that we have at least 50% failures in 1 core, we will sell these as tri-cores .
is there anyother words that can describe such a total fuckup on AMD's behalf , am I grasping the whole thing here?

there is just something about buying a part that didnt work in 4 core mode that they will now deactivate a core and make 3 and still somehow promote confidence that it will somehow work? that doesnt sit right for me. AMD will be lucky to last this year without being involved in a hostile takeover, Hector wont sell, and because he is a 49% owner (i think) it will have to be taken over hostile
There is so much ill-informed commentry on this article I am going to have to set you all straight.

Its not a quad core with one bad its a quad with only three enabled. And its done to meet a price point, and thats straight from the horses mouth. By the time the parts get through to retail the SRP will be blown out the window and these chips will represent excellent value for money, beyond what the current meager price differential would suggest.

Finally the translation lookaside buffer is so grossly blown out of proportion its quite comical. All processors have errata (=bugs), I recall Intel making chips that couldn't do simple division computations, on that scale the FORMER TLB issue is a non event.

I suggest you all stop bickering amongst yourselves and start making proper comments. IF you don't have anything worthwhile to say other than obviously daft/false/FUD then keep your comments to yourselves!
I thought Tri-cores were to be so awesome because each core had a direct link to the other two cores, blah blah blah...

Is it the usual "There isn't an app that takes advantage of it" hobble? Or is this truly AMD just binning the quads with one bad core?
Somehow, I don't think that people owning Intel single core chips are crying and rioting in the streets that Intel actually gave them a Core Duo with one faulty core turned off.

Once Intel moves to a single-die quad core (instead of a 2core x 2die = quad core solution), expect them to do the same thing.
mr.DAAMIT salesman, so you're saying that the TLB bug isn't really a bad thing huh? 

"While most may mock the whole concept, it gives AMD a weapon that Intel can not match in retail for at least another year, and that is worth quite a bit. You can construct a three core X3 system, 780G mobo, CPU and 2GB of RAM for well under $300 now, try that with a quad."

... yeah, coming from a DAAMIT salesman that is... very very typical fanboism you are mr. DAAMIT salesman. hoorah!


"Retail is all about giving the consumer options they didn't know they wanted, and the X3s do just that. Just like in fast food, the mere existence of a triple Whopper makes the double seem quite reasonable. AMD can push the idea of an X3 to people who don't want to spend the money for an X4, and Intel will have nothing to aim at them. If you look at the mouth-breathing, knuckle dragging retail PC buyer, they will go for this logic, never mind that they don't need a second core to begin with."

... you know what? that's a good analogy? why didn't i thought of that? oh well, you're more worse than the guys who are promoting a product based on results.

"If you are wondering how they work, the short answer is just fine."

... wow that's something new Intel couldn't have done! say... you hate intel also do you mr DAAMIT salesman?

"there was no noticeable differences between the three CPUs to the semi-trained eye."

... BECAUSE YOU'RE A DAAMIT SALESMAN DAAMIT!
I am sorry for those prices you can buy a Phenom for less than that and have full quad core.

Current Phenom's have that dodgy Lv3 Erreta problem so do these chips it'll be a while before you're guaranteed a B3 chip. And these Triple cores are supposed to be the dodgy Phenoms with 1 core sealed off.