AMD A64X2 5000+ S939 is coming?

[kknd1967]

Data sheet

Turn to page 81 or search 5000+ in the pdf (the 1st occurance refers to its S939. the 2nd refers to max TDP of 110w)

I thought FX60 was the last S939. Or they are the same thing?

 

[1Dark1Sharigan1]

Originally posted by: kknd1967
I thought FX60 was the last S939. Or they are the same thing?

Basically yes . . .

 

[kknd1967]

found this confusing because I read somewhere else
FX62 and X2-5000+ will be launched together at 2.8G and 2.6G for AM2 only.

Anyway, not much interesting except the rating finally reaches 5000+ mark

 

[JackPack]

I think that was the original plan.

But this document suggests that they're introducing 5000+ on S939 as well. Perhaps due to the fact AM2 has been delayed?

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: JackPack
I think that was the original plan.

But this document suggests that they're introducing 5000+ on S939 as well. Perhaps due to the fact AM2 has been delayed?

AFAIK 5000+ = FX-60

 

[lopri]

If AMD follows their own system, it'd be X2 5200+ = FX-60
X2 5000+ should be FX-60 minus 1/2 L2 cache, or a Manchester-like (512MB L2 cache per core) one

 

[TanisHalfElven]

i was wondering the amd naming was designed to compare to intel clockspeeds. is this still valid.
like is the 4800+ really gonna be as fast as a pentium D at 4.8 GHz

 

[F1shF4t]

Originally posted by: tanishalfelven
i was wondering the amd naming was designed to compare to intel clockspeeds. is this still valid.
like is the 4800+ really gonna be as fast as a pentium D at 4.8 GHz

Short answer NO.
Now the numbers are just there to look pretty for the average joe, and for us the all knowing crowd it gives us a way to name em.

 

[TanisHalfElven]

so the a64 3000+ is not equal to a p4 3 ht.
or is the naming spoiled by the x2's only.

 

[chilled]

Originally posted by: lopri
If AMD follows their own system, it'd be X2 5200+ = FX-60
X2 5000+ should be FX-60 minus 1/2 L2 cache, or a Manchester-like (512MB L2 cache per core) one

qft. the 5000+ would be a 2.6/512kb x 2 part.

 

[letdown427]

To answer the original question. Yes.

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: lopri
If AMD follows their own system, it'd be X2 5200+ = FX-60
X2 5000+ should be FX-60 minus 1/2 L2 cache, or a Manchester-like (512MB L2 cache per core) one

512MB per core :Q

 

[DeathReborn]

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: lopri
If AMD follows their own system, it'd be X2 5200+ = FX-60
X2 5000+ should be FX-60 minus 1/2 L2 cache, or a Manchester-like (512MB L2 cache per core) one

512MB per core :Q

Who needs RAM anyway, it's all on the CPU @ full speed.....

I agree, it's most likely a 512k cache part, with the 5200+ being the full 1MB per core.

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: lopri
If AMD follows their own system, it'd be X2 5200+ = FX-60
X2 5000+ should be FX-60 minus 1/2 L2 cache, or a Manchester-like (512MB L2 cache per core) one

512MB per core :Q

Toss in an X1800 core and you'd give SFF a new name.

 

[imported_ST]

This is interesting news and seems to conincide with the higher OC's being reached recently on the 3800's (2.9GHz+ @ near stock voltage); new speed binning for x2 5000 parts...

 

[the cobbler]

Originally posted by: ST
This is interesting news and seems to conincide with the higher OC's being reached recently on the 3800's (2.9GHz+ @ near stock voltage); new speed binning for x2 5000 parts...

time to go dual core :thumbsup:

 

[the cobbler]

even lower voltage requirement?

1800mhz @ 1.150v
2000mhz @ 1.20v
2200mhz @ 1.25v
2400mhz @ 1.30v

 

[hclarkjr]

i am wondering when this will hit the market? i know the opteron 185 is due out anytime also

 

[Effect]

Originally posted by: tanishalfelven
so the a64 3000+ is not equal to a p4 3 ht.
or is the naming spoiled by the x2's only.

Only really works for single cores.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: lopri
If AMD follows their own system, it'd be X2 5200+ = FX-60
X2 5000+ should be FX-60 minus 1/2 L2 cache, or a Manchester-like (512MB L2 cache per core) one

512MB per core :Q

Toss in an X1800 core and you'd give SFF a new name.

impliment a SATA raid on that, and ud have a monster. But Quad SLI > XFire

 

[Icepick]

Originally posted by: Effect

Originally posted by: tanishalfelven
so the a64 3000+ is not equal to a p4 3 ht.
or is the naming spoiled by the x2's only.

Only really works for single cores.

Yes, the current AMD naming system was designed to compare performance to Pentium 4 single core CPUs. On Average, the 3000+ would perform similarly or a bit better than an equally clocked P4.

 

[cdjr]

Looks like Arctic Cooling is ready for them. Check out the speed ratings on their AMD heatsinks:

http://www.arctic-cooling.com/cpu1.php?p=3&disc=

 

[TanisHalfElven]

does amd make any improvements to the cores (tech) or just it does chose the cores that can work at that speed and bring them out.
@icepick. what dop you mean similarly clocked. doe you mean clocked to 3 GHz or do you mean clocked to 1.8 GHz

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: cdjr
Looks like Arctic Cooling is ready for them. Check out the speed ratings on their AMD heatsinks:

http://www.arctic-cooling.com/cpu1.php?p=3&disc=

LOL nice.

Rated up to FX-59 & 5000+ eh

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Icepick

Originally posted by: Effect

Originally posted by: tanishalfelven
so the a64 3000+ is not equal to a p4 3 ht.
or is the naming spoiled by the x2's only.

Only really works for single cores.

Yes, the current AMD naming system was designed to compare performance to Pentium 4 single core CPUs. On Average, the 3000+ would perform similarly or a bit better than an equally clocked P4.

Speaking of naming anyone find conroe nomeclature interesting? 6xxx, just right over what AMD will have 5xxx.