AMD to counter with FX-70, FX-72 and FX-74
- Thread starter LittleNemoNES
- Start date
They will be CPU BUNDLES so the TDP will be 125W x 2, lol. Not that I expect the lower-end parts to get close to the 125W but the 3GHz part may get remarkably close...
all they had to do was to lower prices. it was that simple.. just drop the 5000+ to the E6300 price and the rest accordingly.. and the crowd would be back with AMD again..
n7
Elite Member
- Jan 4, 2004
- 21,281
- 4
- 81
Actually, that still wouldn't really work, since all the C2Ds OC very well, far better than an Athlon 64 could dream to.
Even i would take an E6300 over an FX-62, even if the FX-62 was cheaper :Q, since i know that even if i could get the FX-62 to 3.2 GHz (which would lilkely be very difficult with air), all i need to do is get the E6300 to 3.0 Ghz to equate or beat it, & that's possible with basically every single E6300 w/o too much trouble.
On forums like this, most of us are enthusiasts, & when one company's product is better than another for a similar or even slightly higher price...it's gonna sell a heck of a lot better.
Why the hell would AMD lower prices?
The X2-5000 and X2-5200 are selling out at well above their MSRP. Believe it or not, the X2 has held the lead for so long, there are people still believing that the X2 > Core2 Duo. These are probably semi-enthusiasts who do the research at the time and X2 > Pentium-D, so naturally they extend that generalization to X2 > Core2. Don't believe me? The MSRP for the AM2 X2-5000+ is around the $350 mark. Newegg has them retail for $500+ and is consistently selling out to idiots. Yes folks, for the cost of an E6600 + Gigabyte DS3, you too can get an AM2 X2-5000+.
This was also a phenomenon with the AthlonXP and the Pentium4. The AthlonXP dominated the Willamette (on a PR vs clock basis) at the time. Even when Northwood and Northwood-C blew away the AXP PR vs clock, many people still remained in the dark and assumed that the AXP PR > Northwood-C. You don't know how many people on this forum alone thought the 3200+ Barton > 3.2Ghz P4-C when Anand himself stated the 3200+ wasnt deserving the rating 3200+ and was more on par with a 2.8Ghz Northwood-C.
If you don't believe me, head to Fry's and park yourself along the CPU isle. There are idiots making comments like:
1) X2 is faster than Core2 and consumes less power.
2) Core2 runs at a lower clock than X2, and we all know how efficient AMD is per clock.
3) Core2 is a power hog.
4) Core2 is not a real 64bit CPU.
I heard all the above in about 15 minutes from various people during a busy time.
The X2 will continue to ride on its success, IMO, for at least another year before people start getting a clue, just like the Pentium was riding on its success during the A64 era (actually it was more or less on par with the s754 A64's, it was the S939's that really started to pull ahead).
The X2-5000 and X2-5200 are selling out at well above their MSRP. Believe it or not, the X2 has held the lead for so long, there are people still believing that the X2 > Core2 Duo. These are probably semi-enthusiasts who do the research at the time and X2 > Pentium-D, so naturally they extend that generalization to X2 > Core2. Don't believe me? The MSRP for the AM2 X2-5000+ is around the $350 mark. Newegg has them retail for $500+ and is consistently selling out to idiots. Yes folks, for the cost of an E6600 + Gigabyte DS3, you too can get an AM2 X2-5000+.
This was also a phenomenon with the AthlonXP and the Pentium4. The AthlonXP dominated the Willamette (on a PR vs clock basis) at the time. Even when Northwood and Northwood-C blew away the AXP PR vs clock, many people still remained in the dark and assumed that the AXP PR > Northwood-C. You don't know how many people on this forum alone thought the 3200+ Barton > 3.2Ghz P4-C when Anand himself stated the 3200+ wasnt deserving the rating 3200+ and was more on par with a 2.8Ghz Northwood-C.
If you don't believe me, head to Fry's and park yourself along the CPU isle. There are idiots making comments like:
1) X2 is faster than Core2 and consumes less power.
2) Core2 runs at a lower clock than X2, and we all know how efficient AMD is per clock.
3) Core2 is a power hog.
4) Core2 is not a real 64bit CPU.
I heard all the above in about 15 minutes from various people during a busy time.
The X2 will continue to ride on its success, IMO, for at least another year before people start getting a clue, just like the Pentium was riding on its success during the A64 era (actually it was more or less on par with the s754 A64's, it was the S939's that really started to pull ahead).
RichUK
Lifer
- Feb 14, 2005
- 10,341
- 678
- 126
The only reason AMD are releasing 3Ghz parts for the top end 4x4 FX parts, is so that they don?t get obliterated in future benchmarks/reviews against the 2.6Ghz quad core Kentsfield. So this should be as close to competitive as can be. They are lucky that Intel don?t release the Kentsfield XE at 2.9Ghz, as then they would really be in trouble.
And yes I do think 4x4 for the consumer segment is just a stop gap. Simply because it is just two Socket F Opteron 2 series with a different brand name. It simply doesn?t bring anything different to the table, other than the FX brand name.
The thing is. AMD are now on the back foot, so they have to keep up with Intel, and be perceived as competitive in all segments. In this case against Intel in bringing quad cores to the consumer market otherwise they will lose market share and their somewhat loyal user base. Even when they have to use an over complicated yet already proven vehicle for quad cores.
Remember when Intel bodged a dual core package back in the Pentium D days to quickly combat AMD with their X2. The tables have now turned where that very same dual dice single socket technology, has led AMD to quickly compensate against the quad cores competition. Ironic isn?t it.
I read that AMD have ramped 65nm clocks so far upto 2.6Ghz. So I suppose this would explain the reason that they are not using 65nm on the higher clocked 4x4 FX parts, yet another blow for AMD. I would imagine that this is the last spin for 90nm for sure.
Without K8L and high yield 65nm, Intel are easily running circles around AMD.
For instance, say AMD before xmas, are able to release 3.2 or even 3.4Ghz Socket F 4x4 FX?s on 65nm, so to take the crown for quad core processing power over the quad core kentsfield 6700. All Intel will comfortably do is slap two x6800?s on to a socket for the next Kenstfield XE without a sweat. Ohh and take back the crown of course.
And yes I do think 4x4 for the consumer segment is just a stop gap. Simply because it is just two Socket F Opteron 2 series with a different brand name. It simply doesn?t bring anything different to the table, other than the FX brand name.
The thing is. AMD are now on the back foot, so they have to keep up with Intel, and be perceived as competitive in all segments. In this case against Intel in bringing quad cores to the consumer market otherwise they will lose market share and their somewhat loyal user base. Even when they have to use an over complicated yet already proven vehicle for quad cores.
Remember when Intel bodged a dual core package back in the Pentium D days to quickly combat AMD with their X2. The tables have now turned where that very same dual dice single socket technology, has led AMD to quickly compensate against the quad cores competition. Ironic isn?t it.
I read that AMD have ramped 65nm clocks so far upto 2.6Ghz. So I suppose this would explain the reason that they are not using 65nm on the higher clocked 4x4 FX parts, yet another blow for AMD. I would imagine that this is the last spin for 90nm for sure.
Without K8L and high yield 65nm, Intel are easily running circles around AMD.
For instance, say AMD before xmas, are able to release 3.2 or even 3.4Ghz Socket F 4x4 FX?s on 65nm, so to take the crown for quad core processing power over the quad core kentsfield 6700. All Intel will comfortably do is slap two x6800?s on to a socket for the next Kenstfield XE without a sweat. Ohh and take back the crown of course.
All I can say is that we all knew 4x4 was coming. We all knew it would not be marketed as a mainstream platform. We all knew it wouldn't be all that and a bag of chips. Did anyone really expect more of 4x4?
As for how it will stack up against Kentsfield, I'll wait for the benches.
As for how it will stack up against Kentsfield, I'll wait for the benches.
eventhough if AMD wins the all benchmarks for their 4x4, I think they are still not the winner since those 4x4 are compose of 2 CPU. Yes intel uses 2 conroes for their Quad but still it is quad core as compared to 2-socket, 2-cpu. Funny how AMD criticize intel for their quad approach.
All that matters is how the consumer wins in terms of price/performance
All that matters is how the consumer wins in terms of price/performance
For some reason, I highly doubt 2x 3Ghz FX's can beat a single Core2 Quadro at 2.66Ghz consistently. Woodcrests kind of take a beating due to the extra latency of FB-DIMMS, which are good for high memory usage but suck for low-memory performance. Kentsfield doesn't seem to suffer from the same fate and would definitely be faster than Dual Woodcrests clock for clock just because it uses regular DDR2 memory.
Hard Ball
Senior member
- Jul 3, 2005
- 594
- 0
- 0
It will definitely depend on the application. for apps involving a lot of vector/SIMD code, Kentsfield definitely will have an advantage; for apps that require streaming memory, or large amount of relatively random accesses in address space, 4x4 will probably perform better. For most of the remaining applications, there the performance should be pretty close.
lolz @ a measly 3.0ghz X2
Seriously though, I am in hot sweaty love with my Conroe. My X2 4400+ @ 2.6 was a damned fast CPU, but this thing is literally +/- 10-15% (depending on app) of DOUBLE the speed (when you add in the slight boost from the FSB and mem, ~5% avg put together)
I've enjoyed watching how MS-Word loads faster and faster on my newer systems.
On my P4 3.4ghz prescott, it simply flashed the "Word" screen and was up
About the same on my X2 4400+
On my current system? The "Word" screen doesn't even show up. Fking A
Seriously though, I am in hot sweaty love with my Conroe. My X2 4400+ @ 2.6 was a damned fast CPU, but this thing is literally +/- 10-15% (depending on app) of DOUBLE the speed (when you add in the slight boost from the FSB and mem, ~5% avg put together)
I've enjoyed watching how MS-Word loads faster and faster on my newer systems.
On my P4 3.4ghz prescott, it simply flashed the "Word" screen and was up
About the same on my X2 4400+
On my current system? The "Word" screen doesn't even show up. Fking A
Thats a pretty lame thing to "enjoy".
I can probably live without that benefit.
On my ~4000+ A64 the Word screen is there for less than a quarter of a second.
It doesnt hurt to have RAID-0 either if you are comparing to your older rigs.
Originally posted by: Crusader
Thats a pretty lame thing to "enjoy".
I can probably live without that benefit.
On my ~4000+ A64 the Word screen is there for less than a quarter of a second.
It doesnt hurt to have RAID-0 either if you are comparing to your older rigs.
No same HDDs as before
AMD ... i doubt FX at 4GHz can battle conroe at 3.2GHz .. not to mention u can easily OC conroe (E6600 or above, E6400 or below are allendale) to 4GHz
Originally posted by: Crusader
Thats a pretty lame thing to "enjoy".
I can probably live without that benefit.
On my ~4000+ A64 the Word screen is there for less than a quarter of a second.
It doesnt hurt to have RAID-0 either if you are comparing to your older rigs.
Uhh, theres a Word Screen?
But seriously, I'm running 2007 Beta, and its as smooth a butter!
Originally posted by: lopri
I might actually be interested in this setup if FX70 cost less than $200 and multiplier unlocked.
LOL $200 keep dreaming.
There's no way it could. If you look at CPU bound gaming benchmarks in anand's review for instance, the Core 2 x6800 beats the FX-62 by nearly 40% on average over 4-5 games.
3.6ghz E6600 + 5% (for faster FSB/mem due to OC) x 30% faster per clock = 4.9ghz AMD
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 361
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter