[VR-Zone] AMD Phenom II X8 2420

[dma0991]

AMD Phenom II X8 2420 Spotted Running in the Wild

I am wondering if the PII X8 is just a rebranding effort as Bulldozer's name is tainted. :hmm:

 

[eternalone]

Yes I knew it I need a release date, this is my next upgrade. Cheapo style with X8 cores hehe. I would be happy if I could get these to 3ghz.

 

[watek]

Eh, not good for gamers unless you only play BF3 even then that's a low clock.

 

[dma0991]

Yes I knew it I need a release date this is my next upgrade. Cheapo style with X8 cores hehe. I would be happy if I could get these to 3ghz.

I don't know whether you could really call it an 'upgrade' when the FX series of Bulldozer barely looked any better than the old PII X6. To make matters worse, FX was above 3GHz at the very least. The PII X8 did not even make it to 3GHz.

 

[eternalone]

Eh, not good for gamers unless you only play BF3 even then that's a low clock.

Depends if we can get them to 3ghz. Also remember these maybe Stars or the more forward-looking Piledrive cores as the article stated so these theoretically could be faster than the phenom 2 and thuban cores. 🙂

 

[eternalone]

I don't know whether you could really call it an 'upgrade' when the FX series of Bulldozer barely looked any better than the old PII X6. To make matters worse, FX was above 3GHz at the very least. The PII X8 did not even make it to 3GHz.

One of the Phenom X8 is rated @3ghz but at 125 watts so theres a good possibility they could get there.

- ZD242046W8K43, AMD Phenom II X8 2420,2.40 GHz, 95W;
- ZD302051W8K44, AMD Phenom II X8 3020,3.00 GHz, 125W;
- ZD252046W6443, AMD Phenom II X6 2520,2.50 GHz, 95W;
- ZD282046W6K43, AMD Phenom II X6 2820,2.80 GHz, 95W;

 

[watek]

Depends if we can get them to 3ghz. Also remember these maybe Stars or the more forward-looking Piledrive cores as the article stated so these theoretically could be faster than the phenom 2 and thuban cores. 🙂

Yes could be 🙂 or they could of just used the old BD and just changed name and slower clocks 😀

for some reason i must be emote happy lol

 

[dma0991]

One of the Phenom X8 is rated @3ghz but at 125 watts so theres a good possibility they could get there.

- ZD242046W8K43, AMD Phenom II X8 2420,2.40 GHz, 95W;
- ZD302051W8K44, AMD Phenom II X8 3020,3.00 GHz, 125W;
- ZD252046W6443, AMD Phenom II X6 2520,2.50 GHz, 95W;
- ZD282046W6K43, AMD Phenom II X6 2820,2.80 GHz, 95W;

Still pales in comparison to the FX-8120 @ 3.1GHz and FX-8150 @ 3.6GHz. So we're getting less performance at lower clocks at the same TDP. Even if these were Piledriver cores, I would expect that the clocks would increase, not decrease especially when processors that are based on Bulldozer relies heavily on high clock speed. I am more disappointed if these samples were Piledriver based.

 

[Rvenger]

They are probably reject 8150/8120s that won't run at the rated speeds to begin with. Probably needs the same voltage for stability at lower clocks which holds true on the 95w/125w tdp.

 

[Topweasel]

They are probably reject 8150/8120s that won't run at the rated speeds to begin with. Probably needs the same voltage for stability at lower clocks which holds true on the 95w/125w tdp.

Or like the previous 3 Names they used, as production ramps up and as they killed off Stars production outside Llano, they needed a new name for the regular users.

So people needing 8 cores but not worried about single threaded components, can get a locked BD, with no Turbo, for less. Expect to see reduced clock versions of the FX4k and FX6k also using the Athlon or Phenom lineup.

They really should stop doing this. Any value in the previous name goes away each time it becomes the value chip. Now neither Athlon or Phenom become names that they can use later. Bringing in the FX name for a whole lineup of Performance processors was a mistake again. For BD it doesn't matter but FX will be so diluted as a brand now, they they won't be able to use it for the king of the hill chips in the future. Each gen they practically will have to come up with a new marketable name.

 

[Rvenger]

Or like the previous 3 Names they used, as production ramps up and as they killed off Stars production outside Llano, they needed a new name for the regular users.

So people needing 8 cores but not worried about single threaded components, can get a locked BD, with no Turbo, for less. Expect to see reduced clock versions of the FX4k and FX6k also using the Athlon or Phenom lineup.

They really should stop doing this. Any value in the previous name goes away each time it becomes the value chip. Now neither Athlon or Phenom become names that they can use later. Bringing in the FX name for a whole lineup of Performance processors was a mistake again. For BD it doesn't matter but FX will be so diluted as a brand now, they they won't be able to use it for the king of the hill chips in the future. Each gen they practically will have to come up with a new marketable name.

Like how they tarnished the FX name 🙄 .

 

[BD231]

Happy new years from AMD, hope ya like CRAP.

 

[formulav8]

These will end up being lower clocked FX cpu's. Don't expect much more than that. They probably have a ton of pre-b2 or lower quality b2 steppings to get rid of. :thumbsdown:

But... with 'voltage' these could be decent for doing reference ocing. I wouldn't expect low power consumption though. Theres a reason they wanted to do a B2 respin before launching the FX cpus and it wasn't just for clockspeed.

Of course, if priced @ or under $100 they will provide very nice bang for your buck. Having to buy an AM3+ mobo really messes things up though. If they would work in existing AM3 boards they would be a very nice upgrade for peoples that have dual core or tri core cpu's.

 

[skipsneeky2]

One of the Phenom X8 is rated @3ghz but at 125 watts so theres a good possibility they could get there.

- ZD242046W8K43, AMD Phenom II X8 2420,2.40 GHz, 95W;
- ZD302051W8K44, AMD Phenom II X8 3020,3.00 GHz, 125W;
- ZD252046W6443, AMD Phenom II X6 2520,2.50 GHz, 95W;
- ZD282046W6K43, AMD Phenom II X6 2820,2.80 GHz, 95W;

LOL i love how every chip at 2.8ghz or below has a clean 95w tdp but jump it up a measily 200mhz and it pumps out a whopping 125w tdp sadly that is pathetic.

What a sadistic basket case of a processor when was the last time we even had a mainstream 2.4ghzs chip was it the q6600 back in 2007?

🙄

 

[formulav8]

You need to remember that the numbers are relative. For example the first Ph2 965 x4 was 140 watts, but it was barely a few watts higher than the 125 watt cpu's in testing.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Assuming no turbo for the X8...What's ~60% of a FX-8150 single threaded performance?

Shit just got even shitter.

And who the hell would anyone disable CnQ anyway (like in the OP pic) unless they enjoy paying a higher electric bill.

 

[Vesku]

Wonder what kind of OCing you can do with these models. Funny that if they do use the Phenom II labeling for a bulldozer they will be selling SKUs that have weaker cores than previous products under the same branding. Perhaps they should call it Phenom II "Prescott Boogaloo Edition".

 

[JoJoman88]

Wonder what kind of OCing you can do with these models. Funny that if they do use the Phenom II labeling for a bulldozer they will be selling SKUs that have weaker cores than previous products under the same branding. Perhaps they should call it Phenom II "Prescott Boogaloo Edition".

Phenom II "Prescott Boogaloo Edition". LoL

 

[nyker96]

It's probably going to be over 120 bucks when it is released. For that money I'd just get a 1035T off ebay for the same amount. x8s don't seems to be much faster or power saving than the old x6s.

 

[Rvenger]

Perhaps they run faster at lower clock speeds? lol

I bet my Llano is faster than the 2.4 Phenom x8.

 

[Blitzvogel]

Happy new years from AMD, hope ya like CRAP.

:biggrin:

I lol'd at that comment.

At least Trinity is looking good.

 

[Topweasel]

Like how they tarnished the FX name 🙄 .

I don't think its Tarnished, more like diluted. Even if BD isn't a good proccessor, its still is Performance CPU, and cores whether useful or not help sell the idea its the best AMD has.

But by using the FX processor which used to mean one of the 2 fastest CPU's AMD sold, it now is a whole lineup, which means that people have to research which of the 9 FX cpu's are the best for them. What AMD should have done, is saved the FX lineup for the FX8k and used the Phenom III X4 and Phenom III X6 names for the 4k and 6k lines. The FX name can be salvaged, but basically it now won't hold the value that the FX used to have and EE still has. Now at best it is yet another of AMD's general use CPU names, even if they can bring back the performance angle, its still only good for lineup, and no one is going to buy a CPU because its an FX again.

Starting to really piss me off, because even if they didn't want to use the Athlon name any more, they could have saved it for a rainy day. But instead they wanted to milk a couple thousand extra CPU sales on the low end by just using the name regardless of the product. Even though they had two pretty decent names available like Duron and Sempron. Which really people have fond memories of the Duron, yet because of what it was no one had high expectations (kind of like the Celeron). It would have been tailor fit for the L3 less Stars.

So now you have a valueless Athlon name, they are about to completely destroy any level of credibility they salvaged on the Phenom name with the Phenom II, and completely wasted their ace in hole, with the FX name.

 

[Maximilian]

Bet they will snag sales from people who dont know this is rebranded bulldozer.

OMG 8 cores!!! Just the upgrade i need for my X4/X6 rig whilest avoiding bulldozer 🙄

 

[T_Yamamoto]

if its cheap, itll be a good alternative to FX

 

[podspi]

if its cheap, itll be a good alternative to FX

Depending on how much they cost, and how much of an OC can be squeezed out of them, they may end up being great budget cpus.... But I thought these were just BD engineering samples?