Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: AMD's move to 65nm begins

  1. #1
    HEXUS webmaster Steve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    14,283
    Thanks
    293
    Thanked
    841 times in 476 posts

    AMD's move to 65nm begins

    Technically the move to 65nm began when they started planning it, but today is the day AMD issued a press release announcing availability of 65nm CPUs.
    http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=7386
    PHP Code:
    $s = new signature();
    $s->sarcasm()->intellect()->font('Courier New')->display(); 

  2. #2
    Moderator chuckskull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The Frozen North
    Posts
    7,713
    Thanks
    950
    Thanked
    690 times in 463 posts
    • chuckskull's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z77-D3H
      • CPU:
      • 3570k @ 4.7 - H100i
      • Memory:
      • 32GB XMS3 1600mhz
      • Storage:
      • 256GB Samsung 850 Pro + 3TB Seagate
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 980Ti Classified
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic M12 700W
      • Case:
      • Corsair 500R
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus VG278HE
      • Internet:
      • FTTC
    Run much cooler, still cant get near intel for speed though. wonder how well the they overclock with the lower TDP's

  3. #3
    Banhammer in peace PeterB kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    31,039
    Thanks
    1,881
    Thanked
    3,379 times in 2,716 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 32GB DDR4 3200 CL16
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 970Evo+ NVMe
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGF
      • Internet:
      • rubbish
    If it's anything like the 'energy efficient' AMDs, terribly

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    116
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    save energy, save money to buy a big psu.
    good stuff. When is it available for sale?

  5. #5
    HEXUS webmaster Steve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    14,283
    Thanks
    293
    Thanked
    841 times in 476 posts
    RTFA, there's a link in there
    PHP Code:
    $s = new signature();
    $s->sarcasm()->intellect()->font('Courier New')->display(); 

  6. #6
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    26
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    • ikjadoon's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P5N-E SLI (BIOS 401)
      • CPU:
      • C2D E6600 @ 3.5GHz
      • Memory:
      • 2048MB @ DDR2-770 (5-5-5-15)
      • Storage:
      • Seagate 7200.10 320GB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • XFX 8800GTS @ 576/1800
      • PSU:
      • Enermax 620W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master Stacker 830 (6x120)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung 172t + Mintek 26" + NEC 20WMGX2
      • Internet:
      • Bellsouth Fast Access 6.0Mbps
    Quote Originally Posted by kalniel View Post
    If it's anything like the 'energy efficient' AMDs, terribly
    "Terribly"? Would they not be equal? They can't be worse! It's the SAME chip, just ran at a lower voltage. You can make any X2 3800+ a "65W" version, just lower the voltage. (Small chance it might not be stable, but that is beside the point.) Or am I completely off base and somehow AMD screws with the overclockability?

    Either way, I expect the 65nm products to OC about the same, maybe slightly better. Not worse, though.

    ~Ibrahim~

    P.S. Don't tell me you were being sarcastic? Then I'd be really embarrassed.

  7. #7
    Banhammer in peace PeterB kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    31,039
    Thanks
    1,881
    Thanked
    3,379 times in 2,716 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 32GB DDR4 3200 CL16
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 970Evo+ NVMe
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGF
      • Internet:
      • rubbish
    No, I wasn't being sarcastic, unfortunately.

    The energy efficient versions of processors overclock far far worse than the normal voltage versions of the processors. Bumping the volts back to the non-EE setting still only gets you a mild overclock.

    Now hopefully the 65mm chips will be better, but if they're combining the 65mm with a reduction in target voltage there is always the danger they'll do what the EE processors did.

  8. #8
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    26
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    • ikjadoon's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P5N-E SLI (BIOS 401)
      • CPU:
      • C2D E6600 @ 3.5GHz
      • Memory:
      • 2048MB @ DDR2-770 (5-5-5-15)
      • Storage:
      • Seagate 7200.10 320GB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • XFX 8800GTS @ 576/1800
      • PSU:
      • Enermax 620W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master Stacker 830 (6x120)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung 172t + Mintek 26" + NEC 20WMGX2
      • Internet:
      • Bellsouth Fast Access 6.0Mbps
    Ahh! Are you sure?

    Neoseeker got a X2 4200+ EE to 2.79GHz. That is very nice, with a HTT of 310MHz. Surely you can't classify that as "far worse".

    LINKAGE!

    Quote Originally Posted by X-Bit
    This way, Energy Efficient Athlon 64 X2 4600+ processor with the maximum heat dissipation of 65W could overclock only to 2.84GHz, i.e. its frequency potential didn’t surprise us. The regular CPUs of the same type with the 85W TDP could most probably hit the same mark during overclocking. In other words, our very first experiment indicated clearly that there will hardly be anything special about the overclocking potential of the Energy Efficient processors.
    Yet, one could say I've misquoted. If you keep reading, it says "...too early to make conclusions...one more Energy Efficient...." They then test the X2 3800+ 35W version. They up the voltage all the way to 1.5V, but can only reach 2.55Ghz, a modest overclock. Seems a tad low, but not horrible, either.

    Quote Originally Posted by X-Bit
    In reality if you raise the Vcore of the Energy Efficient processor to the level of the nominal Vcore of a regular one, you will simply be able to catch up with the frequency of the regular processor, but not overcome it.
    The only time they ever mention that it might be worse is in the conclusion:

    Quote Originally Posted by X-Bit
    As for their overclocking potential, which might be of specific interest to hardware enthusiasts, we have to upset you. Despite the expectations, Energy Efficient AMD CPUs cannot boast higher overclocking potential. They may even overclock worse than their “standard” analogues. Although their lowered power consumption allows you to raise the core voltage much higher, it doesn’t help to hit the extreme clock speeds.
    Key word: may. As we have seen from the Neoseeker review, they might have gotten a "weaker" chip, I don't know. But I would NOT say they overclock "far worse". They overclock just as well, but maybe slightly less.

    LINKAGE #2

    ~Ibrahim~

  9. #9
    Banhammer in peace PeterB kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    31,039
    Thanks
    1,881
    Thanked
    3,379 times in 2,716 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 32GB DDR4 3200 CL16
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 970Evo+ NVMe
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGF
      • Internet:
      • rubbish
    Of course, I took some poetic license in my generalisations, but if review samples don't overclock that well I never have much confidence. When overclocking you really want lots of reviews saying that they overclock fantastically, and then there's just a chance yours might. If there's even a small number of poor results, it's such a small sample size that chances of you getting a chip that overclocks well are 'far worse' than for the non EE chips

  10. #10
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    26
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    • ikjadoon's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P5N-E SLI (BIOS 401)
      • CPU:
      • C2D E6600 @ 3.5GHz
      • Memory:
      • 2048MB @ DDR2-770 (5-5-5-15)
      • Storage:
      • Seagate 7200.10 320GB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • XFX 8800GTS @ 576/1800
      • PSU:
      • Enermax 620W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master Stacker 830 (6x120)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung 172t + Mintek 26" + NEC 20WMGX2
      • Internet:
      • Bellsouth Fast Access 6.0Mbps
    True, I see where you are coming from. I wish some more people would review them, so we could get a more accurate reading. The peeps on NewEgg have gotten similar results, 2.3+ on the EE 3800+. Who knows?

    ~Ibrahim~

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. What is AMD's Next move?
    By manne_29 in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 31-10-2006, 07:22 AM
  2. is Intel 651 65nm CedarMill i915G compatible???
    By enaveso in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 19-04-2006, 12:01 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-12-2005, 07:29 PM
  4. Dual cores and 65nm @ Tom's Hardware
    By Steve in forum HEXUS News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 28-04-2005, 09:13 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •