AMD to release Athlon X2 6400+.

M

mpcamer1220

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 2, 2003
Messages
1,717
AMD is preparing to launch a new high-end desktop processor, the Athlon 64 X2 6400+, which will be the last processor in the Athlon 64 X2 family, according to sources at motherboard makers.

Currently, AMD's highest-end desktop processor is the Athlon 64 X2 6000+, however with its performance unable to match Intel's upcoming Core 2 Duo E6850, AMD plans to launch the new 6400+ to cover up the gap in the market, noted the sources.

The 6400+ will have a core frequency of 3.2GHz and 2MB L2 cache, noted the sources. Pricing will range between US$220-248, they added. AMD has already sent processor samples to motherboard makers in order to allow them to update their BIOSes. The processor is predicted to ship shortly, added the sources.






More Here.
 
Well I guess AMD needed *something* above the $200 mark, but this is going to fall short of the $183 E6750, let alone the $266 E6850/Q6600.

At least it will get certain people excited being the fastest clocked CPU on the market and all, but really, K10 can't come soon enough for AMD. ;)
 
arrgghhh i just ordered a 6000+

oh well, i have water and a cool place...if i dont hit 3.5 im selling it...:confused:
 
Below Ambient said:
arrgghhh i just ordered a 6000+
Click to expand...

Who cares, it's far better value anyway. $170 for 3GHz or $220 - $248 for 3.2GHz... the X2 6000+ is clearly the better value. $50 for a 5% performance difference? Not worth it.

This is purely a marketing move by AMD to prove it can 'compete' with high end C2Ds, but in truth it is way overpriced compared to the rest of the AMD lineup, not to mention similarly priced and cheaper C2Ds.
 
It wouldnt be surprized if the 3.2 clocks even higher than the 6000+ . The new 6000+steppings are easy 3.5 on air ,This is good becuase the 6400+ should have way better silicon and revised memory controler( Hehehee evil laugh) it also means i will have a new patient to practive my torture on :D .
 
harpoon said:
At least it will get certain people excited being the fastest clocked CPU on the market and all...
Click to expand...
Something very weird about that... The highest clock speed available on the market is an Athlon! :eek: Can it be that they have become the new Intel? :p
 
That is exactly what I was thinking lol. You can tell that AMD is realy struglling to bring CPU out that can actually beat any of the Intels. Anybody in their right mind would buy a core 2 quad q6600.
 
Yea AMD.. Yeah you intel fanboys enjoy it while you can. Sooner or later the little guy will be kinking the big guys a*% again.
 
AMD takes a step in the right direction and brings out a faster chip which should allow AMD to compete one bin higher with Intel, and half the posts are just bashing AMD? I'll never understand the minds of fanb0is I guess.

Anyways, anyone know or have an educated guess as to what process AMD will produce this on? I would guess 90nm because it will be a low volume, high price part. This would be a better fit for the more expensive 90nm process. I'm always impressed with the way AMD is able to push their process though. It would be very interesting to see AMD with a higher clock even though they are on an older process generation with a CPU with a shorter pipeline.

I don't want to say anything about processor performance, but in reference to the maturity of AMD's SOI process, this speaks volumes.
 
visaris said:
AMD takes a step in the right direction and brings out a faster chip which should allow AMD to compete one bin higher with Intel, and half the posts are just bashing AMD? I'll never understand the minds of fanb0is I guess.
Click to expand...

trying to stretch the K8 another 200 mhz is pointless at this point. it presents a ~7% jump in performance, assuming linear scaling

a 6400+ wont beat a e6750 anyway, and doesnt stand a chance against anything faster. AMD should have had barcelona out by now, instead they are forced to make gap-filler products like this

one could even assume the fact AMD bothered with this cpu right now as an indication that barcelona will take a while to make it to the desktop
 
I think it all depends on the overclocks. If it can clock higher than the 6000+ then it might be worth it. Other than that, then the 6000+ or something cheaper would be just fine.

That link to "The Problem with SOI" is frightening, and I'm afraid of my 3600+ now, lol. Damn leaky bastard.... now I really want to buy a 6000+/6400+
 
Citizen86 said:
I think it all depends on the overclocks. If it can clock higher than the 6000+ then it might be worth it. Other than that, then the 6000+ or something cheaper would be just fine.

That link to "The Problem with SOI" is frightening, and I'm afraid of my 3600+ now, lol. Damn leaky bastard.... now I really want to buy a 6000+/6400+
Click to expand...


im pretty sure that t wont overclock much. it would not surprise me if amd were just binning the best 6000's and OCing them to 3.2, and tagging 6400+

actually along those lines, it wouldn't surprise me if the 6000+ were just the best 5600+'s

k8's are getting old and already at thier limit, it would not suprise me to see the 6400+ being at 60* under load. and seeing how i can OC a 5400+ on air to 3.3 at 60*, it just makes me more secure in my feeling.

cliffs:

i think the 6400+ is just a pre-overclocked processor
 
Yea that was a pretty good link. Didnt read the whole thing, I will later, but that was some pretty interesting stuff right there. Good find.
 
SippieCup said:
im pretty sure that t wont overclock much. it would not surprise me if amd were just binning the best 6000's and OCing them to 3.2, and tagging 6400+

actually along those lines, it wouldn't surprise me if the 6000+ were just the best 5600+'s

k8's are getting old and already at thier limit, it would not suprise me to see the 6400+ being at 60* under load. and seeing how i can OC a 5400+ on air to 3.3 at 60*, it just makes me more secure in my feeling.

cliffs:

i think the 6400+ is just a pre-overclocked processor
Click to expand...

Thats what they do with all chips based off the same core...
 
lamboman said:
That is exactly what I was thinking lol. You can tell that AMD is realy struglling to bring CPU out that can actually beat any of the Intels. Anybody in their right mind would buy a core 2 quad q6600.
Click to expand...

theres a reason people buy amd processors... they're cheap... just becasue someone wants to save money doesnt mean they made the wrong choice... i had one of the very first 100% overclocks on a 750 that i took up to 1280 with a bunch of watercooling stuff made with a drill press in a garage...

the only reason intel is ahead is because its easier to spend extra 100.00 on a mobo/cpu combo and get hte same performance...

meh? id rather work for it
 
Ohhh god... Not Ed again.... Is his ass speaking again.... How many times does his ass spew shit in a day? If I had diarrhea that bad I might go the hospital or something...

First, you should look at what SOI does, then you'll know the basis for the whole article was just plain wrong... As a matter of fact, it was a flat out lie. And he knows he is lying in the article too... I 6think that makes Ed the biggest fanboy in the world. He lies, whren he knows he's lying just to confuse people into making a point for him... It's a shame that you allowed yourself to become the pawn of a pawn...

http://www.elecdesign.com/Articles/ArticleID/8279/8279.html
Whats that? It actually --reduces-- leakage by a huge margin? Say it aint so!!

http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/overview.jsp?nodeId=0ST287482183078
It reduces power consumption by reducing leakage? What you say!!

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3776/is_200309/ai_n9268815\
Damn!! I guess it is sooo. Maybe Ed really is talking out of his ass again... Or maybe he got --paid-- to say what he does..... Just maybe.....
 
LOL dook...I agree. I have to say, I'm no expert on all that strained silicon whatever you're trying to spew duby... but it's amazing that everytime someone says/posts something you don't agree with, they're being paid. I wish money was thrown at ME so easily.
 
dook43 said:
You would know
Click to expand...

Whasa matta? Don't like it that someone calls out Ed when he could be wrong? Like he's always been right or something when it comes to AMD and Intel? Haha! :D Right. :rolleyes:

Here's another person's perspective into the matter that shows IMHO, Ed's clueless about SOI, amongst other things...

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=32351755&postID=5195319009356259530

"I've read Ed's comments (which were a waste of time). I read wbmw's post on Investor's Hub and the looked at the orginal white paper data. I'm not seeing anything that supports either of his claims.

His first claim is that the data shows that AMD's 65nm process is worse than the 90nm process. The data does not show that. The wattage profile for ADO5000IAA5DD which is 65nm is the best of all processors in the chart. The 65nm chips show similar wattage profiles to the older 90nm 65 watt chips.

He implies that the new 3600+ is an indication that 65nm is worse. However, if you compare this profile with the older 65 watt 90nm parts you can see that it's profile would have been the same. Presumably the reason AMD did not release a 3600+ part on the older process was that similar wattage profile 90nm chips were simply sold as 89 watt 3800+.

Secondly, he claims that 65nm is stuck at 2.6Ghz which is again not indicated by the data. There is nothing that would for example exclude a 2.8Ghz 89 watt 65nm chip. It appears that AMD simply has not seen any reason to replace the lowest volume bins (2.8 & 3.0 Ghz) with 65nm chips at the same TDP (89 watts). I would agree that the savings to AMD for doing this are not currently compelling."
 
Lou Ceifer said:
Whasa matta? Don't like it that someone calls out Ed when he could be wrong? Like he's always been right or something when it comes to AMD and Intel? Haha! :D Right. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

No indeed. I just have a beef with Duby claiming anyone is paid/biased. :rolleyes:
 
It's Ed and SuperPi all of a sudden.... The two most worthless things in the computer industry.

And you have the gall to call me out? I know what I'm talking about. I did a single google search and immediately pulled --proof-- that Ed was lying.... One single very simple google search is all it takes for even me to prove that Ed doesnt know his ass from a hole in the ground.

So he doesnt know what the fuck he is talking about, and yet he still has a well funded web site.... I wonder why? Maybe just maybe you can pull the wool back from your eyes for a minute....
 
LOL. The Ed article and the posts it was based off of are disingenuous in the first place. They take advantage of the fact that 99% of people don't know a fucking thing about semiconductors, and as can be seen from this thread, people are eating it up.

SOI was put in place to stop leakage in the bulk Si. It's under the FET, preventing any current to flow from the device into the bulk (the wafer/ die).

The problem with these new chips is very unlikely to be leakage in the bulk. It's probably gate leakage. Gate leakage becomes a *huge* problem at small geometries.
 
duby229 said:
It's Ed and SuperPi all of a sudden.... The two most worthless things in the computer industry.

And you have the gall to call me out? I know what I'm talking about. I did a single google search and immediately pulled --proof-- that Ed was lying.... One single very simple google search is all it takes for even me to prove that Ed doesnt know his ass from a hole in the ground.

So he doesnt know what the fuck he is talking about, and yet he still has a well funded web site.... I wonder why? Maybe just maybe you can pull the wool back from your eyes for a minute....
Click to expand...

LOL, oh, the irony.
 
mwarps said:
LOL. The Ed article and the posts it was based off of are disingenuous in the first place. They take advantage of the fact that 99% of people don't know a fucking thing about semiconductors, and as can be seen from this thread, people are eating it up.

SOI was put in place to stop leakage in the bulk Si. It's under the FET, preventing any current to flow from the device into the bulk (the wafer/ die).

The problem with these new chips is very unlikely to be leakage in the bulk. It's probably gate leakage. Gate leakage becomes a *huge* problem at small geometries.
Click to expand...

I already admitted that. I was just going to use it as an excuse to buy a faster proc :p
 
WE JUST NEED TO KEEP BUYING FROM AMD NO-MATTER WHATS GOING ON so we can keep this price war going!:D I"m about to buy a 1900 or a 1950 vid card over the next 3 months.
 
mwarps said:
LOL. The Ed article and the posts it was based off of are disingenuous in the first place. They take advantage of the fact that 99% of people don't know a fucking thing about semiconductors, and as can be seen from this thread, people are eating it up.

SOI was put in place to stop leakage in the bulk Si. It's under the FET, preventing any current to flow from the device into the bulk (the wafer/ die).

The problem with these new chips is very unlikely to be leakage in the bulk. It's probably gate leakage. Gate leakage becomes a *huge* problem at small geometries.
Click to expand...

It very well could be gate leakage. Noone knows for sure, unless they happen to work for AMD ;) The thing is though, AMD has always been very good at accomplishing multi-voltage optimization at the gate level (their 90nm process exhibits this), and so that leads one to conclude that they are either having massive gate leakage problems at 65nm or their SOI just isn't working properly at 65nm.

Anyway, I truly hope that AMD's K10/Barcelona is a knockout, as Intel seems to be gearing up for sitting on its ass, since they have cut their R&D budget by 11% in the last quarter. However, it looks like they still have some major problems to fix in their silicon before any magic can happen.

But as for this 6400+, who would buy one over a D0 stepping Q6600/E6750?
 
This thread needs some spicing up, I think we should focus on the new processor and not arguing. How about performance, lets try and find some benchmarks on it.
 
mpcamer1220 said:
Yes, but AMD is out of the price war.. No more cuts, in the near future..
Click to expand...

AMD cuts prices to counter Intel pricecuts anyway. I think you are right though, there won't be any more pricecuts from either side for at least a few months.
 
Originally Posted by brhinton89
WE JUST NEED TO KEEP BUYING FROM AMD NO-MATTER WHATS GOING ON so we can keep this price war going! I"m about to buy a 1900 or a 1950 vid card over the next 3 months.
Click to expand...

Thats part of the reason I upgraded to Dual core. Plus I just couldn't resist the 170 for $115.00


Originally Posted by rylenol
This thread needs some spicing up, I think we should focus on the new processor and not arguing. How about performance, lets try and find some benchmarks on it.
Click to expand...

I think these intel fanboys are getting worried. I wonder what else AMD has up their sleeve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top