Anandtech Phenom review is in

[TechnologyCoordinator]

My question: Where are the K10 dual cores?

AMD should be able to crank out some decent 2.8-3.0 ghz dual cores (less complicated to manufacture than native quad core). That would make Phenom powerful in single/double threaded apps.

 

[jwlangs]

Yes I'd like to see if the errata fix really does improve performance by 10% as has been claimed. If it does then the B2 launch was a joke and the biggest slap in the face AMD Loyalists possible.

Yeah, it's kind of funny to me that the B2 stepping, which was supposed to allow lower TDPs and higher clocks, couldn't make it to 2.4 GHz.

 

[Scotteq]

My question: Where are the K10 dual cores?

AMD should be able to crank out some decent 2.8-3.0 ghz dual cores (less complicated to manufacture than native quad core). That would make Phenom powerful in single/double threaded apps.

TC - Would be a good idea, I think: Currently a faster clocked dual is still better for most users and gamers. But I wonder if that may not be possible with the "Native" quad. Intel does it because they use a pair of duals. But when the chips are created as one unit?

 

[rwayne]

I think AMD really shot themselves in the foot by choosing the name "Phenom". The name in of itself projects the image that it is a phenominal chip equal to or better than anything else out on the market.

I think it is a Phenominal Disappointment. Forget about competing with Intel's Next Gen processors, it does not even compete with Current Gen processors like Q6600 at the same clock speed of 2.4 GHz.

Value and low pricing is the only way they (AMD) are going to be able to move those chips.

I currently have an AMD 64x2 4200 processor and was looking forward to Phenom until now.

Now I think I am just going to upgrade to a 64x2 5600 or a 6000 if they ever get around to making that energy efficent version they have been talking about.

I am sure with Intel's latest offerings AMD will have no choice but to issue another across the board price cut on all of the 64x2 chips.

 

[rwayne]

I just went to Newegg.com after making my last post.

Looks like AMD has begun the price cuts of the 64x2 line.

Yesterday the 64x2 6400 black edition was $209

Tonight it is $179.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103191

$30 price drop for their high end processor.

not bad.

 

[turpit]

Hmm, similar to the 939 sell off. May be an excellent time to buy an X2.

 

[cnumartyr]

Hmm, similar to the 939 sell off. May be an excellent time to buy an X2.

Definately considering it to replace my P4 back up rig.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

I think it is a Phenominal Disappointment.

You're wrong! Just look at how successful the launch is with the high up model RECALLED and the fact that In all benchmarks the Q6600 wins, hell, even the E6600 and K8 beat it in a bunch of benchmarks.

Phenomenal Disappointment, I think not.

I'd call it a Phenomenal Phailure.


Of course Baron would tell you it's a success because only half the processors were recalled and also because some of the Phenom will no doubt pass the Power On Self Test. As long as it comes in a green package and is sold at a loss it is "fast enough" and therefore wins all benchmarks.

 

[rwayne]

Phenomenal Disappointment, I think not.

I'd call it a Phenomenal Phailure.

LOL!

 

[dragonsprayer]

its not the chip - its the review


omg! amd did there homework - my butt!

 

[NMDante]

You're wrong! Just look at how successful the launch is with the high up model RECALLED and the fact that In all benchmarks the Q6600 wins, hell, even the E6600 and K8 beat it in a bunch of benchmarks.

Phenomenal Disappointment, I think not.

I'd call it a Phenomenal Phailure.


Of course Baron would tell you it's a success because only half the processors were recalled and also because some of the Phenom will no doubt pass the Power On Self Test. As long as it comes in a green package and is sold at a loss it is "fast enough" and therefore wins all benchmarks.

But it's not in a green package. It's in a purplish package.

Another quote that might upset a few:

In an interview in Warsaw, AMD now officially confirmed that the tri-core models are indeed quad-cores with one deactivated core.

So much for the whole native tri-core idea that was rumored.

 

[dragonsprayer]

i would buy one - for $150

thats what one is worth compared to 3.6ghz q6600



i am going back to hell - i mean hellgate london to get some real work donw!

HGL=D3 helgate london rocks!

 

[cnumartyr]

i would buy one - for $150

thats what one is worth compared to 3.6ghz q6600



i am going back to hell - i mean hellgate london to get some real work donw!

HGL=D3 helgate london rocks!

TF2 > HGL

 

[function9]

I'm full of indignation. I have always admitted that C2Q was faster. And yes I am holding out hope that the next rev will increase perf somewhat, but like I always say, I buy NO INTEL. PERIOD!! For me it's like the writer's strike. Big company beating up on little guy while gullible consumers hope for the best.

They're not anymore gullible than the people that lap up anything the "little guy" dishes out only because he is the "little guy". Or the people that have to always go to the "David and Goliath" song and dance. When a company is operating on billions of dollars, sorry, they don't qualify as the "little guy" in my book. I don't care if their competitor(s) are xxx times larger.

I hate Intel for their FUD back in the dark days of sub 1GHz chips. I'll never let them or you live down how they SABOTAGED the Opteron launch and undercut the market by charging $183 for a chip that was as fast as some of the former high end P4s.
Thats my opinion on the matter and it can be as fanboy as you like, that won't change the facts. Intel knew what would happen; that AMD would have to lower prices and lose money thereby causing issues with the new design.

So how long will it take for you to wake up and stop believing AMD's FUD? Unless there's someone else using your name here, I remember you touting QFX as the second coming, treating the infamous "upto 80% increase" slide as gospel. And thinking the 40% increase was spot on. What was the phrase you were using through all of that? "I'll take AMD at their word", right? Or something pretty close. Now the phrase is what, "It's fast enough", right? Hmm.

Of course, no one will care until every chip is more than $500, but then that's their plan. Suck in the gullible. Suck up their money.

Yeah because AMD never sticks it to their customers when they can set the price, no not at all.

I will continue to support AMD even if they're slower because it's just not that serious.

You sure do spend a whole lot of time pushing and defending your stance on all of this even though it doesn't mean that much.

 

[boduke]

Simple fact is that Phenom doesn't live up to the hype AMD laid for it, and there are none available *anywhere* even tho AMD said they'd be available at launch. (An oft to heard story coming from the green team these days.)

AMD fanboys can spin it however they want - AMD failed.

 

[bitrate]

PC enthusiasts are only a small part of the market so all the postulating and chest beating about AMD's demise by the Intel fanboys is misguided and foolish. Yes, Phenom X4 is slower clock for clock than Q6600 - so what ? AMD wasn't aiming for the performance crown as the benchmarks show (which aren't too bad BTW). AMD's focus is the server and OEM markets - an area which they're doing quite well in.

I'm just pleased that AMD released a working quad core that offers a decent performance upgrade for AM2 owners. I couldn't care less about gaming and video encoding benchmarks as all these performance measures are synthetic and have no real bearing on everyday PC usage.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Breaking news! I found something that Phenom is faster than!!!

 

[boduke]

AMD wasn't aiming for the performance crown as the benchmarks show (which aren't too bad BTW). AMD's focus is the server and OEM markets - an area which they're doing quite well in.

I would believe that if AMD hadn't claimed a 40% performance increase over Kentsfield. I would believe that if AMD could deliver product. Check with any server OEM and vendor and try to order a Barcelona based server. You can't because they have no CPU's. I work closely with several tier 1 vendors and a few tier 2 and I can tell you AMD is NOT doing well in these segments anymore becasue they have lost vendor trust in their ability to deliver product.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

AMD wasn't aiming for the performance crown as the benchmarks show (which aren't too bad BTW).

That's like saying the Jeff Gordon wasn't aiming for first in the Daytona 500 but it was instead his plan from the begining to finish 5th.


Gotta love Fanboy logic. Of course AMD was aiming for the crown. If they could have the crown they'd be selling processors from $300-$1000 intead of just the bargain bin.

Hector Ruiz would give his left testicle for the crown and anyone who says AMD didn't want it is kidding themselves.

 

[xrider]

PC enthusiasts are only a small part of the market so all the postulating and chest beating about AMD's demise by the Intel fanboys is misguided and foolish. Yes, Phenom X4 is slower clock for clock than Q6600 - so what ? AMD wasn't aiming for the performance crown as the benchmarks show (which aren't too bad BTW). AMD's focus is the server and OEM markets - an area which they're doing quite well in.

I'm just pleased that AMD released a working quad core that offers a decent performance upgrade for AM2 owners. I couldn't care less about gaming and video encoding benchmarks as all these performance measures are synthetic and have no real bearing on everyday PC usage.

So there wasn't any chest beating when AMD said there native quad core would be 40% better than Intel. You have to be fulling yourself if you think AMD did not want to catch the performance crown. So what your saying is AMD is around just to make adequate chips. That doesn't sound like a very good business plan to me

 

[epsilon84]

Well, if AMD was aiming for 2nd best, then it succeeded, definitely...

I'm not sure how such lofty goals sit with shareholders though... LOL!

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

So what your saying is AMD is around just to make adequate chips. That doesn't sound like a very good business plan to me

ROFL

 

[Evilonigiri]

Nono I think the plan AMD is following will be necessary to keep them alive. What better than to target midrange products where most of the money comes rolling in? Don't forget the midrange cards too.

I hope AMD will have more Phenom in stock....oh and lower them damn prices if they can.

 

[NMDante]

Nono I think the plan AMD is following will be necessary to keep them alive. What better than to target midrange products where most of the money comes rolling in? Don't forget the midrange cards too.

I hope AMD will have more Phenom in stock....oh and lower them damn prices if they can.

That would be true, but not for the first release of the next generation product.
You have to enter the cost of R&D, FAB, materials, marketing, PR, and employees. The chip doesn't just come into a fab as a wafer and out a CPU.
Targeting the mid-range would be the job for the existing products. New products should demand a higher premium, but this one doesn't, and that's too bad. They will then lose money on existing items as they are pushed to low end, while the newest products (all 2 of them) will have to fight it out in the mid-range against Intel and their own BE/higher clocked products. That's not good for business.

As for their mid-range cards, yes, they are doing well with the HD 38xx series. The problem again, has to be the initial costs for that card, compared to where they are placed in the market. nVidia pushes for higher ASPs, and gets them, while ATI/AMD has to scrounge for mid-range $$$. Not a viable plan to make money. With the new 38Xx series, ATI/AMD can get some $$$, but can the GPU division keep the boat afloat for the entire company? I doubt it.

 

[yomamafor1]

PC enthusiasts are only a small part of the market so all the postulating and chest beating about AMD's demise by the Intel fanboys is misguided and foolish. Yes, Phenom X4 is slower clock for clock than Q6600 - so what ? AMD wasn't aiming for the performance crown as the benchmarks show (which aren't too bad BTW). AMD's focus is the server and OEM markets - an area which they're doing quite well in.

I highly doubt it. The profit margin in OEM markets are very very thin (somewhere in the 5~10% max). From my personal experience, in the OEM market, sometimes you have to lose in order to gain something (anyone here worked with Dell before? ) It is OK for AMD to focus on server and OEMs with low end K8, because AMD knows it will not be a part of its mainstream product line. AMD is unlikely to make anymore than manufacturing cost off them , so pushing them into the OEM line makes sense. But for a brand new product line like K10, you simply can't expect AMD to break even with their focus on servers and OEMs.

If their focus was indeed in OEMs, their primary focus on K10 would be making it a lot cheaper, while maintaining the same performance, not the other way around. Also, like Boduke said, since the announcement of their K10 project, AMD has been hammering the public with bogus performance claims. If their primary focus was indeed on OEMs, then they should have touted its cost and yield.

For example, Intel's Silverthrone is a product that's targeted in the OEM market. Did Intel touted its performance? No. Instead, they focused on its yield (2000+ chip per wafer), and its cost (very very inexpensive). Performance and power consumption is secondary.