Athlon II X3 435: AMD's Three-Core, 2.9 GHz, $87 Triple-Threat

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]False_Dmitry_II[/nom]Well that's if you were to overclock the CPU by actuallly doing it. By that I mean you could have simply used the same max settings on the athlon II on your simulated x3 720. This way it may not be exactly what a x3 720 could achieve for real, but at least you'd see some swinging blows.[/citation]

Yeah, that's an option, although I thought it would be kinda cheep.

I don't think I had enough time to include it anyway though, unfortunately due to time constraints this job involves a lot of juggling what you think you can do in the time you have as opposed to what you wish you could do.

With an overclocking article on the horizon, I'll cover it in the near future though, just couldn't do it in this particular article.

 

[tkgclimb]

AMD has a chance after all

 

[anamaniac]

[citation][nom]El_Capitan[/nom]Good review... however:1. I'm basically ignoring the overclocked Athlon II x3 435 benchmarks unless you're also going to compare overclocked Phenom II x3 720 benchmarks (which I assume can still be simulated using the modified Phenom II x3 965). Still, on stock settings, it's surprising that the Athlon II x3 435 can hold it's own. However, who uses desktop CPU's on stock settings? If you are, and you're reading this, wtf?2. It's Asus M4A785TD-V EVO, not Asus MA4785TD-V EVO. Switch the "4" and the "A".3. A lack of L3 cache isn't too much of a big deal, unless you're going to handle multiple operations at the same time (which Tom's Hardware should do more). However, I have a hunch they're releasing these because of the TLB bug AMD had in the past that they couldn't fix in the B2 stepping. To make money, they just disabled the L3 cache (which is how people had to get around the bug in the past, by disabling the L3 cache in the BIOS).[/citation]

I run stock settngs.
I ran OC'd, but realized that I was 60FPS+ in all my games with both my PCU and GPU stock... Plus I tend to blow breakers when I run a microwave, laundry, and my computer all at the same time as is...

 

[mcattack77]

out of all these cpus, I would still go with the x2 550 oc'd to 4ghz. Not only that, you get a 50/50 chance of unlocking cores. Have a few buddies running 4 cores stable on air at 3.4-3.6 ghz for 100 bones!

 

[ramguido]

come on! they always do the same here, they o/c the processor being reviewed and they comapre it to stock processors. I dont see how any conclusion seen here can be taken seriously. Why don't they overclock the 720 and see how it performs against the 435 o/c?

 

[Guest]

What a way to skew the results. Using a $50 cooler on a

 

[wh3resmycar]

I dont see how any conclusion seen here can be taken seriously.

if you've read the introduction you'll find a clue why.

geez people, cant you just use your brain and figure that stock scores on the 720 and 435 will mirror the OC scores as well? with the definite obvious that the 720 will outperform the 435.

the point is the 435 packs a punch at being significantly cheaper. thats the main point.

 

[chesterman86]

You guys could put Intel processors with similar prices in the graphs

 

[marcusmurphy]

But why wouldn't I pay $12 more and buy an Athlon II x4 instead?

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]marcusmurphy[/nom]But why wouldn't I pay $12 more and buy an Athlon II x4 instead?[/citation]

Only you can answer that.

As for our recommendation for the 435, the article explains that based on benchmark results and price.

But if you constantly run benchmarks that make use of quad-cores, the 620 isn't a bad choice, and we never said that it was.

 

[verrul]

[citation][nom]chesterman86[/nom]You guys could put Intel processors with similar prices in the graphs[/citation]

umm what intel processor is that low

 

[verrul]

other than the ancient pentium D you really dont have anything that low

 

[chesterman86]

[citation][nom]verrul[/nom]umm what intel processor is that low[/citation]
e5300 and e6300
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116074
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116091
i'm not saying they are good as these athlons, but it's a good price by performance comparison

 

[verrul]

those perform on par with the 250 pretty much neither are as spectacular ocers as the old 5200 but they do have some decent oc room

 

[rdawise]

[citation][nom]sonofliberty08[/nom]did the disable core of Athlon II X3 435 can be unlock ?[/citation]

I think you are asking can the disabled core of the 435 be unlocked (I'm not a grammar Nazi so don't worry about it). It seems Xbit labs was able to activate the fourth core by using the Gigabyte MA790FXT-UD5P motherboard and enabling ACC. Article is linked below:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon-ii-x3-435_9.html#sect0

Note that this is note a guarantee by any means. It's all up to chance.

 

[liquidsnake718]

I guess AMD is really trying to Milk their foundries and technology to the last cache and silicon by making a CPU at almost every segment they can... I guess they are getting ready for a new chip to be mentioned or released late next year since they have maxed out all AthlonII possibilities unless they come out with a 3.5Ghz as a "low" end option one but i doubt it....

 

[verrul]

they have to. intel has 4x the manufacturing capability

 

[dextermat]

i like intel overall but +1 for AMd on this one

 

[enayet_redeemer]

Amazing launch from AMD. As AMD could not compete in the high-end CPU market its a wise decision to present its product at the reach of value users for whom Intel has very little to offer. Impressive performance from Athlon II X3 and X4 also.

Three Cheers for AMD...

 

[mapesdhs]

Speaking of high-end CPUs, Intel apparently now has an i7 960 3.2GHz
option available for X58 S1366, locked multiplier, about half
the cost of the previous Extreme edition. See:

http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/10/21/intel.launches.32ghz.core.i7.cpu/


I still reckon a P55/860 or an X58/920 with a good oc makes more
sense though, for those wanting top-end performance. Unless of
course money is no object...

However, I reckon AMD will make a bigger splash with its new
offerings. The 620 looks increasingly like such a good buy now.

Ian.

 

[Toejam]

It is a shame that these processors, just like the rest of the Athlon II and Phenom II line, fail to work with most older Socket AM2 boards.

I have several great Nforce 590 boards in my possession, all of which can handle 125 watt TDP processors. I would love to throw a X3 435 onto each of them as an inexpensive upgrade. However, none of them will boot with an Athlon II or Phenom II installed.

When you factor in the extra $110-$150 to replace those boards with an AM2+ equivalent model, it just doesn't justify the price.

It would be great if AMD would lean on mother board manufacturers and get them to make their older boards work with these processors. There is plenty of room for CPU microcode updates if you remove the full screen logos from the BIOS images. And most of these CPUs seem to tolerate the narrower voltage ranges of the older AM2 boards, too.

 

[mapesdhs]

Toejam,

I've run into this problem too. I would love to use a Ph2 with my
ASUS board, the supposedly 'professional' M2N32 WS Pro, but there's
no bios update for it. ASUS' excuse is that the board isn't made
anymore, but since when was that the deciding factor? By contrast,
Asrock is still issuing bios updates for really old/cheap AM2
boards like the AM2NF3-VSTA (my old mbd, now in my gf's PC);
talking to Asrock, they were much more positive about CPU
support. Indeed, the bios update for the 620 was released just
one day after the CPU was announced.

I bought the ASUS 'pro' board because I thought it would have
better CPU support, but in reality the opposite is the case. Feel
like I've been conned to some extent. I could put a good Ph2
quad-core, or a 620, into my gf's cheapo PC, but not in my
expensive ASUS board.

So yes Toejam, I fully agree, AMD should learn hard on mbd makers
to support newer CPUs in AM2 boards. If Asrock can do it, then
so can ASUS.

Ian.

 

[Toejam]

mapesdhs,

Asus is actually one of the better companies regarding CPU support longevity with their mother boards. Most of their mid and upper tier AM2 boards officially support the AM2+ Phenom I processors. The majority of AM2 boards from other manufacturers do not. Asus, Gigabyte and ASRock are notable exceptions.

Also, there are numerous reports on the Asus web site user forums of people getting their Asus boards working with Athlon II and Phenom II processors while using the latest Phenom I compatible BIOS. Results vary, and there are a host of other issues that pop up, but for some people, it seems to work fine.

Also, for people reading this thinking that DDR2-800 memory will kill performance, my experience with my Phenom II X2 550 is that it doesn't. I ran two 2GB sticks at 5-4-4-10-2T-800 on an AMD 790X board, stock CPU speeds, and my Sandra benchmarks are within +/- 3% of those within this article. (Sandra Dhrystone: 23.22 GIPS, Whetstone: 18.0 GFLOPS, Sandra Multimedia Float x8 iSSE2: 43.73 MPixel/s, Double x4 iSSE2: 24.0 MPixel/s, Sandra Mem Int Buff'd iSSE2: 9.40GB/s, Mem Float Buff'd iSSE2: 9.43GB/s)

Had I not blown $100 on a new board, I would have gotten a Phenom II X4 955 instead of an X2 550. Oh well, AMD's loss.

 

[mapesdhs]

Toejam writes:
> Asus is actually one of the better companies regarding CPU support
> longevity with their mother boards. ...

Indeed, that's one of the reasons I bought the ASUS board, because of
their reputation (that and the fact I wanted proper PCIX support).
All the more galling that they haven't issued any newer BIOS updates
for it. One can use the original Phenom1 CPUs, but they're a joke
compared to the 6000+/3.25 I currently have installed.


> majority of AM2 boards from other manufacturers do not. Asus,
> Gigabyte and ASRock are notable exceptions.

It seems so. Atm it's looking like I might use a Gigabyte board,
though I've not yet examined Asrock's offerings.


> Also, there are numerous reports on the Asus web site user forums of
> people getting their Asus boards working with Athlon II and Phenom II
> processors while using the latest Phenom I compatible BIOS. Results

I've seen those posts, but getting concrete info is difficult. I
don't want to spend 100+ UKP on a good Ph2 unless I'm sure it's going
to work.

Alas, most of the comments refer to the non-Pro board. So far I've not
found anything specific about the one I have. My next plan was to
search Futuremark, see if I could find any user of the same board who
had a Ph2, email them & ask what BIOS version they were using. Not
done this yet.


> vary, and there are a host of other issues that pop up, but for some
> people, it seems to work fine.

Some have said that it works with a slightly older BIOS than the
latest, though again this was for other versions of the board.


> Also, for people reading this thinking that DDR2-800 memory will kill
> performance, my experience with my Phenom II X2 550 is that it

Yup, DDR2 RAM will perform well. I think there have been articles in
the past showing that, beyond DDR2/800, RAM speed makes little
significant difference to performance compared to CPU speed or gfx
speed. Articles reviewing RAM kits rave about 1 or 2fps differences
which, in tests giving 60+ numbers, is meaningless, well within
margins of error. Fitting an SSD would be a far better investment.


> Had I not blown $100 on a new board, I would have gotten a Phenom II
> X4 955 instead of an X2 550. Oh well, AMD's loss.

How much did the X2 550 cost you? How much extra would the X4 955 be now?
Think you'll switch at all?


Thanks for the replies! Oh, here's my current spec btw:

http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/misc/mysystemsummary2.txt
http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/misc/ASUS_M2N32-WS-Pro.jpg
http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/misc/Gigabyte8800GT-Zalman.jpg

Ian.

PS. For anyone with an older DDR1 AGP build, I can definitely
recommend my old Asrock board (AM2NF3-VSTA) as a good inbetween step
prior to switching to PCIe. It's very cheap (about $20 or so 2nd-hand
from industrial suppliers) yet gives excellent results and supports
all the latest AMD CPUs.

 

[chesterman86]

my "high end" evga 590 sli does not have a bios update. i'll never buy evga products again.