new dual core x2 from AMD?

toddbe

Distinguished
Nov 27, 2005
8
0
18,510
0
I am going to buy a new PC sometime after the 1st of the year. Is AMD going to be releasing something new to coincide with Intel's new release of their 900 series?

Thanks,
Todd

PS - I know that the present AMD x2 is better than the upcoming 900 series.
 

ltcommander_data

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2004
997
0
18,980
0
AMD will be releasing the FX-60 on January 10 to compete with the 955EE that Intel will launch on December 27. However, while the 955EE is priced at $999 the FX-60 will cost 20% higher. AMD also plans to launch a X2 5000+, but no date has yet been set. AMD will probably launch the X2 5000+ at least a month after the FX-60 to avoid canabolizing sales, especially since the only difference between the two seems to be cache size. The FX-60 is 2.6GHz with 2x1MB L2 cache and since the X2 4800+ is 2.4GHz with 2x1MB cache, the X2 5000+ must be 2.6GHz with 2x512k cache.

The next major change in AMD's lineup won't come until the socket M2 is released in May. The processor is still K8 based but DDR2 support will be added.

If you are planning getting a dual core in January your choices are the 9xx, the current X2s and Yonah. That is unless you want to spend $1199 for the FX-60.
 

K8MAN

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2005
839
0
18,980
0
Its also premo silicon which has been hitting over 3ghz on air and even higher on phase, not to mention its unlocked. Just because you cant afford it doesnt mean there arent thousands who can and will :wink:
It will be an interesting battle between the 955EE and the fx60 because of the extra bandwidth of the new 975 chipset and faster RAM. I cant wait till H2 of 06 when AMD gets .65nm out the door as Intel seems to have gained alot from it and hopefully AMD will as well. I would luv ~3.4ghz dual core from AMD on air in the next year.
 

ltcommander_data

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2004
997
0
18,980
0
While the actual market price fluctuates, recommended retail prices are set before release. Of course changes do happen, but currently as far as I know my information is correct.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=27743

With the price set at $999, Intel is heavily under pricing AMD's FX-60 and 5000+, which will sell for a daunting 20% more.
20% above the 955EE's $999, puts the FX-60 at $1199. This is perfectly in line with AMD's pricing strategy to price higher than Intel to indicate that they have a faster product. I believe that the FX-57 was the most expensive consumer processor ever at launch with a price of $1031 to indicate that it was faster than Intel's $999 3.73GHz EE. In this case however, its doubtful that the FX-60 will have the 20% increase in performance to justify its 20% increase in price over the 955EE. The Inquirer actually found the FX-60 to be slower than the FX-57 in games, which is countradictory since the FX-series is specifically marketed to gamers.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28152
 

endyen

Splendid
May 19, 2003
8,161
0
30,790
2
With the price set at $999, Intel is heavily under pricing AMD's
I see where the 840EE is down to $1040 at newegg.
Intel's price is based on 1000 units, while Amd's is MSRP for PIB.
Etailers may sell for less (or more, as demand dictates)
 

ltcommander_data

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2004
997
0
18,980
0
I actually didn't know that AMD uses boxed prices while Intel quotes OEM. It isn't that signficant though as the 840EE is $1012 shipped in retail box at ZipZoomFly while the FX-57 is $1011 in retail. Only the 3.73GHz EE is significantly varying from MSRP at $1057 shipped in retail box at PCNation, but that's mainly due to the 840EE having replaced it. The 3.73GHz price has been increasing in the last few months while the FX-57 and 840EE have been holding steady.

http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80833&affiliate=shopping
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80729
http://www.pcnation.com/web/details.asp?affid=305&item=G27560
 

endyen

Splendid
May 19, 2003
8,161
0
30,790
2
Since bothe those Intel chips were released at an Intel price of $999, it has taken a long time for them to get this close.
When will we see the 955EEs @ $1000? A lot depends on when Intel actually starts giving discounts to the resellers. May or june sounds realistic.
 

ltcommander_data

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2004
997
0
18,980
0
Well actually, the 840EE has been pretty stable at around that $1012 price for the last 6 months. There was a 1 month rise between October and November where it was around $1040, but the 2 months before that it was hovering around the $1000 mark. It actually fell below $1000 for 2 weeks at the end of August.

http://labs.anandtech.com/alllinks.php?pfilter=2000

The $1012 price includes shipping as well. Deducting shipping from the margins, and the 840EE is pretty much at MSRP.
 

david_uk

Distinguished
Nov 12, 2005
249
0
18,680
0
will these new amd processors be compatible with socket 939?

is it worth holding off purchase of new computer until later next year?
 

sepuko

Distinguished
Dec 13, 2005
202
0
18,680
0
you miss the main thing. The new ones are expected to support DDR2. Which should be a performance improvement. Which means they will rely on DDR2. Like all recent Pentium CPUs. Which means using socket 939 the mobos with which do not support DDR2 will be a drawback in performance(ddr-lower clock lowe latency, ddr2-higher clock higher latency).
Yes it's worth it. With a new socket M2 mobo and a new AMD cpu and DDR2.
 

DuxSyagrius

Distinguished
Dec 22, 2005
205
0
18,680
0
I think the most important question is what this guy is sitting on right now in terms of a computer. I think the new M2 platform will be an incremental increase at best, akin to the P4 going from 400 Mhz FSB to 533 Mhz FSB. I know alot of people who kicked themselves in the butt for not waiting for the 800 Mhz bus chips (not to mention hyperthreading) If you look at the history of both CPU companies, they never let the cat out the bag all at once. They release new CPUs or platforms that increase performance by around 3-5% each time. Did DDR-2 help out prescott? In some cases no. Think about it like this: 130 nm, 1600 Mhz hyperthreading, Single channel DDR support, Single channel memory control. Sound familiar? Socket 754. Fast foward a bit and you get 2000 Mhz HT, Dual channel DDR support, dual channel mem cotroller, 90 nm and you get Socket 939 winchester chips. Take the winchester add in an improved architecture, SSE3 support, and a more efficient mem controller and you get todays venus core 939 A64s. It was a few years in the making. Knowing all of this, would you have bought a winchester or a newcastle chip? Is a winchester that much better than a clawhammer clock for clock? Think about the jerk who invested in 533 Mhz DDR2 for the prescott only to see 667 Mhz mobos released after awhile. Now imagine the jerk who bought the new 667 Mhz DDR-2 and then saw no discernable improvement.......IMHO, I would overclock the living hell out a 939 until it blows rather than buy a M2 and have to go from 533, to 667, to 800 Mhz DDR2. Then you have to worry about the first M2s being 90 nm, What about the 65 nm CPUs? New chip, new mobo, maybe new RAM...... Not a smar way to spend money. As long as this guy isnt sitting on a willamette core P4, a 1300 Mhz thunderbird, an XP 1800 or some crap, I would say he is ok for another year. Whats the hurry?
 

ltcommander_data

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2004
997
0
18,980
0
The FX-60 and the X2 5000+ will be compatible with current Socket 939. If you really feel the need to upgrade now then the transition to Socket M2 shouldn't stop you from going with a Socket 939. The initial Socket M2 processors are identical to current ones with the only difference being use of DDR2. There won't be a serious performance increase as the higher latency of DDR2 negates most of the bandwidth performance advantage.

I believe that AMD plans to continue releasing new Socket 939 processors until November 2006. That's when it will no longer be part of the Commercial Stable Image Program. In January after the FX-60 and X2 5000+ are released will be an excellent time to buy as they will push the prices down.
 

david_uk

Distinguished
Nov 12, 2005
249
0
18,680
0
I'm thinking of going for a really cheap system actually, just to tie me over for the next couple of years.

Don't suppose the sempron 3400+ is worth considering, as the processor isn't really upgradeable based on that socket (754).

you say the release of new athlon processors come 10th Jan will push down prices of other amd processors, what about the release of the nvidia 7800gtx 512 graphics cards, that hasn't pushed down the price of existing graphics cards much (if at all).
 

ltcommander_data

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2004
997
0
18,980
0
That's because the 7800 GTX 512 was never intended to. The 7800 GTX is perfectly priced where it is and the GTX 512 was only ever intended as a bragging rights product. nVidia couldn't produce enough of them so the idea was that the high price would discourage people from buying them so that they would always be in stock. As it turned out, the performance was so good it was worth it for hard core gamers which have been buying to such as extent that it is almost impossible to find in retail. Which is in contrast to the ATI X1800XT which was available at launch but now is shipping nicely.

The FX-60 is similar to the 7800 GTX 512 in the respect that it is targetted at the ultra high end. It isn't designed to drive down other prices as it will be launched above the FX-57, instead of replacing it. However, the X2 5000+ will probably be launched priced slightly higher than the current X2 4800+ and it will have the effect of forcing down dual core prices. Although the price difference will mostly effect the high end X2 4800+ and the X2 4600+ as AMD doesn't seem to be in a hurry to have the X2 3800+ competing with the 920.

However, if you are looking at a single core system, these 2 new processors will likely have little effect on their pricing. For a low end system, the A64 3000+ or 3200+ have good value, especially when overclocked.
 

DuxSyagrius

Distinguished
Dec 22, 2005
205
0
18,680
0
I think anything will help you brother! If you have waited this long, why not wait a little longer! Here is the deal: I dont think the first Gen M2 CPUs and the platform it is built around will offer any serious improvements over the current 939 platform. The new chips will probobly cost a little more than than it's 939 counterparts but that COULD be offset by cheaper DDR2 prices (which will probobly change by March). The new chips will run hotter (95 watts vs the current 89 watt CPUs). But that COULD be offset by the lower voltage of DDR-2 RAM (1.8v vs 2.6v) It also depends on whereyou plan to buy. If you are going to get it used, then 939 is definitely a good deal. I think by we see the 2nd gen M2 CPUs, 939 will not look like a good deal, just as today's 939 really makes socket 754 and 1st gen 939s look like a bad investment. I say either wait or get into a basic 939 with a really good GPU. Get a A64 3000 or a A64 3500 (not a 3200 which is overpriced). Biostar has a good 939 mobo with good overclocking potential based on Nvidia's C51 chipset for 75 bucks. You can get decent DDR RAM (72 bucks for 1 GB) But just remember, you wont be able to migrate upwards with these parts. But then again, I dont think M2 will be worth buying for 2 years. Good luck!
 

DuxSyagrius

Distinguished
Dec 22, 2005
205
0
18,680
0
I dont think there will be any serious decreases in price for 939 parts any time soon. There was a decrease on the 3000 and 3200 for a week or two about a month ago. AMD stopped prodection on these parts and the prices climbed really high compared to the rest of the lineup. Socket 754 prices have been stable for a long time now. I think the strategy for resellers is that if you want to max out your mobo with the best chip available for your platform, you are going to have to pay out the nose. But seriously, who would pay 300 bucks for a top of the line 754 CPU? It would be cheaper to get a 3500 and a new mobo than a 3700 for the 754 platform. If you want to wait for 939 prices to settle down, you are in for a long wait. As for the sempron, its a good chip and it runs really cool (62 watts) It has decent gaming capability and can encode video almost as good as the 939 parts, but it has its shortcomings: I dont know what 754 part it is based off of, but it may not overclock that well. I remember the Paris core 3100 could only get like an extra 250 Mhz which isnt that bad I guess, but its no 3000 venice core. Depending on the motherboard, you ma have problems with more than 1 stick of RAM. Biostar has a good 754 mobo, but it uses PCI-e which kinda makes getting a 754 CPU dumb. I mean, if I had a good AGP card and I just wanted to get out of a crappy, hot, northwood P4 or I wanted out of a crappy, hot Athlon XP, but I wanted to keep my AGP card, then I think the sempron is a good alternative. But if you are forced to buy a new GPU, the I think a A64 3000 and a new card will do the trick better. There are boards with both AGP and PCI-e buth reliability is spotty from what I have read and I am not sure if the PCI-e slot is full speed either....
 

david_uk

Distinguished
Nov 12, 2005
249
0
18,680
0
Just ordered my new custom built pc anyway:

Athlon 3500+
Asus a8n-vm
1gb ram
geforce 6800 (for screen res. 1280 x 1024)

got it for rather less (about £400 less) than I had first expected to pay for a new computer. the only weak spot I think is the graphics card but might be able to overclock that if necessary and/or just play any demanding games with lower details. will get it in 2 weeks!
 

DuxSyagrius

Distinguished
Dec 22, 2005
205
0
18,680
0
Good deal brother. I havent made up my mind on whether to get the 3500 or X2 3800. I am hoping new codecs will make the X2 worth the extra dosh or quid or whatever they say over there. The 3500 is the chip that gives the most bang for the buck. Its a really smart buy. If you overclock keep this in mind: not all A64s will scale to 2.6 Ghz. Thats why the 4000 is a 2.4 Ghz chip. If you plan to push it to 2.6 or beyond, its going to take more voltage to the mobo, RAM, and CPU. You will also see a large jump in temps too. The 6800 is a still a good card and will hold you over until Nvidia's next generation. But if you can make a change, I would take some of that 400 pounds you saved and put it on a 7800GT. Then you would be rocking...
 

david_uk

Distinguished
Nov 12, 2005
249
0
18,680
0
the 7800gt is an extra £130, I'll include that in my next upgrade lol. other than that I'll have to make do with what I've got. the only types of games I play (at the moment) are turn based strategy games and combat flight simulator games (haven't been able to do much of either with my old p3-800 wreck). I'm ok with the speed of the athlon 3500 and will probably not want to o/c that but I might have a go at o/c'ing the 6800 card if necessary.
 

DuxSyagrius

Distinguished
Dec 22, 2005
205
0
18,680
0
So is it safe to say you play Rome: total war and the like? My buddy has an X800 mobile and he maxes it out. I'm sure you will be fine. I guess 260 bucks sounds right for that upgrade. Rock on!
 

david_uk

Distinguished
Nov 12, 2005
249
0
18,680
0
dunno I been thinking, maybe a 6800gt? extra £70 though.

not had much of a chance to play rome total war with my old wreck lol

got a crappy fx 5200 64bit as well
 

RichPLS

Champion
Aug 24, 2004
15,886
0
50,780
0
I try to buy the best I can afford, (sometime I can't afford it) and get the best I can, I have never regreted that.
I have regretted not getting what I wanted in the first place tho. [/shrugs]
 

TRENDING THREADS