Shortcuts

AMD Spider Platform - Phenom, 790FX, RV670

rated by 0 users
This post has 7 Replies | 2 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 26,085
Points 1,183,190
Joined: Sep 2007
ForumsAdministrator
News Posted: Mon, Nov 19 2007 12:53 AM

Good Morning All.  AMD has taken the wraps of their platform for the Phenom series of quad-core processors.  Put together the AMD Phenom quad-core processor, along with the new 790FX chipset and RV670, aka Radeon HD 3800 series graphics cards, and you have what AMD affectionately calls “Spider”.

The Phenom 9600 and 9500 processor make their debut today, dressed up in an entirely new platform of technology.  And we have all the numbers; yes all the numbers, even from an unreleased Phenom 9700.

AMD Spider Platform - Phenom, 790FX, RV670



  • | Post Points: 50
Not Ranked
Posts 1
Points 5
Joined: Nov 2007
clickwir replied on Mon, Nov 19 2007 11:16 PM

Good review, thank you. AMD needs to get more IPC though. Or something. We went the frequency to stay as low as possible to help power usage. I guess for this core design, all we can hope for is them to ramp up the frequency.... and hope that the next core can get massively better number at lower clocks. Other than buying one, I wish there was some way I could help them. I don't know anything about chip design and I'm pretty bad at math, so I'd be no use. But if I could help, I would.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 3,562
Points 54,720
Joined: Jul 2004
Location: United States, Massachusetts
ForumsAdministrator
MembershipAdministrator
Dave_HH replied on Tue, Nov 20 2007 8:49 AM
This one is easy, at least from my perspective. AMD needs to simply incorporate larger on-chip cache. They're currently in 65nm versus Intel's 45nm, so incorporating on-die cache is more expensive, die real estate-wise for AMD than it is for Intel. BUT that's the one true way to increase IPC efficiency and I'm fairly certain it's largely why Intel is faster clock for clock.

With smaller L2 cache, AMD has to go "off chip" for data more often than Intel's architecture does. This was a necessity for Intel, since their FSB arch limits their available bandwidth going off chip versus HyperTransport for AMD which has a lot more bandwidth. However, regardless, if you have to go off chip to process, rather than stuffing a bunch more in cache and then just pipelining, it's going to cost you performance.

If AMD had 8 to 12MB of on-chip L2, things might look decidedly different but that would cost a bit in power and heat as well, especially at 65nm, which is another story all together and something that AMD is obviously dealing with as well.

Editor In Chief
http://hothardware.com


  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Posts 1,142
Points 14,910
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: florida
frg1 replied on Sun, Mar 9 2008 12:59 PM

i got to agree good review 

Photobucket
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 143
Points 2,390
Joined: Feb 2008

Hundred percent agree, stuff a load of cache on chip, crank up the 45nm process time frame, and maybe stand a chance with performance against Intel.  I think partially it's in doing so they'll increase the cost and so lose their one solid edge against Intel.  If they weren't cheaper right now who'd buy. 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 508
Points 7,860
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: California

The AMDs are not worth it at all, not only they perform poorly compared to the Intel Quad-Cores, but also use more power than the most powerful Intel Processor now. Excellent Review by the way. :)

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 463
Points 7,025
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: United States
AjayD replied on Sun, Mar 9 2008 8:24 PM

Progress is progress, however meager it may be. It would be nice if AMD were more of a threat to Intel, rather than always one step behind. Hopefully they will be able to shorten the gap with their 45nm chips, but by the time they get them out Intel may verywell be onto bigger (or smaller) and better things.

 

***** Time you enjoy wasting, was not wasted. *****

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 795
Points 13,650
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Reseda
Kamrooz replied on Mon, Mar 10 2008 3:55 PM

AjayD:

Progress is progress, however meager it may be. It would be nice if AMD were more of a threat to Intel, rather than always one step behind. Hopefully they will be able to shorten the gap with their 45nm chips, but by the time they get them out Intel may verywell be onto bigger (or smaller) and better things.

 

And that is indeed happening, Nehalem will slap Shanghai right out the door...I'm predicting it now...so in 7-9 months from now..I'll be the first to say I tell everyone I told you so Stick out tongue.

2x Core 2 Quad QX9775 2Gb DDR2-667 Kingston FBDimm 150GB Western Digital Raptor 2x 500 Gb Seagate 7200.10 2x 8800 GT SLI Intel D5400XS (Skulltrail) Gigabyte 3D Aurora 570 Ultra X3 1KW psu 2X Liteon DL DVD-RW Rig courtesy of HotHardware! =D
  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (8 items) | RSS