Sometimes they come back: AMD introduces the Phenom II X4. Sometimes they come back: AMD introduces Phenom II X4 AMD Phenom II X4965: specifications and features

The Phenom II X4 20 processor, the price of a new one on amazon and ebay is 6,435 rubles, which is equal to $111.

Number of cores - 4.

The base frequency of the Phenom II X4 20 cores is 3.3 GHz. The maximum frequency in AMD Turbo Core mode reaches 3.3 GHz.

Price in Russia

Want to buy Phenom II X4 20 cheaply? Look at the list of stores that already sell the processor in your city.

AMD Phenom II X4 20 Benchmark

The data comes from tests by users who tested their systems with and without overclocking. Thus, you see the average values corresponding to the processor.

Speed of numerical operations

Different tasks require different CPU strengths. A system with few fast cores is great for gaming, but will be inferior to a system with a lot of slow cores in a rendering scenario.

We believe that a processor with at least 4 cores/4 threads is suitable for a budget gaming PC. At the same time, individual games can load it at 100% and slow down, and performing any tasks in the background will lead to a drop in FPS.

Ideally, the buyer should aim for a minimum of 6/6 or 6/12, but keep in mind that systems with more than 16 threads are currently only applicable to professional tasks.

The data is obtained from tests by users who tested their systems both with overclocking (the maximum value in the table) and without (the minimum). A typical result is indicated in the middle, with a colored bar indicating the position among all tested systems.

Accessories

We have put together a list of components that users most often choose when building a Phenom II X4 20 based computer. These components also achieve the best test results and stable operation.

The most popular config: motherboard for AMD Phenom II X4 20 - Dell XPS One 2710, graphics card - Radeon HD 6700.

Characteristics

Main

Manufacturer	AMD
Release date Month and year when the processor appeared on sale.	03-2015
cores The number of physical cores.	4
streams Number of threads. The number of logical processor cores that the operating system sees.	4
base frequency Guaranteed frequency of all processor cores at maximum load. Performance in single-threaded and multi-threaded applications and games depends on it. It is important to remember that speed and frequency are not directly related. For example, a new processor at a lower frequency may be faster than an old one at a higher one.	3.3GHz
Turbo frequency The maximum frequency of one processor core in turbo mode. Manufacturers have made it possible for the processor to independently increase the frequency of one or more cores under heavy load, thereby increasing the speed of operation. It greatly affects the speed in games and applications that are demanding on the frequency of the CPU.	3.3GHz

Today, AMD is known around the world as a supplier of technologically advanced, high-performance, but at the same time affordable processors for various types of personal computers. In Russia, the line of AMD Phenom II chips, which is produced by this brand, is currently very popular.

In turn, the modification of the X4 processors, which belong to the corresponding line, has also become very widespread. These chips can be described as universal high-speed devices, ideal for overclocking. What are their main specifications? What do modern IT specialists think about the effectiveness of Phenom II chips in the X4 modification?

general information

Processors AMD families The Phenom II is based on the high-tech microarchitecture of the K10 type. In the corresponding chip line, there are solutions that are equipped with a number of cores from 2 to 6. X4 chips, which belong to the family in question, also belong to the Dragon platform developed by AMD. Chips with 6 cores belong to the Leo platform. AMD releases Phenom II chips in several modifications. These are Thuban, Deneb, Zosma, Heka and Callisto.

All these microcircuits are united by one technological process - 45 nm. There can be significant differences between them. Since Thurban modification processors have 6 cores and 904 million transistors, this level of chips has a L3 cache size of 64 GB. The same amount is reserved for instructions. The L2 cache is 512 KB and the L3 cache is 6 MB. The processors support DDR3 and DDR2 RAM modules.

The value of power consumption lies in the range from 95 to 125 watts. Processors that belong to this proprietary line can operate at a frequency of 2.6 to 3.3 GHz when using the Turbo Core option - 3.7 GHz. In the Zosma modification, AMD Phenom chips have 4 cores. They have the same cache performance as the Thuban processors. The situation is also with the support of RAM modules. As for the power consumption level of the device, there are chips in the Zosma line that can run at 65 watts.

There are also those that consume 140 watts of power. In this modification, the processors operate at a frequency of 3.3 GHz in Turbo Core mode. They can accelerate up to 3.4 GHz. The Deneb line of chips also has 4 cores. These processors have 758 million transistors. The area is 258 square millimeters. The cache memory parameters in this case are the same as in the modifications considered above. The same can be said about the level of support for major technologies and memory modules.

Processors that belong to the Deneb modification support operation at a frequency of 2.4 to 3.7 GHz. The Heka line chips are almost identical to the Deneb chips in terms of their characteristics. The only difference is that they have 3 cores. Technically, they are Deneb processors with one core disabled. It is also worth noting that the frequencies supported by Heka chips are kept in the range from 2.5 to 3 GHz. In addition, there are no modifications among the processors of this line, the power consumption level of which exceeds 95 watts.

Another modification of Phenom II chips is Callisto. The chips that belong to this modification are actually identical to the Deneb processors, only they work on two cores. So they are Deneb chips that have 2 cores disabled. The processors of this line operate in the frequency range from 3 to 3.4 GHz. The power consumption value is 80 W. The most common types of Phenom II processors in Russia include representatives of the Deneb line. The chips that belong to this technological range are produced in the following modifications: X4 940, X4 965, X4 945, X4 955. The X4 line also has a flagship model - X4 980. Next, we will take a closer look at the features of these chip modifications.

Processor X4 940: Specifications

The first processor that we will consider is the X4 940. This chip has the following technical characteristics: the processor frequency is 3 GHz when using a multiplier of 15 units, the chip has 4 cores, is made within technological process 45 nm. The amount of cache memory of the 1st level is 128 KB, the second level - 2 MB, the third level - 6 MB. The instruction set supported by the chip includes MMX, SSE 3DNow! The X4 940 processor is compatible with AMD 64/EM65T and NX Bit technologies. The temperature limit value of the X4 940 chip is 62 degrees. The chip supports socket type AM2+. It can be noted that the X4 945 processor has almost the same characteristics. The only difference is that X4 945 can work with socket AM3.

Chip X4 955: features and capabilities

Consider the specifics of the AMD Phenom II X4 955 chip. This chip has the following specifications: in this modification, the processor operates at a frequency of 3.2 MHz using a multiplier of 16. There is also an integrated memory controller with a bandwidth of 21 Gb / s.

The size of the processor's cache memory practically does not differ from what the models discussed above have. In terms of support for computing and multimedia technologies, the chip has the same characteristics as the younger processors. The maximum operating temperature of the chip is 62 degrees. The most significant advantages of the X4 955 include compatibility with DDR3 RAM modules.

What practical possibilities does this chip have? It is worth paying attention to the results of some tests of this processor. It is worth noting that these results were achieved when the device was used in combination with an ASUS M4A79T motherboard that supports AM3 sockets and 4 GB of DDR3 RAM.

Tests conducted by IT experts show that, in combination with DDR3 memory modules, the AMD Phenom II processor is noticeably ahead of similar chips installed in computers equipped with DDR2 RAM. Therefore, in practice, a significant factor in the use of this chip is its addition to other technological and high-performance hardware components.

X4 955: overclocking

Let's consider another important aspect of using the X4 955 processor, namely overclocking. Experienced IT experts advise overclocking using the multi-functional Overdrive 3.0 utility. You can, of course, overclock through the BIOS, but using the marked version of the program allows you to solve the problem without the need to restart your personal computer. The most notable features of this utility include the BEMP function.

Its use allows you to greatly simplify the configuration of the processor in overclocking mode. This function involves establishing a connection between the Overdrive program and a database that contains lists of optimal values for frequencies and other options that are necessary to speed up the chip. Also very useful is the Smart Profiles option, which is available in the Overdrive program. With this option, the user has the ability to fine-tune the overclocking process of the chip.

The Overdrive program allows you to adapt the overclocking of the AMD Phenom II X4 processor to the work of applications running on the computer. For example, if a program operates in a single-threaded mode, then using the appropriate software the user can reduce the frequencies from 3 cores out of 4 in order for the fourth core to increase the speed limits. At the same time, the operating temperature of the device will remain optimal.

AMD Phenom II X4 955: comparison with competitors

How competitive is the version of the AMD Phenom II X4 processor we are reviewing? The review in terms of comparing this chip with analogues will most likely not be detailed enough. However, we can examine the test results of the chip, which were carried out by experts in the field of IT technology. The closest competitor of the model we are considering is the Intel Core 2 Quad Q 9550. Tests show that in terms of performance, the solution from Intel is slightly faster.

However, the difference identified by experts does not play a practical role when launching games and applications. Solutions such as Intel Core i7, in turn, are noticeably ahead of AMD Phenom II X4. At the same time, all three microcircuits have a comparable market value. It can also be noted that the AMD Phenom II X4 processor is more competitive in multimedia tests than in arithmetic ones. When testing, it is important to measure the performance level of the compared solutions in different modes. This will give an opportunity to get an objective idea of the capabilities of the microcircuit.

AMD Phenom II X4965 Specifications and Features

This chip has the following specifications: the standard processor frequency is 3.4 GHz, the voltage on the chip is 1.4 V. Otherwise, the processor parameters are identical to the lower models of the line. It should be noted that this chip can be used on two types of sockets - AM2+ and AM3. The memory controller installed in the processor, in turn, is also compatible with two RAM standards - DDR2 and DDR3.

AMD Phenom II X4 965 Overclocking

Let's see how successful overclocking of the AMD Phenom II X4 965 chip can be. The processors of this line are well adapted to the ability to adjust the voltage level. So, for example, some advanced solutions from Intel can work unstably at a voltage of 1.65 V. AMD chips operate quite stably in such modes. Tests show that the AMD Phenom II X4 965 can be overclocked to 3.8 GHz.

It is worth noting that approximately the same result was achieved when accelerating the processor in the 955 modification. IT specialists note that theoretically, the AMD Phenom II X4 965 chip can be accelerated to a frequency of 4 GHz. This will keep your computer stable. However, if this indicator is exceeded, the processor may become unstable in some modes. Experts who tested this version of the AMD Phenom II X4 processor claim that overclocking makes it possible not only to fix the advantages of this microcircuit in tests, but also to achieve a significant acceleration of the computer.

It should be noted that it is possible to overclock a processor in the AMD Phenom II X4 modification not only when conducting experiments with coefficients. Many experts use a technique in which chip acceleration can be achieved by increasing the frequency of the north bridge. It can be brought up to an indicator that corresponds to 2.6 GHz.

In this case, the motherboard on which the processor is installed must support the appropriate operating modes of the microcircuit. Exclusively important point when overclocking any chip are the appropriate characteristics of the cooling system. If the system copes well with normal operation, this does not mean at all that it will be able to ensure stable operation of the microcircuit during overclocking. Therefore, it may be necessary to install a cooling system with a higher speed.

When conducting experiments with overclocking chips, it will be useful to have programs at hand that allow you to monitor the temperature of the processor in real time. At some point, even the most efficient system Chip cooling may not work stably. In this case, it is important for the user not to miss such moments and fix overheating in time. The work associated with increasing the processor frequencies must be carried out systematically, avoiding sudden changes in the corresponding parameters. If the chip will work flawlessly at a given frequency with acceptable heating, then you can slightly increase the frequency. This can be done until the maximum performance is reached, at which the microcircuit is still working stably.

AMD Phenom II X4 980: flagship model

The closest attention, perhaps, should be given to the flagship model of the line. Its modification BE is quite popular. Its advantage lies in the fact that it has an unlocked coefficient and therefore has become popular among overclockers. The key capabilities of this processor basically coincide with those of AMD Phenom II X4 945. In terms of supported standards and cache memory, the characteristics remain the same as in the younger models of the line. However, the chip has a rather high level of power consumption - 125 watts. However, for a high level of processor frequency, this indicator can be considered optimal.

AMD Phenom II X4 980: testing

Testing of the AMD Phenom II X4 980 chip showed that its performance is quite consistent with that of the leading models of the Intel brand, which are based on the Sandy Bridge microarchitecture. In addition, in some tests, such as multimedia, the chip even outperforms more powerful counterparts, such as the Intel Core i5-2500. If we talk about effective tools for measuring the speed of chips, then you should definitely pay attention to the Everest program.

This program is a collection of synthetic tests. These include CPU Photoworx, CPU Queen, CPU Zlib. These tests provide an opportunity to evaluate the performance of microcircuits in a complex. It is also noteworthy that the benchmarks that are part of the Everest program are perfectly adapted to testing the speed of work with the simultaneous use of several computational threads. This means that during the tests, the processor cores can be fully loaded.

The more there are, the higher the actual processor performance. Experts consider the performance of the chip when performing floating-point operations to be an important indicator. The solution from AMD in the relevant tests is confidently ahead of competing processors from Intel.

Another notable tool that can be used to measure the speed of chips is the PC Mark program. Its characteristic feature is a comprehensive study of the capabilities of the chip. The testing modes in this program are as close as possible to real conditions. So, for example, this program makes it possible to provide processor testing by activating web browsing or converting one type of file to another.

Testing of the AMD Phenom II X4 chip in this modification demonstrates simply excellent results.
Another popular test among IT professionals is 3D Mark. It makes it possible to evaluate the capabilities of processors, in a mode that corresponds to the loads in three-dimensional games. Experts note that AMD Phenom II X4 980 is the absolute leader in its price segment according to the results of tests in 3D Mark. In addition, the superiority of this processor over some Thuban chips, which are equipped with 6 cores, was recorded. There are no stability issues when working in the main screen resolutions.

If we talk about the frame rate, then in some modes AMD Phenom II X4 980 turns out to be preferable to processors from AMD. In addition, in a real game process, the difference in processing speed between solutions from AMD and Intel, which is observed during testing, is most likely to be imperceptible.

Conclusion

In this review, we reviewed the characteristics of the AMD Phenom II X4 line. If we are talking about the AMD Phenom II X4 965 model or its younger modification 940, then the characteristics of these chips are similar to each other. The main difference between the chips is the frequency, and in some cases the types of sockets supported. All modifications of this line can be overclocked.

The devices look quite competitive against the background of similar solutions from Intel. If we talk about the technological capabilities of the AMD Phenom II X4 line of chips, then the supported standards allow us to conclude that AMD has brought to the market truly advanced solutions that look more than competitive against the background of similar solutions from Intel.

Introduction Continuing the series of announcements of processors based on the new 45nm Deneb core, AMD today introduces several new models aimed at the mid-price segment. Thus, the "pioneers" of the Phenom II family that we considered earlier, having processor numbers 940 and 920, remain the older models in AMD products, but now the company's position will be reinforced by several more processors, which are manufactured using a more modern technological process. More specifically, AMD is presenting five 45nm processors today: three quad-core processors - Phenom II X4 910, 810 and 805, as well as two tri-core processors - Phenom II X3 720 and 710. and fast processors. It is much more interesting that the models released today on the market have a new design - Socket AM3.

Recall that the main goal of transferring AMD processors to the Socket AM3 platform is to implement support for more modern and faster DDR3 SDRAM. At the same time, such Socket AM3 processors also retain compatibility with the existing Socket AM2+ infrastructure. It turns out that the new Phenom II models have a universal memory controller that can work with DDR2 or DDR3 SDRAM, depending on which motherboard it is installed on. However, such versatility is not at all surprising: we all remember the ease with which motherboard manufacturers used to develop products supporting DDR2 SDRAM, basing them on LGA775 X-series chipsets oriented to work with DDR3 SDRAM. Continuity, which is at the forefront of changing memory standards, ensures compatibility between DDR2 and DDR3 at the logical level, which allows engineers to support both technologies at the same time at minimal cost.

At the same time, with all its appearance, AMD makes us understand that we should not expect too much from the new processor socket and DDR3 memory. Yes, DDR3 SDRAM has higher frequencies, but at the same time it is also characterized by increased delays, which, as you know, also significantly affect the speed of platforms with AMD processors. Apparently, being guided by these considerations, AMD has not yet started switching older Phenom II models to Socket AM3, which remain available exclusively in Socket AM2+ variants. So for the time being, only mid-range models can boast of compatibility with Socket AM3, for which, frankly speaking, the ability to work with high-speed and expensive memory is not so relevant.

The fact that the Phenom II X4 940 and 920, released just a month ago, turned out to be incompatible with the new Socket AM3 platform, obviously, has some more weighty reasons, besides the lack of a noticeable increase in performance. And these reasons are not difficult to see if you get acquainted with the characteristics of the models presented today in more detail. The fact is that, when switching to a new processor socket, AMD decided to make its processors more economical: for all five of today's new products, the maximum heat dissipation level is set not to 125 W, as for the older Phenom II, but to 95 W. It is the same nameplate heat dissipation that all four-core Intel processors belonging to the Core 2 Quad family have. However, to all appearances, the parity in the maximum calculated thermal characteristics of the LGA775 and Socket AM3 platforms will not last long, since within the next couple of months AMD is going to introduce processors that are faster and less economical than Phenom II X4 910 and 810.

From all that has been said, it follows that the compatibility of the processors presented today with the new Socket AM3 socket and DDR3 memory does not solve much from the point of view of ordinary consumers. The presented models of the middle price range in the vast majority of cases will fall into the Socket AM2 + infrastructure and will be used with the widespread and inexpensive DDR2 SDRAM. AMD does not yet offer high-performance Phenom II modifications that would be really interesting to use in Socket AM3 platforms. Nevertheless, this is not a reason for us to close our eyes to a new promising platform, to which we decided to devote a separate material. In this article, we will get acquainted with the features of the new processor socket, and along the way we will test one of the new Socket AM3 processors - Phenom II X4 810.

The Phenom II Family: Species Diversity

First of all, we decided to gather together all the information about AMD processors manufactured using the 45nm process technology and supplied to the market under the Phenom II trademark. The need for a single reference table is due to the fact that this series, which currently includes seven processors, turned out to be very controversial: it consists of models with a different number of cores, with different purposes, compatibility with different platforms, and so on.

According to earlier plans, AMD was going to introduce another Socket AM3 processor - Phenom II X4 925, however, this moment its release did not take place. A possible reason for this is problems with fitting its heat dissipation into the 95-watt thermal package. And taking into account the fact that the next model, Phenom II X4 910, although formally announced, is actually available only for AMD OEM partners, the older Socket AM3 processor, which will be available in stores in the near future, turns out to be Phenom II X4 810 This is what explains the participation of this model in our tests.

The expansion of the Phenom II model range leads to the fact that the new nomenclature of processor ratings adopted by AMD becomes clear. Thus, a series of ratings characterize the main characteristics of processors. And if we add information about future processor models with 45-nm cores to the available data, we get a completely harmonious and logical sequence:

Series 900 - quad-core processors with 6 MB L3 cache;
Series 800 - quad-core processors with 4 MB L3 cache;
Series 700 - three-core processors with 6 MB L3 cache;
Series 600 - quad-core processors without L3 cache;
Series 400 - three-core processors without L3 cache;
The 200 series are dual-core processors.

Information about the 200, 400 and 600 series is preliminary. The output of such processors, judging by the available data, is scheduled for the second quarter of this year.

Socket AM3 platform

With the introduction of the new Socket AM3 platform, AMD's first goal is to introduce support for modern DDR3 SDRAM memory in systems based on Phenom II processors. Such support has been available in competitor platforms for more than a year and a half, but earlier AMD considered the transition to a new type of memory untimely due to its high cost. By now, the situation has changed a lot, prices for DDR3 modules have dropped significantly, and this has prompted AMD to enter the market and develop a new type of processor socket.

However, unlike its main rival, AMD recent times extremely rarely makes drastic changes in the design of the platform. The company's engineers make every effort to ensure the possibility of a painless migration from one platform to another. This tactic is especially relevant in the light of current realities, when AMD processors do not have many advantages compared to Intel products. This is what makes the new platform interesting: AMD developers were able to offer such a scheme for upgrading the memory controller built into their own processors, in which neither old nor new adherents of the Athlon and Phenom brands should be dissatisfied.

The fact that the Socket AM3 platform is in many ways similar to its predecessor can be understood from a quick glance at the boards and processors in the new design. Not only did AMD not convert its chips to LGA packaging, moreover, the processors even retained the same geometric dimensions, and the number of their contacts has practically not changed. Due to the fact that AMD has put the ideas of succession and compatibility at the forefront, it is possible to distinguish a Socket AM3 processor from a Socket AM2 + brother only upon very careful examination.

Left - Socket AM2+ processor, right - Socket AM3 processor

Differences between Socket AM2+ and Socket AM3 processors are visible only from the "belly". From the above photo, you can see that the number of contacts in Socket AM3 has decreased by two, respectively, now there are 938 of them.

A similar picture can be seen if we compare the connectors on motherboards.

Left - Socket AM2+, right - Socket AM3

As you can see, Socket AM3 processors can be mechanically installed in Socket AM2+, while a Socket AM2+ processor in Socket AM3 simply cannot be inserted into the motherboard due to the "extra" two pins. This mechanical compatibility reflects the logical compatibility as well. The new Socket AM3 processors have a universal memory controller that supports both DDR2 and DDR3 SDRAM. The specific type of memory used in each case is determined solely by the DIMM slots on the motherboard. In Socket AM2+ boards this is DDR2, in Socket AM3 it is DDR3 SDRAM. Older Socket AM2+ processors do not have such versatility, they can only work with DDR2 SDRAM, which is why they were deprived of mechanical compatibility with the new processor socket.

Socket AM2+ and Socket AM3 have retained continuity in many other aspects. Due to matching socket and processor sizes, AMD was able to ensure that the same CPU coolers can be used on both platforms. Even the scheme of their fastening has not been transformed.

The same applies to microarchitecture features: Socket AM2+ and Socket AM3 processors differ only in terms of the memory controller. All other nodes, including the HyperTransport 3.0 bus, were kept unchanged. And this, in turn, means that new chipsets are not required to support Socket AM3, such processors are perfectly compatible with the same chipsets as Socket AM2+ models. That is why the main developers of chipsets for the AMD platform do not offer any special solutions aimed at supporting new products.

Almost complete mechanical and logical compatibility between the types of processor sockets in some cases even allows you to deviate from the original one-to-one correspondence scheme: Socket AM2+ - DDR2 SDRAM, Socket AM3 - DDR3 SDRAM. Some motherboard manufacturers, such as Jetway, are preparing universal Socket AM2+ motherboards with slots for DDR2 and DDR3, in which, when using a Socket AM3 processor, it will be possible to put either one or the other memory.

Socket AM3 processors officially support DDR2 memory up to 1067 MHz and DDR3 memory up to 1333 MHz. At the same time, reliable performance of DDR3-1333 in Socket AM3 systems is guaranteed only if no more than one module per channel is used. However, in practice it turns out that the new processors can also work with DDR3-1600 SDRAM: the corresponding multiplier for the memory frequency is supported by the built-in controller. In practice, it looks like when installing a Socket AM3 processor in a Socket AM2+ board, it becomes possible to choose between the standard DDR2-667/800/1067 memory frequencies for any Phenom, and when it is used in Socket AM3 boards, another set of multipliers opens up, allowing you to clock the memory in DDR3-1067/1333/1600 modes.

It only remains to add to the above that to achieve full compatibility of the Socket AM2+ motherboards on the market with the new Socket AM3 processors, a simple BIOS update is enough. Moreover, the motherboard BIOS support for Phenom II processors, even in Socket AM2+ version, automatically entails that Socket AM3 processors will also work in such a motherboard without any problems. And this, in turn, means that no special difficulties are expected when adapting the existing motherboard fleet to new processors.

Processor Phenom II X4 810

After a detailed story about what Socket AM3 brings in itself, it seems that the processor in this design has nothing to surprise us with. However, this is not quite true. Although in general the new Phenom II differs little from the Phenom II presented by AMD a month ago, the Phenom II X4 810 sent to us for testing showed some unexpected characteristics.

First of all, it should be noted that Phenom II X4 810 received a processor number from the eighth dozen for a reason. With these reduced numbers, AMD designates quad-core processors with reduced performance. In our case, a part of the L3 cache went under the knife, its size in the Phenom II X4 810 is 4 MB versus 6 MB in the "full-fledged" Phenom II.

In general, the appearance of Phenom II processors with a reduced L3 cache, as well as with disabled cores, is a completely natural event. The monolithic die of Deneb processors, although produced using a 45-nm process, has a fairly large area: 258 square meters. mm. For comparison, this is only slightly less than the area of the Intel Core i7 chip, which indicates approximately the same production cost for these processors. Comparing the retail prices of Core i7 and Phenom II is clearly not in favor of the latter: obviously, the release of Phenom II is a much less profitable enterprise than the production of Core i7. And given that AMD does not yet have chips comparable in performance to the best Intel products, it becomes clear that the company is forced to squeeze the maximum profit out of available resources. Selling processors based on partially defective chips, which for some reason could not make it into the Phenom II 900 series, is one such method.

Actually, the appearance of Phenom II X4 810 is a typical illustration of this tactic. This processor is based on exactly the same Deneb semiconductor die as in the Phenom II 900 series processors, but a third of the L3 cache is disabled in it. Thanks to this trick, AMD implements chips in which a defect occurred during production in the part where the L3 cache is located. If the marriage falls on the area of the crystal in which the computing cores are located, then such crystals are used in the production of the three-core Phenom II 700-series processors, which are also presented to the public today.

The characteristics of the L3 cache memory of the Phenom II X4 810 processor look rather strange.

According to the diagnostic utility, the L3 cache of this processor has 64 associativity regions, while the L3 cache of the full-fledged Phenom II X4 900 with a 6 MB L3 cache had only 48 associativity regions. The most logical explanation for this phenomenon seems to be an error in the CPU-Z readings, and the Phenom II X4 810 L3 cache has an associativity of 32. Otherwise, the cache in the 800 series should have a higher latency than in older processor models, which in practice is not observed.

However, the L3 cache of Phenom II processors in Socket AM3 is still faster than their Socket AM2+ counterparts. However, the reasons for this lie not at all in the depths of the microarchitecture - they lie on the surface. The fact is that for its Socket AM3 models AMD has set a higher frequency of the integrated northbridge, which is also used to clock the L3 cache. The L3 cache in the Phenom II X4 810, like in other processors for the new platform, operates at a frequency of 2.0 GHz, while the L3 cache frequency of its predecessors was 200 MHz lower.

As follows from the screenshot above, the above is also true when installing a Socket AM3 processor in a Socket AM2+ motherboard.

But despite all the differences between the Phenom II in Socket AM3 version we are considering and its Socket AM2+ counterparts, which we had the opportunity to meet a month ago, it is quite difficult to hide the blood relationship between them. For example, the Phenom II X4 810 uses the same C2 core stepping that we saw in the Phenom II X4 940 and 920 processors earlier. And this means that the semiconductor crystals underlying the Socket AM2+ and Socket AM3 Phenom II versions do not differ at all, and the memory types supported by one or another processor modification are determined only at the stage of packaging it into a case.

Impact of L3 cache size on performance

The first question that arises when getting acquainted with the characteristics of the Phenom II X4 810 processor concerns how much the reduction in the L3 cache size harms performance. To unequivocally answer this question, we decided to compare the performance of the Phenom II X4 810 and Phenom II X4 910 processors. Both these models are based on the 45 nm Deneb core, have the same clock speed of 2.6 GHz and differ only in the amount of cache memory, which in both cases it operates on the same frequency of 2.0 GHz.

Our testing shows that cutting the L3 cache from 6 to 4 MB does not lead to any significant drop in the performance of Phenom II X4 processors. The loss of Phenom II X4 810 to its “full-fledged” colleague not only averaged only 2%, but even in the most unfavorable situations did not exceed 5%.

Thus, it is quite reasonable that the Phenom II X4 810 costs only $20 less than the Phenom II X4 920. Obviously, there is no glaring difference in the practical performance of these processors, and the main drawback of the younger model is not the reduced L3 cache, but at a lower clock frequency.

By the way, we should not forget that the L3 cache of the Phenom II X4 810 operates at a higher frequency than the L3 cache of the older Phenom II X4 940 and 920 models. And this can be considered as additional compensation for its smaller volume. , because as we found out earlier, a 200-MHz increase in the frequency of the north bridge built into the processor entails an approximately one and a half percent increase in performance.

Motherboard Gigabyte GA-MA790FXT-UD5P

Frankly, we have the impression that today's announcement of the Socket AM3 platform is not well prepared. The obvious problems that we also had to face can be seen in the unavailability of the new infrastructure: it turned out to be quite difficult to choose a platform for testing new Socket AM3 processors. Motherboard manufacturers obviously did not expect that AMD would present Socket AM3 within a month after the release of the first Socket AM2+ Phenom II, and therefore did not have time to bring the development and production of the corresponding products to the final stage. As a result, even AMD representatives recommended us to test the Phenom II X4 810 on a Socket AM2+ motherboard with DDR2 memory.

Nevertheless, we still managed to get a motherboard for testing Socket AM3. The situation was saved by Gigabyte, which literally at the last moment provided its fresh Socket AM3 board GA-MA790FXT-UD5P. This board will be the new flagship product in Gigabyte's range of offerings for owners of AMD processors, and therefore it deserves a separate review.

Gigabyte GA-MA790FXT-UD5P continues the company's series of products aimed at supporting AMD processors, so this board has a lot in common with its predecessors equipped with Socket AM2+. However, this is not surprising, considering that the GA-MA790FXT-UD5P is based on the usual set of logic, consisting of the AMD 790FX north bridge and the SB750 south bridge. In fact, the main features of the board are concentrated in the vicinity of Socket AM3, as there are four slots for DDR3 SDRAM - memory that was not previously supported by systems with AMD processors.

Since the motherboard in question is designed to create high-performance systems, it has two PCI Express x16 2.0 slots that can work with a pair of graphics cards combined using CrossFireX technology in full speed mode.

The board's positioning determined its belonging to the Ultra Durable 3 class, to which Gigabyte classifies all of its most interesting products. First of all, this means that high-quality electronic components are widely used in the manufacture of the board: capacitors with a solid electrolyte of Japanese origin, field-effect transistors with a reduced channel resistance in the open state, and inductors made on armored ferrite cores. Secondly, the GA-MA790FXT-UD5P motherboard uses printed circuit board with thicker than usual copper ground and power layers. This improvement allows Gigabyte to talk about improving the quality of signals and reducing interference, as well as improving the thermal regime of the board - conductors at the same time play the role of a heat sink.

The processor power converter on the board is made according to a four-channel scheme, while its power is such that Gigabyte guarantees stable operation of the board with processors consuming up to 140 watts. The transistors included in the power converter are covered with a massive heatsink (the largest on the board), connected by heat pipes to heatsinks installed on the north and south bridges of the chipset. It should be emphasized that these heatsinks have a small height and are moved away from the processor socket at a distance sufficient for comfortable installation of massive coolers. However, when installing a processor cooling system, obstacles can still arise from the DIMM slots, which are located so close to the processor socket that the cooler can make it impossible to install DDR3 memory modules in the slots closest to the processor.

For ease of use, Gigabyte engineers placed Power, Reset, and Clear CMOS buttons on the board. Unfortunately, the convenience brought by this is compensated by their very unfortunate location: the first two buttons were locked between the connectors, and the Clear CMOS button can be blocked by a long video card. But Gigabyte engineers did not forget a device to protect the reset button from accidental pressing: it is closed with a transparent plastic cap.

The presence on the GA-MA790FXT-UD5P of ten Serial ATA-300 ports deployed parallel to the board attracts attention. At the same time, six ports are implemented in a standard way through the SB750 south bridge, and additional JMicron controllers are responsible for the remaining four. Ports connected to the southbridge support RAID levels 0, 1, 0+1, and 5, while additional ports can only provide RAID 0 or 1.

On the back panel The board has eight USB 2.0 ports, two gigabit network ports, two Firewire ports, PS/2 ports for mouse and keyboard, as well as analog and SPDIF audio inputs and outputs. It should be noted that the eight-channel codec Realtek ALC889A, which has a certified signal-to-noise ratio of 106 dB, is responsible for the implementation of sound on the board under consideration. In addition to the ports on the rear panel, the GA-MA790FXT-UD5P is also equipped with several pin headers that allow you to connect four more USB 2.0 and one IEEE1394.

The BIOS Setup of the motherboard in question is made with a clear focus on enthusiasts, therefore, in addition to the standard settings, it contains a whole section "MB Intelligent Tweaker" designed for overclocking. In addition to the standard options for changing multipliers and base frequencies, it offers flexible means for controlling voltages.

The voltage increase limit for DDR3 memory is 2.35 V, and the processor voltage can be increased to a value that exceeds the standard value by 0.6 V. Additionally, you can control the voltage of the north bridge built into the processor and the power supply of chipset chips.

Also, the board offers detailed settings for memory parameters.

On the whole, the Gigabyte GA-MA790FXT-UD5P motherboard made quite a favorable impression on us. Of course, the BIOS version number F4D, with which we tested this board, cannot yet be called problem-free and absolutely stable, but, nevertheless, we were able not only to complete the full set of tests in the normal mode, but also to experiment with overclocking the processor.

How We Tested

We divided today's testing into two stages. First of all, we will find out how the transfer to a new platform that supports DDR3 SDRAM affects the speed of Phenom II X4 processors. To do this, we will compare the performance of the new Phenom II X4 810 when running in a Socket AM2+ motherboard with DDR2-800 and DDR2-1067 memory with its performance when installed in a Socket AM3 board, in which we will use DDR3-1333 and DDR3-1600 SDRAM .

The second phase of our tests will be dedicated to finding out the performance of AMD's new quad-core processors in comparison with competing offerings. Here, obviously, the comparison of Phenom II X4 810 and Core 2 Quad Q8200 performance will attract the main interest, since these processors have approximately the same retail price.

As a result, the following set of components was involved in the tests:

Processors:

AMD Phenom II X4 920 (Deneb, 2.8GHz, 6MB L3);
AMD Phenom II X4 910 (Deneb, 2.6GHz, 6MB L3);
AMD Phenom II X4 810 (Deneb, 2.6GHz, 4MB L3);
AMD Phenom II X4 805 (Deneb, 2.5GHz, 4MB L3);
AMD Phenom X4 9950 (Agena, 2.6GHz, 2MB L3);
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300 (Yorkfield, 2.5 GHz, 333 MHz FSB, 2 x 2 MB L2);
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 (Yorkfield, 2.33 GHz, 333 MHz FSB, 2 x 2 MB L2).

Motherboards:

ASUS P5Q Pro (LGA775, Intel P45 Express, DDR2 SDRAM);
Gigabyte MA790GP-DS4H (Socket AM2+, AMD 790GX + SB750, DDR2 SDRAM);
Gigabyte MA790FXT-UD5P (Socket AM3, AMD 790FX + SB750, DDR3 SDRAM).

RAM:

GEIL GX24GB8500C5UDC (2 x 2GB, DDR2-1067 SDRAM, 5-5-5-15);
Mushkin 996601 4GB XP3-12800 (2 x 2GB, DDR3-1600 SDRAM, 7-7-7-20).

Graphic card: ATI RADEON HD 4870.
HDD: Western Digital WD1500AHFD.
Operating system: Microsoft Windows Vista x64 SP1.
Drivers:

Intel Chipset Software Installation Utility 9.1.0.1007;
ATI Catalyst 9.1 Display Driver.

Performance: DDR3 vs DDR2

In this part of our article, we will compare the performance of the Phenom II X4 810 when installed in motherboards with different types of processor sockets: Gigabyte MA790GP-DS4H and Gigabyte MA790FXT-UD5P. In both cases, we used a couple of different widely used memory configurations.

Thus, the Socket AM2+ system used DDR2-800 with 5-5-5-15 timings and 1T Command Rate and DDR2-1067 with 5-5-5-15 and 2T Command Rate timings. Note that the use of 2T Command Rate in the second case is a forced measure, since the Phenom II memory controller does not allow reducing this delay when using 2GB DDR2-1067 SDRAM modules.

The Socket AM3 system used configurations that included DDR3-1333 and DDR3-1600, both with 7-7-7-20 latencies. The Command Rate parameter in both cases was set to 1T - fortunately, with high-speed DDR3 memory, this choice is acceptable.

Synthetic tests

First of all, it was decided to evaluate the practical parameters of the memory subsystems of various platforms using synthetic tests.

As expected, the synthetic tests unanimously demonstrate the superiority in throughput and latency of the Socket AM3 platform. In other words, from the new platform that allows the use of DDR3-1333 and DDR3-1600, we can only expect a performance boost.

It should be added to the above that, as an additional test showed, the performance of the memory controller of the Socket AM3 processor installed in a Socket AM2+ system with DDR2 memory is identical to the performance of the memory controller of "native" Socket AM2+ processors (provided that the built-in northern bridge). In other words, the versatility of the memory controller in Socket AM3 processors does not reduce its performance when working with DDR2 SDRAM.

Overall Performance

The results obtained in SYSMark 2007, which shows the weighted average performance in real applications, confirm the benefits of the new platform. However, they do not give grounds for excessive optimism. As you can see, switching to DDR3 SDRAM increases the speed of the system based on the Phenom II X4 810 processor quite symbolically. Thus, the superiority of a Socket AM3 system equipped with DDR3-1600 SDRAM over a system with a Socket AM2+ processor and DDR2-1067 memory is only 3-4%.

Gaming Performance

Although games usually show good sensitivity to changes in the characteristics of the memory subsystem, switching to DDR3 does not bring a serious gain. However, it must be emphasized that this does not at all mean the acceptability of a completely disregarding approach when choosing memory. For example, betting on DDR3-1600 SDRAM instead of DDR2-800 can increase platform performance by up to 10%. Therefore, the appearance of the Socket AM3 platform and processors with a universal memory controller cannot be called a useless step. By now, DDR3 memory has received sufficient development so that its advantages over DDR2 cannot be doubted. And this means that AMD was obviously not in vain waiting to launch its new platform.

Although video encoding is primarily a computational task, fast DDR3 memory provides a slight speedup in this case too.

Tellingly, the advantage of the Socket AM3 platform over Socket AM2+ is evident even in the final rendering, which is almost completely indifferent to the choice of memory.

Other Applications

When editing images in a popular graphics editor, the type of memory has a distinct effect. Even when using the most common DDR3-1333 memory, we were able to get higher speeds than demonstrated by a Socket AM2+ system with DDR2-1067 SDRAM.

With the transition to a new platform, the speed of solving computational problems in Excel and Mathematica has slightly increased. The advantage of a Socket AM3 system with DDR3-1600 memory over a configuration using Socket AM2+ and DDR2-1067 SDRAM was almost 3%.

Approximately on a similar scale, the speed of the archiver also increases.

Summing up, we can say that the Socket AM3 platform makes it possible to speed up the execution of typical tasks by Phenom II X4 processors by an average of 2-3%. Today, against the background of the difference in prices between DDR2 and DDR3 modules, this increase seems ridiculous. However, in the light of the trend of further fall in the cost of DDR3 SDRAM, the Socket AM3 platform has quite bright prospects.

AMD Phenom II X4 810 Performance

Despite the fact that the new AMD Phenom II X4 810 processor has a Socket AM3 design, we decided to test its performance, as well as the performance of other today's new products, in a Socket AM2 + system equipped with DDR2 memory. This is due to the fact that in the current realities, these processors belonging to the middle price range will most likely be used in such systems: this is the most logical option in terms of economic feasibility. In addition, DDR2 memory was also used in all other systems we tested, so the choice of the Socket AM2+ platform for the Phenom II X4 810 tests seems to be quite correct.

Overall Performance

Competent construction of a pricing policy is something that AMD has become particularly adept at lately. Therefore, it would be strange to see if any of the new processors looked inadequate among competitors in the same price category. So the slight superiority of the Phenom II X4 810 over the Core 2 Quad Q8200 is by no means surprising, but the more expensive Intel processor, the Core 2 Quad Q8300, is already too tough for today's main novelty.

Gaming Performance

Although the Phenom II processors began to show much better performance in games than their predecessors manufactured using 65-nm technology, we can't speak about the confident victory of the Phenom II X4 810 over the Core 2 Quad of the same price category. In order for the Phenom II X4 810 to receive our unequivocal recommendations as a gaming solution, it clearly lacks clock speed. However, the situation for the AMD processor is by no means catastrophic, and in a number of gaming applications its performance is quite acceptable.

Video encoding performance

But when encoding video Phenom II X4 810 manifests itself exclusively on the positive side. For example, when using the x264 codec, it can even compete on equal terms with the more expensive Core 2 Quad Q8300. This is explained, obviously, by the high efficiency of the FPU/SSE of the processor block with the Stars microarchitecture (K10).

Render performance

The general verdict with this type of load is hard to make. As you can clearly see from the graphs, everything depends heavily on the application that is used for rendering. Nevertheless, the Phenom II X4 810 does not hit the dirt, demonstrating decent results even in 3ds max 2009, where Intel processors are traditionally strong.

Other Applications

Adobe Photoshop and Microsoft Excel are two popular applications where Phenom II processors do a very poor job. This also applies to the Phenom II X4 810, which outperforms the Core 2 Quad Q8200 in our test tasks by 9 and 17 percent, respectively.

In Wolfram Mathematica 7, the results of the Phenom II X4 810 can be called acceptable, although they turn out to be slightly lower than those of the youngest processor in the Core 2 Quad series.

But when archiving in WinRAR, the new AMD processor manages to demonstrate a significantly higher relative performance than in previous cases.

Counting tasks, where integer arithmetic is actively used, are not the most favorable environment for processors with the Stars (K10) microarchitecture. The two diagrams above are a vivid illustration of this well-known thesis.

Overclocking

With the release of the Phenom II family, the topic of overclocking AMD processors has become relevant again. These processors, which are based on 45-nm cores, among other things, have received good overclocking potential: as shown by our earlier tests, these models, when using air cooling, are capable of operating at frequencies reaching 3.7-3.8 GHz. However, our conclusions were made for 900-series processors using full-fledged Deneb cores. Now we have a Phenom II X4 810 processor in our hands, which has a reduced L3 cache, and, moreover, a Socket AM3 design.

To study the overclocking potential of the new processor, we used the new Socket AM3 motherboard Gigabyte MA790FXT-UD5P. The use of this board will allow us, among other things, to draw conclusions about the suitability for overclocking of Socket AM3 platforms in general. CPU cooling during the tests was performed by a Scythe Mugen cooler with a Noctua NF-P12 fan installed on it.

We managed to get the best result by increasing the processor supply voltage from the standard 1.3 to 1.525 V. In this state, the processor overclocked to 3.64 GHz, which is quite comparable with the results of overclocking other Phenom II obtained earlier.

Note that since the Phenom II X4 810 processor does not belong to the Black Edition class and does not have a free multiplier, it was overclocked by increasing the frequency of the base clock generator. In particular, in order to obtain a processor frequency of 3.64 GHz, we had to increase the frequency of the clock generator to 280 MHz, which the motherboard we use Socket AM3 coped with without any problems. In other words, overclocking processors in Socket AM3 systems is absolutely similar to overclocking in systems with a Socket AM2+ processor socket and can be performed in full accordance with our guide.

As for the Phenom II X4 810 itself, its 40% overclocking can be an additional argument in favor of the AMD platform. Moreover, it is often possible to overclock comparable Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 processors only up to 3.4 GHz. And in this regard, a system built on the basis of Phenom II X4 810 can be quite attractive for overclockers.

conclusions

To be honest, AMD has chosen a somewhat strange moment to launch its new Socket AM3 platform, designed for processors with DDR3 memory support. For some reason, this platform did not appear a month ago, along with a new line of Phenom II processors, but only now. As a result, in view of the fact that older modifications of Phenom II are already offered in Socket AM2+ variations, models from the middle price range have to accompany the announcement of Socket AM3. However, these processors seem to be very poor candidates for installation in Socket AM3 motherboards: the DDR3 memory required for such systems is about one and a half to two times more expensive than the widely used DDR2 SDRAM, which makes it a dubious investment compared to the choice of a more expensive processor.

However, the main advantage of Socket AM3 processors lies in the fact that they are equipped with a flexible memory controller that can work with both DDR3 and DDR2 memory. Therefore, no one is forcing you to use the medium-priced Phenom II processors presented today in Socket AM3 systems in Socket AM3 systems. They also work great in existing, time-tested Socket AM2+ or even Socket AM2 infrastructure.

However, thanks to the testing of the new processor in the Socket AM3 motherboard, we were able to verify the viability of this platform as well. The use of DDR3 SDRAM with Phenom II processors has a quite tangible effect, consisting in about a three percent increase in performance even compared to DDR2-1067 SDRAM.

Fortunately, the lack of high-performance processors for the Socket AM3 platform is a temporary situation. Over the coming months, AMD will obviously adjust its proposals, and the new platform will receive decent high-speed processors. This period of time is given to motherboard manufacturers that obviously need it so that they can finally bring their Socket AM3 products to perfection.

As for the Phenom II X4 810 processor reviewed in this article, it should be taken as another embodiment of AMD's strategy to offer higher performance for less money. Testing showed that in terms of performance it is comparable to the Core 2 Quad Q8200, but at the same time it costs a little less. As a result, AMD has an acceptable alternative to all cheap quad-core Intel processors, up to the Core 2 Quad Q9400. In other words, AMD was able to take an important step - to offer a competitive line of processors that can be recommended for purchase.

To what has been said in this article, it only remains to add that we are not finishing our acquaintance with Phenom II yet, and in the near future we will have another article about new three-core processors based on the Heka core, produced using a 45-nm process technology.

Check availability and cost of AMD Phenom II processors

Phenom II: new microarchitecture or new process technology?

AMD is using the name Phenom II for its new desktop processors, formerly codenamed Deneb. And although the appearance of the additive "II" after the promoted trademark is perceived as a hint of new step in the development of microarchitecture, in fact, the deep differences between Phenom II and Phenom turn out to be not so significant. Even AMD itself does not deny the fact that the Phenom II are carriers of the same Stars (K10) microarchitecture, which also includes the first generation Phenom processors.

Therefore, we believe that the main characteristic feature of Phenom II processors is the transfer of their production to a new technological process with 45 nm standards and the use of immersion lithography. Unfortunately, AMD is a whole year behind its main competitor in terms of the implementation of modern technical process. However, the manufacturing technologies used by AMD proved to be unique in many ways, as the company followed its main technology partner, IBM, into introducing immersion lithography equipment. A feature of such equipment is the use of a liquid instead of a gaseous medium in the space between the projection lenses of the lithography system and the semiconductor wafer. This improvement improves the accuracy of the projection system, resulting in higher semiconductor chip performance and reduced manufacturing rejects. The progressiveness of this approach is well illustrated by the fact that immersion lithography equipment is now seen not only as an interesting improvement for modern technologies, but also as one of the possible alternatives to EUV lithography (Extreme UltraViolet, that is, using a hard ultraviolet radiation) in future technical processes. Thus, the 45nm process technology finally introduced by AMD can solve many manufacturing and engineering problems facing the company at once.

New technologies for the production of processor cores primarily affect the frequency potential. And for AMD, whose 65nm Phenom processors could only reach 2.6 GHz, the increase in clock speeds is necessary as air. After all, it is the low clock speeds that do not allow the Phenom X4 processors to compete with the Intel Core 2 Quad family. Fortunately, the new process technology justifies the hopes placed on it. The Phenom II X4 processors released today, which are based on 45nm cores, reach the 3GHz mark in terms of clock speed.

The second important advantage of modern semiconductor technologies is the possibility of placing a larger number of transistors on a semiconductor chip of the same area, through which it is possible to improve any characteristics of the processor. In particular, the new Phenom II X4 has a core area of 258 square meters. mm and contain 758 million transistors, while the previous generation Phenom X4, manufactured using 65-nm technology, has only 450 million transistors with a core area of 285 square meters. mm. At the same time, such a solid increase in the number of transistors in the Phenom II X4 core is caused by microarchitecture improvements that increase performance regardless of the increase in clock frequency.

In sum, AMD talks about a 20% speed advantage over the company's new quad-core processors over its predecessors.

The biggest part of this gain is naturally due to the higher clock speeds of the Phenom II X4. The models presented today seem to continue the Phenom X4 lineup, the frequencies of the new products are 200 and 400 MHz higher than the frequency of the Phenom X4 9950 processor, the senior representative of the 65-nm family. But a 15% increase in clock speed cannot result in a 20% increase in performance.

Other factors also play a role. So, most of the added transistors are used to increase the cache memory of the third level. In Phenom II X4, its volume has tripled: up to 6 MB versus 2 MB for Phenom X4 processors of the previous generation. By the way, in addition to increasing the volume, the cache memory of the new processors has become faster than that of its predecessors. Its latency decreased by 2 cycles, however, at the same time, associativity increased one and a half times. The L3 cache of Phenom II X4 processors has 48 associativity regions, while Phenom X4 has 32 regions.

As a result, the practical speed of the L3 cache has changed ambiguously, at least, the results of Everest Ultimate 4.60 indicate this.

Deneb (45 nm) 3.0 GHz, 1.8 GHz in-core northbridge

Agena (65nm) 3.0GHz, 1.8GHz in-core northbridge

It should be added that, unfortunately, the transition to a new technological process did not allow AMD to increase the frequency of the north bridge built into the core; in Phenom II X4 it operates at 1.8 GHz. This is a very unfortunate fact, since an increase in this frequency would increase the speed of the L3 cache and the memory subsystem much more than an almost imperceptible decrease in the latency of the third level cache.

This is where the obvious advantages of the Phenom II X4 end, but besides them, a number of other minor improvements were introduced into the new processors, which also, although not so tangibly, affect performance. So, in 45-nm processors, the operation of branch prediction algorithms has been improved: now AMD processors, like competing products, can predict indirect branches. In addition, in the new kernel, engineers were able to increase the capacity of internal buffers for loading and saving data, as well as FPU buffers. The list of other improvements includes speeding up the operation of the instruction for moving a floating point value between processor registers, pipelining instructions with the LOCK prefix, as well as speeding up the algorithm for maintaining cache coherence during inter-core data exchange.

The overall impact of these small improvements can be seen in the Sisoftware Sandra 2009 synthetic benchmark results, which use simple algorithms that are unaffected by speed, cache and memory size.

The demonstrated gain in speed from 0.5 to 4% is just the result of those very “minor improvements”. In other words, the changes made by AMD engineers in the depths of the computing cores can be described as minor. And this means that Phenom II X4 processors at the same frequency will continue to lag far behind Intel's quad-core models.

In the illustration above, you can also see the promise of performance gains due to the use of DDR3-1333 memory. However, this change does not apply to Phenom II X4 processors currently being released. Today's models are designed for use in Socket AM2+ motherboards, which means they can work, like their predecessors, only with DDR2 SDRAM. Nevertheless, already in February, AMD plans to expand its Phenom II range by adding Socket AM3 processors to the existing models, which will be compatible with both existing Socket AM2 + motherboards and promising platforms equipped with a new processor socket. At the same time, Socket AM3 boards will be designed to work with DDR3 memory, which, as expected, will be able to further increase the speed of systems with AMD processors.

While improving performance was the most pressing issue for AMD engineers, the transition to the new process has also addressed some of the other issues with the older generation of processors. In this case, we are talking about heat dissipation and power consumption, which cannot be called trump cards of Phenom X4 processors based on 65-nm cores. And although the Phenom II X4 models introduced this week, like their predecessors, have a maximum design heat dissipation of 125 W, this figure will be revised in the very near future. Thus, the Phenom II X4 models in Socket AM3 version, planned for February, will have a thermal package of 95 W, comparing this characteristic with Intel Core 2 Quad.

However, to see the progress made in terms of reducing energy consumption, it is not necessary to wait until February. The Socket AM2+ versions of Phenom II X4 released today have approximately 40% lower idle power consumption. AMD has once again redesigned Cool "n" Quiet technology, adding in version 3.0 implemented in Deneb, algorithms for flushing the contents of the L1 and L2 cache memory of the cores into the L3 cache when they go into a low power state. This improvement improves the economy of new processors by completely eliminating passive cores from cache lookups.

Checking the effectiveness of Cool "n" Quiet 3.0 technology is easy in practice. We measured the power consumption in the processor power scheme, which allowed us to estimate how much power the processor requires when loading a different number of cores. Note that the figures given do not take into account the efficiency of the power converter, that is, they reflect the consumption of the processor along with VRM, but they are quite suitable for comparison purposes.

The new Phenom II X4 are indeed more economical than their predecessors. This can be seen not only in the idle state, where the reduction in power consumption has reached 60%, but also at various load levels. However, the new Phenom II X4 remains less economical than the competitor's 45nm processors.

Summarizing summary features of the new Phenom II X4, let's reduce and compare all its formal characteristics with the characteristics of previous AMD quad-core processors.

Details about the range

AMD today announces two processors of the Phenom II X4 family: with model numbers 920 and 940. They differ in clock frequencies, which is clearly seen in the table of characteristics.

As you can see, along with the transfer of quad-core processors to production using 45-nm technology, AMD decided to change the system of processor ratings again. AMD processor numbers are now similar to those used by Intel for the Core i7. It seems that this analogy is not accidental, although this correspondence will be broken already in February, when AMD starts producing 45-nm processors in Socket AM3 version with a reduced L3 cache and with three cores.

So, in a month, the Phenom II family will be expanded with six more models.

The forthcoming transition to a new processor socket will provide an opportunity not only to start using more modern types of memory, but will also become a reason to reduce the thermal package. That is why the older CPUs in the family are announced today, they have maximum clock speeds and higher power consumption. At the same time, the top model of the series, Phenom II X4 940, belongs to the Black Edition class, that is, it has an unfixed multiplier. The tri-core Phenom II X3 720 processor will also be assigned to the same series.

The appearance of the new Socket AM2+ processors gives out 45-nm cores only by marking.

We will see big differences in Socket AM3 processors, the number of contacts of which will be reduced by two to be compatible with the new socket.

Diagnostic utilities do an excellent job of identifying processors with the code name Deneb.

The Phenom II X4 940 processor sent to us, as you can see from the screenshot, has a C2 core stepping. Pay attention to comparative high voltage power supply - 1.35 V. The maximum voltage level is generally set equal to 1.5 V, while the temperature of the processor case, according to the specification, should not exceed 62 °C. Thus, the Phenom II X4 processors can use a higher supply voltage than their predecessors, but the level of their power consumption and heat dissipation does not go beyond the established limits. These are the features of 45nm Deneb cores: their high frequency potential is largely due to the possibility of a more significant increase in voltage than for 65nm crystals.

AMD promises full compatibility of today's Phenom II X4 with existing Socket AM2+ motherboards. However, newer processors will require a BIOS update to function properly. Therefore, if you plan to use AMD's 45nm quad-core to upgrade an existing system, check with your motherboard manufacturer for availability of a Deneb-enabled BIOS. Generally speaking, with some assumptions, the new Phenom II X4 can also work with older Socket AM2 motherboards - in a mode with a reduced HyperTransport bus frequency and without separate core power management. But the vast majority of motherboard manufacturers are in no hurry to add the necessary code to the BIOS of older products. Therefore, today we can talk about the compatibility of Phenom X4 II with old Socket AM2 motherboards only in relation to some ASUS products.

However, that doesn't stop AMD from playing the platform succession card again, making the Phenom II X4 an attractive upgrade option. However, AMD resorts to such arguments, obviously not from a good life. The promised 20% performance boost is too small for the new quad-core processors to compete with the Intel Core i7. But on the other hand, the purchase of Phenom II X4 can be economically justified: these processors are compatible with a large number of inexpensive Socket AM2+ platforms on the market and so far work with cheap DDR2 memory. Therefore, even though the price of the older Phenom II X4 is approaching the price of the Core i7-920, the cost of a full platform with an AMD processor will be almost five to seven thousand rubles lower.

Therefore, the new 45nm processors are primarily competitors for Core 2 Quad, that is, they offer an advantageous combination of price and performance in the segment of low-cost quad-core processors. And if the Phenom X4 of the past generation could be considered only as cheap quad-core processors, then the new Phenom II X4 is aiming to occupy the middle part of the market, which is now completely owned by Intel's offerings.

To understand how the Phenom II X4 can solve the tasks assigned to them, it's time to look at the test results.

How We Tested

For comparison with the Phenom II X4 processors, we chose Intel's quad-core models that fall into the same price range. This is the senior processor of the Core 2 Quad Q8000 series and the younger models of the Core 2 Quad Q9000 series. Of course, we couldn't resist comparing Phenom II X4 with this season's hot new product: the youngest from the Nehalem family - Intel Core i7-920. Also, to compare the Phenom II X4 with the previous family, we also tested the older processor of the Phenom X4 family.

As a result, three different platforms took part in testing.

1. AMD Socket AM2+ platform:

Processors:

AMD Phenom II X4 940 (Deneb, 3.0 GHz, 6 MB L3);
AMD Phenom II X4 920 (Deneb, 2.8GHz, 6MB L3);
AMD Phenom X4 9950 (Agena, 2.6GHz, 2MB L3).

Motherboard: Gigabyte MA790GP-DS4H (AMD 790GX + SB750).
Memory: Corsair TWIN2X4096-8500C5 (DDR2-800 SDRAM, 2 x 2 GB, 4-4-4-12)

2. Intel platform LGA775:

Processors:

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 (Yorkfield, 2.83 GHz, 2 x 6 MB L2);
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400 (Yorkfield, 2.66 GHz, 2 x 3 MB L2);
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300 (Yorkfield, 2.5 GHz, 2 x 2 MB L2);
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 (Yorkfield, 2.33 GHz, 2 x 2 MB L2).

Motherboard: ASUS P5Q Pro (Intel P45 Express).
Memory: Corsair TWIN2X4096-8500C5 (DDR2-1067 SDRAM, 2 x 2 GB, 5-5-5-15)
Graphic card: ATI Radeon HD 4870.
Hard drive: Western Digital Raptor WD1500AHFD.
Operating system: Microsoft Windows Vista x64 SP1.

3. Intel LGA1366 platform:

Processor: Intel Core i7-920 (Bloomfield, 2.66GHz, 8MB L3);
Motherboard: ASUS P6T Deluxe (Intel X58 Express).
Memory: Kingston HyperX KHX16000D3K3/3GX (DDR3-1333 SDRAM, 3 x 1 GB, 7-7-7-20).
Graphics card: ATI Radeon HD 4870.
Hard drive: Western Digital Raptor WD1500AHFD.
Operating system: Microsoft Windows Vista x64 SP1.

Note that although we used a motherboard equipped with an integrated graphics core at the heart of the Socket AM2 + platform, during the tests it was disabled.

Performance

Overall Performance: PCMark Vantage

By tradition, we started testing the new Phenom II X4 processors with Futuremark PCMark Vantage, which shows the weighted average performance under multi-threaded workloads of various nature.

Judging by the results, AMD's promises were not entirely fair. On average, the Phenom II X4 940 shows only a 10% performance advantage over the previous generation Phenom X4 9950. Nevertheless, even this superiority is enough to consider the new 45nm Phenom II X4 as competitors for junior and mid-range Intel Core 2 Quad models. However, the Phenom II X4 falls short of the level of the junior Core i7. Despite the fact that its clock speed exceeds that of the Core i7-920 by 333 MHz, the Phenom II is significantly slower than the representative of Intel's flagship line under any type of load. In other words, modern Intel processors boast the best IPC - the average number of instructions executed per clock cycle.

Graphics performance: 3DMark Vantage

Phenom II X4 lagging behind Core i7 in the 3DMark Vantage test looks catastrophic. However, there is a completely logical explanation for this: this test parallelizes the load well, and therefore, it makes good use of the advantages provided by the SMT technology implemented in the new Intel processors. If we compare the Phenom II X4 results with the LGA775 performance of the competitor's processors, then the speed of both AMD models turns out to be similar to that of the Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Core 2 Quad Q8300, which have exactly the same retail price.

Gaming Performance

In games, the advantage of 45nm AMD processors over 65nm predecessors can be seen much better. Here the older Phenom II X4 is ahead of the Phenom X4 9950 by 20-25%. However, under gaming load, the performance of the previous generation Phenom was so bad that the new AMD quad-core processors can only compete with junior Intel processors belonging to the Core 2 Quad Q8000 lineup.

Nevertheless, we consider it our duty to remind you that quad-core processors cannot fully reveal their potential in most modern games that cannot parallelize more than two cores. But, unfortunately, AMD plans to release dual-core models with a 45-nm core only in June. So for now the best choice for players who prefer mid-range systems, Core 2 Duo processors will remain uncontested.

Media encoding

Relatively high results (relative to its predecessors) Phenom II X4 are also shown when encoding media content. As a result, in video encoding they could well have seriously competed with mid-range Intel processors - if, of course, Intel had not released Core i7 processors two months earlier, which are head and shoulders above all rivals in this task.

final rendering

Regarding the results demonstrated by the Phenom II X4 processors during the final rendering, we can only say the same as about video encoding. Namely, the new AMD processors have become faster than their predecessors, but not so much as to somehow compete with the Core i7. At the same time, they caught up with Core 2 Quad of junior models, but nothing more. Thus, a familiar picture emerges again: where, for example, the Phenom II X4 940 shows higher performance than the Core 2 Quad Q9400, it loses miserably to the Core i7-920. But all three processors belong to the same price category, so the only argument in favor of AMD's new offer in this case can be the high cost of the LGA1366 platform, at least at the moment, there are no affordable motherboards yet.

Adobe Photoshop CS4 and Adobe Premiere Pro CS4

When processing digital images in Adobe's graphics editor, AMD's quad-core processors, neither the old nor the new generation, can offer the same performance as their competitors. But at a fairly good level is the rendering speed of HD videos with non-linear video editing. When the final result is encoded in Windows Media format, the new Phenom II X4 looks decent even in comparison with the younger Core i7.

Mathematica 7 and Microsoft Excel 2007

Nucleus new version of the popular Mathematica package has finally received full support for multi-core. Therefore, starting from this test, we are moving to using a standard test that runs within a single processor of the system.

However, the change in approach with a change in performance did not cause a qualitative change in the picture. AMD's quad-core processors continue to lose out to Intel's offerings, and the Phenom II X4 940 barely matches the performance of the Core 2 Quad Q8300.

Numerical calculations in Excel are performed even worse by AMD processors. Here the Phenom II X4 940 is almost twice behind the Core i7-920, falling short of even the cheaper Core 2 Quad Q8300.

WinRAR, Fritz Chess and [email protected]

The increased amount of L3 cache puts the Phenom II X4 processors on a par with the competitor's quad-core processors with a total L2 cache of 6 MB. However, they cannot reach the heights of the Core i7, because this processor is equipped with a larger 8-megabyte cache memory of the third level, and in addition, it has an extremely fast integrated three-channel memory controller.

The 20% increase in operating speed provided by the transfer of AMD's quad-core processors to the new 45-nm cores does not allow achieving decent performance by today's standards in the chess test either. The Phenom II X4 920, for example, even outperforms the Core 2 Quad Q8300, which is one of Intel's junior quad-cores.

At the request of our readers, in this article we have added performance testing when calculating proteins in the popular distributed computing project [email protected] For tests, we used the TOC application [email protected] Bench 0.4.6.0

Unfortunately, the performance of the new Phenom II X4 was far from AMD's promises in this case as well. The new AMD processors can compete only with the Core 2 Quad Q8000 series, but not with the representatives of the Core 2 Quad Q9000 family.

Energy Testing

For the sake of completeness, we measured the power consumption of a complete system (without a monitor) based on the Phenom II X4 940 processor and compared it with the power consumption of similar platforms based on competing processors. These tests differ from earlier measurements of processor power consumption in that they also take into account the consumption of AMD and Intel chipsets, and also do not depend on the presence or absence of a memory controller integrated into the processor.

During the measurements, the load on the processors was created by the Prime95 utility. In addition, to properly assess idle power consumption, we have enabled all power-saving technologies, C1E, Cool "n" Quiet and Enhanced Intel SpeedStep. For the Core i7-920 processor, the turbo mode was also activated.

Against the backdrop of the 65nm Phenom X4 9950 processor, the results of the Phenom II X4 940 look just fine. By introducing a new, more modern process technology, AMD has been able to achieve measurable reductions in the power consumption of its platforms. But it is still far from perfection. Modern systems, which are based on four-core Intel LGA775 processors, offer a clearly better performance-per-watt ratio.

At the same time, surprisingly, the system with the Phenom II X4 940 processor was generally more economical than the platform based on the processor intel new generation, Core i7-920. However, one should not flatter oneself about this, since, according to our tests, the Core i7 is a much more productive solution, which means that it will spend less energy on performing the same tasks - simply because it will finish this execution earlier than the Phenom II x4.

Overclocking

The Phenom X4 family processors could hardly be called a good overclocking choice: when overclocked using air cooling, they were rarely given frequencies above 3.2 GHz. Therefore, overclockers preferred quad-core Core 2 Quad processors, which for the most part could be overclocked much more without any problems.

Phenom II X4 processors look more interesting in this regard, they are produced according to a new technological process, which provided a significant increase in nominal frequencies, and therefore, theoretically, is able to push the limits of overclocking.

To test this hypothesis, we overclocked the Phenom II X4 940 in our laboratory. This processor belongs to the Black Edition class, so it has an unfixed multiplier, which greatly simplifies checking the maximum frequency potential. So, using the Scythe Mugen air cooler and increasing the processor voltage from the standard 1.35 V to 1.55 V, we managed to achieve stable operation at a frequency of 3.8 GHz, which was achieved by simply increasing the multiplier.

Thus, the new Phenom II X4 really have a good frequency potential: the older model overclocked by 26% when using air cooling. It turns out that the new AMD processor is quite suitable for overclocking experiments. However, with all this, we want to warn potential buyers of the Phenom II X4 940 among enthusiasts from premature euphoria. The fact is that the frequency of 3.8 GHz will not allow the processor with the Stars (K10) microarchitecture to work as fast as overclocked Core 2 Quads of the same price category can.

For example, Core 2 Quad Q9400 processors close in price to Phenom II X4 940 can be easily made to work at the same 3.8 GHz. But, as our tests have shown, in normal mode, Phenom II X4 processors operating at 3.0 GHz demonstrate on average a lower speed than the Core 2 Quad Q9400 with a nominal frequency of 2.66 GHz. Therefore, if the frequency of both processors is increased to the same value, Phenom II X4 will show significantly worse performance.

This means that overclockers may be interested in Phenom II X4 only as an alternative to less overclocked Intel processors. These include, in particular, the outgoing Core 2 Quad Q6600 with a 65nm Kentsfield core or 45nm quad-core processors with a low multiplier, for example, the Core 2 Quad Q8200 or Q8300. But comparing their overclocking performance to that of the overclocked Phenom II X4 940 makes no sense, since AMD's offer is higher priced.

In this regard, it remains to be assumed that the cheaper Phenom II X4 920 may be more interesting for overclockers. However, at the moment there is no such processor in our laboratory, so we cannot yet test its overclocking appeal.

conclusions

To be honest, we really wanted to end this article on an optimistic note. After all, it is very disappointing to realize that the result of the last couple of years has been the almost complete disappearance of competition among processors of the middle and upper price range. Moreover, this state of affairs is unlikely to benefit consumers, who are forced to choose processors only among the offers of one manufacturer, which is free to manage the cost of its own products as it pleases. In addition, the lack of competition also slows down technological progress: the disappearance of high-performance AMD processors as a class inevitably leads to a slowdown in the introduction of new technologies and a slowdown in the performance growth of older Intel products. That is why we hoped until the last moment that the new Phenom II X4 processors would usher in a long-awaited renaissance for AMD.

And partly our expectations were justified. At the very least, we can say that the new 45nm manufacturing process turned out to be much better than the previous 65nm technology, which for several years slowed down the growth of clock frequencies of AMD processors of all families. A simple transfer of the production of processors with the Stars (K10) microarchitecture to the new technical process allowed AMD to immediately increase their clock frequencies by 400 MHz - up to 3.0 GHz. And, obviously, this is far from the limit. We expect that AMD will be able to increase clock speeds even higher over the coming months. Also, the new manufacturing technology allowed AMD engineers to make some improvements to the Stars (K10) microarchitecture processors: increase the L3 cache and change some little things in the depths of the computing cores.

All this had an immediate effect. As the testing showed, the performance of the older quad-core AMD processors immediately increased by 10-20%. Along with this, the Phenom II X4 processors have improved other characteristics. Their power consumption has decreased, and the frequencies achieved during overclocking have noticeably moved away.

However, all the positive changes that happened to AMD's quad-core processor family seem significant only when comparing the Phenom II X4 with its predecessors, but not with today's competitors. The introduction of 45nm technology and the release of the Phenom II X4 took too much time for AMD. The right moment has been missed, and today the release of Phenom II X4 does not produce the desired effect. Against the backdrop of modern Core 2 Quad processors, and even more so Core i7, the new Phenom II X4 does not look impressive at all. According to the tests, the older Phenom II X4 can be considered relatively full-fledged competitors, except for the Core 2 Quad of the "younger" Q8000 series. Unfortunately, the Phenom II X4 is not yet capable of more.

However, let's wait until we draw final conclusions. After all, already in February we will meet with AMD Socket AM3 processors, which will support DDR3 SDRAM memory. In addition, we hope that the improvement of the technological process will soon allow AMD to move on to the release of faster, more economical, and more overclockable processors than the Phenom II X4 940. Today, AMD has demonstrated that it is quite capable of using hidden reserves to improve the consumer qualities of processors with the Stars (K10) microarchitecture. In this regard, it remains only to express the hope that these reserves have not yet run out.