AMD Phenom II

[Mats]

Tzupy is right, the 940 was underclocked to 2.6 GHz.
The P2 seems to be pretty close to the performance of the C2Q, too bad it's a year too late.

There's nothing faster than a i7 and they will only get faster and cooler when they go 32 nm and get L2 cache.
The i5 or whatever is probably not far behind in terms of performance, Intel wants to make something faster than C2.

Intel starts shipping C2Q 65 W models in two weeks from now.
Not that it makes much difference, people says the old ones uses less than 65 W.

I don't care about the Dragon platform and the possibly updated graphic card, the only new in it is the P2.

I've always thought that a CPU with AM3 was the one to get since it works with all AM motherboards.
Only trouble is that I'm not sure if it will work with AM2 boards, either because the manufacturers are too lazy to update BIOS, or because of the BIOS size.
Does anyone have info about this?

[Mats]

the AM3 socket which Iam kinda confused about because Gigabyte has said their 780G and 790GX are "AM3 Ready".

I don't understand what you mean, pretty much all 700 series motherboards are supposed to work with AM3 CPU's.

Here are lists of Phenom II-compatible motherboards:

Asrock
Asus
Biostar
Foxconn
Gigabyte
Jetway
MSI

[CallmeRoth]

Well why call it a "New" socket if it is just the AM2 socket running DDR3 and a 45nm chip.

And if motherboards currently called AM2 are now being called AM3 ready, its kind of a pointless term, and one that may confuse the less informed buyer.

[Mats]

Well why call it a "New" socket if it is just the AM2 socket running DDR3 and a 45nm chip.

AM2+ added faster HTT and a different power distribution design, and AM3 have DDR3 support. They need different names, otherwise it would be even harder to tell the difference.

And if motherboards currently called AM2 are now being called AM3 ready, its kind of a pointless term, and one that may confuse the less informed buyer.

No, it's not a pointless term, it's a good way of upgrading old systems. Just because they support AM3 CPU's it doesn't mean they work like a AM3 motherboard.
They will still run with a slower HTT, CnQ won't be optimised, and you can't use DDR3. But in most cases that's still a pretty good upgrade.
The alternative would be making a new socket. Less confusion, sure, but lots of old systems getting outdated too soon.
I know what I prefer.

In the end it's not harder to upgrade CPU than before.
Just check with the manufacturer if your motherboard supports the new CPU, that's all you really need to know.

The only thing confusing me is why not all P2's are AM3.

[dhanson865]

Well why call it a "New" socket if it is just the AM2 socket running DDR3 and a 45nm chip.

And if motherboards currently called AM2 are now being called AM3 ready, its kind of a pointless term, and one that may confuse the less informed buyer.

There is (edit) two pins difference between AM2 and AM3 sockets.

AM3 has less holes so AM2 chips won't fit in the AM3 socket.

AM2 has more holes so AM3 chips will fit in the AM2 socket.

This allows you to buy the new chips to put in either an old or new motherboard.

The motherboard determines what features are disabled if needed when a AM3 chip is put in an AM2 board.

[Mats]

dhanson865: Thanks, I forgot to mention that they have 940 and 938 pins, respectively. Here's a picture.

While we're talking motherboard compatibility, an AM2 motherboard capable of using P1 CPU's should be able to use P2 as well, right?
I mean, the last picture I linked to showed that some AM2 mobos won't work with any of them,
while other models should work with both since there are no different requirements between P1 and P2.

Foxconn lists two 690V mobos with P2 support, I hope that the other manufacturers are focusing on updating the AM2+ BIOS'es first and will update the AM2 models later on.

[dhanson865]

Socket 939 is 939 pins Hypertransport 1.x up to 1.0 GHz
AM2 is 940 pins HyperTransport 2.0 up to 1.0 GHz
AM2+ is 940 pins HyperTransport 3.0 up to 2.6 GHz
AM3 is 938 pins HyperTransport 3.x HyperTransport up to 3.2 GHz

so yes my memory was off slightly on the number of pins but there are changes to the motherboards more than just name.

If you say P1 I'm going to think Pentium, P2 would be Pentium II. I've been around too many years to think otherwise.

AM2+ gives you split power planes (which are present on AM3 as well). Putting a processor in a AM2 socket that has split power capability would either mean it would use more power because CoolnQuiet couldn't power down the CPU cores and memory controller separately.

In addition to reducing the abilities of CoolnQuiet you'll restrict the newer CPU to older Hypertransport modes at lower clock speeds.

Even if you can put a newer processor in an old board it won't be as fast as putting the same processor on a newer board.

Beyond that I haven't paid too close of attention to specific compatibility issues. I'll look it up again when I need to buy something.

[Elvellon]

the AM3 socket which Iam kinda confused about because Gigabyte has said their 780G and 790GX are "AM3 Ready".

AFAIK it means "AM3 CPUs ready". AM3 CPUs can work in AM2 (+ or whatever) motherboards using DDR2 but not the other way around.

[Spare Tire]

If you say P1 I'm going to think Pentium, P2 would be Pentium II. I've been around too many years to think otherwise.

Yeah, don't be lazy, spell it out in full, phenom isn't that long to write on a keyboard. P1 and P2 is just wrong nomenclature.

[chahahc]

Anandtech has released their review of the Phenom 2.
Much improved over the original Phenom.

Anandtech Phenom 2 Review

[Mats]

Calling Phenom 2 a P2 in a Phenom 2 thread isn't wrong.
I've used Pentium 1, Pro and 2 too back in the days, and also more recently.

[Mats]

Here's a list of 31 reviews.

[Tephras]

Ah, perfect! I was just about to look around for Phenom II reviews to dig into but didn't know where to start.

[Mats]

Just be warned that HardOCP's review is supposed to be very negative.
Some people even read it just for a laugh. I haven't had time yet though.

[AZBrandon]

Just be warned that HardOCP's review is supposed to be very negative.
Some people even read it just for a laugh. I haven't had time yet though.

Negative in that reporting the facts of a product with inferior performance can be viewed as negative. They tested the Phenom II in 14 different benchmarks by my count and it got smoked by C2Q and i7 in every single test when comparing them all at the same clockspeed. This means clock for clock, it's simply a much slower processor in pretty much every synthetic, real world application, and game commonly used. In fact out of all of them that I looked at, the Phenom II only just barely beat C2Q in two tests: synthetic memory bandwidth and calculating digits of pi. IMHO, two not very useful synthetic tests. In the real world applications it got smoked across the board, plain and simple.

Now no one can deny that AMD tends to price their chips at a lower cost than Intel when comparing clockspeed. For example a 2.3ghz Phenom I appears to be about $120 right now versus $180 for a Q8200 Intel chip. Dollar for dollar, the Phenom is still looking like a pretty good buy at the low end, but the Phenom II is currently showing as $235 on newegg for the 920 (2.8ghz). Based on all the results, the C2Q still holds so much of a speed advantage in processing power that the similar priced Q9300 should easily best AMD's offerings in outright speed per dollar once you get above the total bottom end chips.

HardOCP Review of the Phenom II

[Mats]

None of all the reviews that I've seen have said that it's as fast as C2 at the same clock speed, so no surprise there.
It's not about their results, it's about their methods.
Unlike other reviewers, they couldn't manage to run the P2 at DDR2-1066, so they dropped the speed down to DDR2-800.
Not only that, they compare it to the QX9770 with DDR3-1600 and a i7 965. The QX9770 is the only CPU that's more expensive than a i7 965.

How about comparing to something similary priced and use the same RAM?

Prices from Newegg:

QX9770 (1399 USD) + ASUS Rampage Extreme (390 USD) = 1789 USD

X4 940 (275 USD) + MSI DKA790GX Platinum (155 USD) = 430 USD

Oh and they compensate by raising the speed to 3.2 GHz for the 940.
I'm not saying that the results would have been different if it was compared to a lower clocked C2,
or with the same DDR2 at the same speed (and same timings, not possible with DDR3 ), it just looks bad.

Edit − more rant:
2 GB used for the X4 940
4 GB used for the QX9770
6 GB used for the i7 965
The reason is in short that it doesn't matter anyway, check the thread below.

Then the reviewer comments in a less than pleasant way in the forums.
I just can't stand it, it's so bad.
________________________________________________________

The 940 is very close to the Q9400 in many benchmarks and in price, and that's the conclusion most reviewers have done.
Actually, there's also a Q9450 that I think is even closer, but it's not being manufactured anymore.
One interesting list is made by Belgian site Madshrimps, they used the results from other reviews and put them together.

[Mats]

If any of you find any compatibility info for older boards then please post it here.

The P2 runs stable with the old ASUS M2R32-MVP (580X chipset), which officially supports P1 but not P2 yet.
AFAIK, no Vcore control, as expected.

It would be great to be able to use P2 with existing motherboards like M2A-VM, and then get a better motherboard later on if needed.

[Tobias]

The P2 runs stable with the old ASUS M2R32-MVP (580X chipset), which officially supports P1 but not P2 yet.
AFAIK, no Vcore control, as expected.

No multiplier control either, according to this thread (Swedish)
http://www.sweclockers.com/forum/showth ... did=826930

[Mats]

Tack Tobias, that's the one I read about, I just had forgotten where.
Have you seen any more reports about old, working boards?

[ryboto]

A user on XS did some undervolting, here's the thread http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/sho ... 96&page=40, it's on the last two pages at the moment.

[Mats]

Nice to see people testing, although I wouldn't expect much from this new process yet.
AMD lists the highest stock Vcore = 1.5 V! That tells me it can get much better.

[Spare Tire]

None of all the reviews that I've seen have said that it's as fast as C2 at the same clock speed, so no surprise there.
It's not about their results, it's about their methods.
[...]

Good critic. Keep us informed.

[dhanson865]

If you say P1 I'm going to think Pentium, P2 would be Pentium II. I've been around too many years to think otherwise.

I noticed on another board that someone started using Ph1 and Ph2 as short names and it is way less confusing.

another usage of P1 and P2 that is common now is power states such as seen at http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx ... 420&pgno=7

between Pentium 1 using P1 and power state P1 it'd sure be less collisions in name space and Google search results if you'd use Ph1 for Phenom and Ph2 for Phenom II if you aren't going to type it out.

[Mats]

The 940 works with Asus M2A-VM according to this thread. Just make sure you have the newest BIOS before trying.

Today I got the Phenom 2 940 and said I should try it first on my M2A-VM mobo instead of buying a 790GX mobo just for a new upgrade "am2" cpu.

Phenom2 works fine on this board although it is not officially supported and it showed as "unknown processor" in the bios.

In the beginning I saw some awful benchmarks compared to various reviews I found online. Thankfully I fixed those. There were 2 reasons the performance was pretty bad compared to the reviews:

First the mighty Cool n' Quiet. With that enabled, single threaded benchmarks were around 40% slower than the reviews. I know that Phenom1 had that bug and Phenom2 has fixed it, but it apparently needs official support with BIOS or something. Anyway CnQ = Disabled.

The second reason was more sneaky. In Wprime and various Sandra tests I had around 20% lower scores. I though that was my slow memory (I have 4x2GB 800mhz kingston value with 5-5-5-18) but it wasn't. A new option appeared in the bios with this CPU (X2 6000+ didn't had it) named "Unganged Mode". It was in unganged mode by default and once I switched to Ganged all the scores were almost the same with the reviews. For a strange reason I had better results than the reviews on memory bandwidth benchs even though I have pretty low end ram modules.

Anyway in some benchmarks slightly lower and in some slightly higher than the high end hardware reviews. Pretty good results if you ask me.

Finally I settled with 3.2ghz and 0.05 CPU Volt increase just for safety. I tested the power consumption and it seems the same with the X2 6000+ @ 3.3ghz that I had before upgrading. I was running that for a year so I feel pretty safe with the 3.2Ghz on the P2 for everyday use. year so I feel pretty safe with the 3.2Ghz on the P2 for everyday use.

[kassler]

http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/cpu/amd-p ... 40-p1.html

First of all, these tests show an encouraging sign (for users, testers, and the entire IT industry) that competition in the CPU market is growing interesting again. Phenom II is evidently a success. Moreover, in a number of tasks we can speak about it even without mentioning prices.

However, AMD is not going to become greedy. That is the recommended price for the top Phenom II model is below the price of the cheapest Core i7. But we already mentioned that in terms of platform prices (motherboard and memory) it will be correct to compare the new processor from AMD with Core 2 Quad CPUs, where AMD enjoys an apparent advantage (this advantage remains even if we take more expensive Q9400/Q9450 models). What concerns games, only extreme models from Intel can challenge the new processors from AMD, which are 4-5 times as cheap. Moreover, AMD added more functions to its chipsets last year (especially those with integrated graphics). We wrote about it. The choice of attractive processors growing wider, more users will appreciate these efforts. It goes without saying that high results of Phenom II will also please those users, who already bought a computer based on the Socket AM2+ platform (with an Athlon or Phenom) and planning to upgrade.

[AZBrandon]

AMD has answered Intel's price cuts by reducing the Phenom II's prices as well. The 920 is now showing only $195 on NewEgg with the 940 at $235. IIRC those are $30-40 price cuts, similar to how we're seeing Intel's pricing pull back. The 2.33Ghz Q8200 is down to $170 and the 2.66Ghz Q9400 is down to $240.

[Mats]

Six models will show up in february. They are all 95 W AM3 CPU's, so you can use them in AM2+ and AM3 motherboards, and even with some AM2 models:

X4 925, 2.8 GHz, 8 MB cache
X4 910, 2.6 GHz, 8 MB cache

X4 810, 2.6 GHz, 6 MB cache
X4 805, 2.5 GHz, 6 MB cache

X3 720, 2.8 GHz, 7.5 MB cache
X3 710, 2.6 GHz, 7.5 MB cache

The only launch date I've seen is February 8.

[ryboto]

I really wish I hadn't bought a Q9400 in August...but then again, I wanted to treat myself. I can't imagine how affordable the 925 and 910 are going to be....hard to resist going back to AMD right now...

[Mats]

Aren't you happy with your Q9400, or do you simply prefer AMD?

[ryboto]

Aren't you happy with your Q9400, or do you simply prefer AMD?

Well, maybe it's my low 12v, but this chip doesn't undervolt as well as I'd hoped. Not that undervolting these 45nm quads saves a ton. Also, I'm on a P45 chipset, and they're really picky with ram, and filling all dimm slots. Had to try 3 boards before I found one that didn't hiccup with the RAM I was using.

I've built one AM2 system for myself, and a few more for others, and they've all be relatively easy to setup. If someone had wanted me to build my current setup for them, just at stock, I might advise against it. Maybe I just had a sour experience. CrystalCPUID can't undervolt for me, I have to do it in the BIOS also. One thing I miss coming from an AM2 system.

I think I just prefered the platform better on the AMD side. With Intel, for my setup, I was required to grab an Asus board...and I can't stand Asus, so maybe that's why I'm still fighting to enjoy the system.