10:10 AM
Amey Mudras
After finding it’s self almost a generation behind Intel, AMD has finally released its tri-core and quad-core processors. Phenom X3 is AMD’s Tri-core (codenamed Toliman) which belongs to the Phenom 8000 series and Phenom X4 is its quad core (codenamed Agena) which belongs to the Phenom 9000 series.
AMD considers the quad core Phenoms also known as “Black Edition” to be the first "true" quad core design, as these processors are a monolithic multi-core design (all cores on the same piece of silicon wafer), unlike Intel's Core 2 Quad series which are a multi-chip module (MCM) design.
AMD Phenom processors deliver the ultimate megatasking (running multiple, multi-threaded applications) experience by providing direct and rapid information flow between processor cores, main memory, and graphics and video accelerators. They have the technology to break through the most challenging processing loads. They feature low latency access to main memory for amazingly rapid response and phenomenal system performance.
The AMD Phenom processors are the most advanced processors for true multitasking with true quad-core design. Don’t get bogged down by non-native quad-core processors and obsolete front side bus architectures. With an Integrated memory controller and shared L3 cache, the processors have low-latency access to main memory for amazingly rapid system response and phenomenal system performance,
blasting through performance bottlenecks. All AMD Phenom processors feature AMD64 with Direct Connect Architecture and award winning HyperTransport 3.0 technology which just got faster, providing support for full 1080p high-definition video and extreme total system bandwidth.
Phenom Architecture
The AMD Phenom X4 offers true quad core architecture, with four individual cores that can communicate internally and share onboard L3 cache. This differs from the Intel quad core design, where Core 2 Quad/Extreme models are actually two Core 2 Duo models on the same processor package. There is nothing inherently better or worse about these two design calls, as overall performance still tells the tale, but Intel's route does offer a faster time to market, while AMD's may take longer, but can yield greater efficiencies and performance across the multiple cores.
The Phenom processors are built on the 65nm SOI process, and include four individual cores, each with its own 64K + 64K of L1 instruction/data cache (512KB total L1 per processor) and 512KB of L2 cache (2MB total L2 cache) . Each Phenom also sports 2MB of integrated L3 cache that is shared by each of the four cores. This translates into an approximate transistor count of 450 million and a die size of 285 mm2. The processor package has also been updated slightly, and while the 940-pin AM2+ design offers some enhancements, the Phenom is fully backward-compatible with the AM2 socket. Even the heatsink-fan assembly has remained consistent.
Like the Athlon 64 X2, the Phenom includes an onboard, dual-channel/128-bit DDR2 memory controller, but support has been upgraded to include DDR2-1066 (with future 45nm support for DDR3). The Phenom's memory controller is slightly different, and is actually dual 64-bit controllers, which can provide 128-bit dual-channel access to system memory, or be configured for individual 64-bit read/write channels. AMD also offers enhanced Cool'n'Quiet support for reducing power consumption that can dynamically change the clock speeds and voltages of each individual core, or even shut down parts of the CPU to save power.
One interesting facet of the Phenom architecture is its memory controller, which now runs at its own fixed clock, rather than using the divisor method employed by the Athlon 64 X2. There were issues with the latter design, as depending on the CPU multiplier, you could be running your DDR2 anywhere from 716 MHz up to 800 MHz. The Phenom no longer has that limitation, and now operates the DDR2 independent of the CPU frequencies, and always at the proper speed. The architecture makes use of HyperTransport-3 (For those of you who are not familiar with Hyper Transport ,it is a bidirectional high band- width bus used for connecting the different cores in a multicore processor,it comes in three major versions 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 which run from 200 MHz to 2.6 GHz. It is also a DDR or "Double Data Rate" connection, meaning it sends data on both the rising and falling edges of the clock signal).
AMD Phenom X4 architecture
The base architecture of Phenom X3 (Triple-core) is consistent with a standard Phenom X4, but with one of its cores disabled. This reduces Level 1 and Level 2 cache by one-quarter, while the shared L3 remains at a full 2MB, due to the lower number of cores there is a resultant drop in voltage and power dissipated by the processor.
Performance Test
The Phenom 9900 is AMD's top processor running at 2.6 GHz, which will represent its fastest quad core processor. This processor will be put to the test against a selection of the fastest dual and quad core models from both AMD and Intel. The Intel side includes the Core 2 Extreme QX6850 (3.0 GHz) & QX6700 (2.66 GHz), and Core 2 Quad Q6600 (2.4 GHz) quad core models, along with the Core 2 Extreme X6800 (2.93 GHz) dual core. The AMD competition includes Phenom 9700, 9600 and 9500 quad core results, as well as scores for the Athlon 64 X2 6000+ and Athlon 64 X2 5600+ AM2 dual core processors.
Test Rig:
AMD Refrence System
AMD Socket AM2+
Processors: Phenom 9900, 9700, 9600 and 9500
Memory: 2 x 1GB Ultra DDDR2-800
Motherboard: ASUS M3A32-MVP Deluxe
Video Card: PNY GeForce 8800 GTS 320M
Hard-Drive: Dual Maxtor MaxLine III 250GB in RAID 0 Mode
Operating System: Windows XP Pro SP2
Intel Reference System:
Processors: Core 2 Extreme QX6850, QX6700 & X6800, and Core 2 Quad Q6600
Memory: 2 x 1GB Ultra DDDR2-800
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-X38-DQ6
Video Card: PNY GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB
Hard-Drive: Dual Maxtor MaxLine III 250GB in RAID 0 Mode
Operating System: Windows XP Pro SP2
Gaming
F.E.A.R. Performance
F.E.A.R. is one of the Latest games and it features jaw-dropping graphics and a physics engine that can bring any system to its knees. The game even includes a wide selection of System and Video settings, along with an in-game testing module to keep things 100% comparable.
F.E.A.R. is a great game for processor testing, as it allows the CPU portion of the test to be ramped up, while dropping the graphics component. From the test it seems that the Phenom 9900 is out of its depth compared to the Intel competition. The 2.6 GHz Phenom 9900 manages to outperform the Athlon 64 X2 6000+, while remaining a few ZIP codes away from the Core 2 Extreme QX6850.
Company of Heroes Performance
Company of Heroes is yet another new addition to the latest games; it offers one of the most demanding benchmark environments ever. CoH is a WW2 real-time strategy game, which again provides with a nice change of pace from the usual FPS benchmark.The game’s built-in performance test, was used for benchmarking.
For all the wrong reasons Intel has owned this particular benchmark since the Core 2 was released, and the quad core Phenom does absolutely nothing to change that. Core speed again seems to reign supreme, and Company of Heroes just seems to love the Core 2 architecture. From an AMD point of view, The 2.6 GHz Phenom 9900 does outdistance the 3.0 GHz Athlon 64 X2 6000+, but stays over 100 fps back of the 3.0 GHz Core 2 Extreme QX6850.
Encoding performance
TMPGEnc Xpress 4 MPEG-2 Encoding
For encoding the encoder TMPGEnc Xpress 4 was used, this encoder not only provides real-world video encoding performance results, but also includes a host of specialized CPU support options. The program is full multi-threaded and supports virtually all CPU multimedia features such as MMX/MMX-2, SSE/SSE2/SSE3 etc.
A higher-end, 8-minute AVI reference video file was used. This file is encoded to 720x480 MPEG-2 DVD quality video using TMPGEnc 4 and the encoding time is recorded. The results are expressed in the form of time elapsed (minutes: seconds)
The Phenom 9900 starts off with a very impressive score in the MPEG-2 section. In fact, all the Phenom processors do very well in this test and the 2.6 GHz Phenom 9900 finishes with the second-best time, just back of the 3.0 GHz Core 2 Extreme QX6850. The Phenom also shows its quad core supremacy over its dual core counterparts, as the 2.6 GHz Phenom 9900 almost cuts the encoding time of the 2.8 GHz Athlon 64 X2 5600+ in half.
Value for money
As usual AMD has priced their Phenoms very well, this is one area that they have been concentrating on .Current pricing on Phenom 9500 (2.2 GHz) and 9600 (2.3 GHz) models set at approximately $200-$210 and $240-$250, respectively. The upcoming Phenom 9700 (2.4 GHz) is set to be priced below $300; while AMD states the Phenom 9900 (2.6 GHz) will sport a price of under $350. This compares to the entry-level Core 2 Quad Q6600 (2.4 GHz) at $280 and the Core 2 Quad Q6700 (2.66 GHz) at $540. In terms of quad core processors, nothing can touch the Phenom in terms of retail pricing.
*Please note that the above said prices are approximate.
Verdict
The overall benchmark results of the Phenom 9900 are a real mixed bag, with the processor rising to dizzying heights in some tests and then falling to the ground in others. The memory benchmark scores offered a very nice surprise, as were the impressive media encoding results. At only 2.6 GHz, the Phenom 9900 acquitted itself very well in the desktop arena, and easily held its own against similarly-clocked Intel quad core processors. Unfortunately, the game benchmarking did not come off as well, and other than a few tests, the Phenom was badly beaten by the Core 2 Quad and Extreme quad cores. PC gaming is still an Intel world, and will likely remain so even if AMD ramps up Phenom clock speeds.
The best part of Phenom is its price-performance ratio, which not only offers an excellent value for new system builders, but also as an upgrade for current AM2 platforms. Keeping in mind the various tests conducted, if you are a gamer I recommend the Core 2 Duo, if you are more on encoding or work with a lot of video files you should go in for the Phenom X4 / Core 2 Quard, if you are a media developer working with 3D modelling applications then you I recommend Core 2 Quard / Phenom X4.
For:
Excellent Media Encoding Results
Exceptional Memory Scores
Low Price
Against:
Lackluster Gaming Performance
Increased Power Consumption
Posted in: amd phenom
