Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
AMD Hardware

3.0GHz Phenom and 3-Way CrossFire Spotted 103

MojoKid writes "AMD revealed the clock speed of the Agena-based processor they showed to the press today yesterday in conference, and clocks in at 3.0GHz. There has been a lot of speculation that AMD wasn't able to push early Phenom samples to frequencies this high, but here is proof that at least some Phenoms clocked at 3.0GHz do exist. You may also notice that the system hit a Windows Experience index score of 5.9, which is the highest score possible. It should be noted that AMD talked about 4-way CrossFire as well (a 3-way CrossFire is shown online), and that the company has continued plans to produce discreet GPUs at all performance levels (mainstream — enthusiast), even after Fusion arrives."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

3.0GHz Phenom and 3-Way CrossFire Spotted

Comments Filter:
  • by moderatorrater ( 1095745 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @11:48AM (#20011697)
    I, for one, miss our AMD performance overlords. I'm hoping that they climb back on top, especially since that would mean beating out the core 2 duo in performance.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by green453 ( 889049 )
      Do you hope that they climb back on top today yesterday?
      • Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)

        by daskinil ( 991205 )
        Mod parent funny- that was a neat comment.
        • by somersault ( 912633 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @12:15PM (#20012147) Homepage Journal
          Mod parent under-rated - he's trying to assist the moderators damnit! I, for one, am glad that he pointed out the comment was so neat! We need more meta-comments spamming up slashdot! Someone please advise on how my post should be moderated!

          Sorry, I don't know why I'm being such a bastard today, maybe someone in the office has PMS..
          • Mod parent funny- that was a neat comment.

            Ok, pretty basic comment, moderators are apparently inept and highly suggestable.

            Mod parent under-rated - he's trying to assist the moderators damnit! I, for one, am glad that he pointed out the comment was so neat! We need more meta-comments spamming up slashdot! Someone please advise on how my post should be moderated!

            Ok. . .now I'm suspecting that the great grandparent has multiple accounts. . .In any case, in true tradition with recursive modding, mod parent

          • by stdarg ( 456557 )
            Mod parent down. The post started off informative and interesting, but ended poorly.
    • by Holmwood ( 899130 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @11:59AM (#20011903)
      Despite a reference to heat, this is not intended as a flame. I want to see a very strong AMD; it'll take that to keep Intel running hard. I'll buy whoever makes the best product at the best price.

      The linked website seems aptly titled -- "HotHardware". Did you see the four extra fans built into the side of the case in the photo in the article?

      The mind boggles at how much heat that setup must be producing.

      I hope AMD can produce product at 3GHz (and faster) in quantity. And I hope they can do so without requiring 4 large fans taking up the entire side of the case.

      Of course, those fans could be just to cool the three AMD graphics cards.

      While I'm sure case modders and extreme performance enthusiasts don't care about this point, the rest of us like lower power consumption and quieter computers, while still being very fast.

      • by FuturePastNow ( 836765 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @12:28PM (#20012381)
        Those three graphics cards alone are probably going to need a 750 Watt power supply. Add in the processor and other components, and the system in those pictures is likely running on 1000W.

        Meh. No amount of performance is worth that. Not to me, anyway.
      • this isn't some case AMD dreamed up to test their 3-way Crossfire in it... it's a case used quite regular on the air cooling overclock scene.
      • "While I'm sure case modders and extreme performance enthusiasts don't care about this point, the rest of us like lower power consumption and quieter computers, while still being very fast."

        I've been looking for such systems for a while now, and I finally got something that is getting close to it. It's a fanless VIA EPIA system at 1.2 GHz. It's running from an ultra-quiet notebook WD drive using a laptop like PSU. I'm posting from it now (Ubuntu/Firefox). Of course, the thing lacking from it is CPU, GPU an
  • by Zero Degrez ( 1039938 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @11:50AM (#20011727)
    Because we automatically subtract 4.1 for being on Windows?
  • Too bad they've taken a backseat to intel :(
    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 27, 2007 @11:55AM (#20011821)
      Too bad they've taken a backseat to intel

      Meh, the most fun I ever had was in the back seat.
      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by centinall ( 868713 )
        Meh, the most fun I ever had was in the back seat.

        Have you ever had a 3 way in the back seat? Not as fun as it sounds. Especially when you have a crappy driver.
        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by suggsjc ( 726146 )
          Crappy drivers, a am I confused. Are you talking about getting it on? Nah couldn't be, this is /. So I'm just assuming your talking about a 3-way system with horrible driver support in the back seat of your mom's car while she is taking you to Fry's to get a cool new case. So yeah, your right...not as much fun as it sounds.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 27, 2007 @11:54AM (#20011805)
    Intel's $266 Q6600 also gets a 5.9: 2007/page39.html#cpu_index []
  • 5.9? (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    What kind of nerd index ends in 5.9?
  • Discreet or discrete? I believe the summary needs the latter in reference to the GPUs.
  • by Visaris ( 553352 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @12:03PM (#20011985) Journal []

    [. . .]Rick Berman, SVP, GM, Graphics Product Group said the technologies [3GHz Phenom + 2900XT] would be available this fall.

    While I didn't hear this directly when listening to the Tech Day presentation, PC-Mag claims to have heard this. While it is true that Barcelona will launch at 2GHz, Phenom will be launched a good few months later. Further, Phenom is simpler, it only has one HT link instead of three, and qualification for desktop chips is much more forgiving than for server processors. I wouldn't be surprised to this by years end. It should compete well with the 3.2GHz Penryn Intel is expected to launch in the same timeframe. See this slide for the only halfway decent becnhmark AMD has posted for the K10-based cores:

    Slide45 []
    • Oh man! Rick Berman [] is working for AMD now? He wasn't content fucking up the Star Trek franchise? What is the semiconductor equivalent of killing off Commander Data? AMD, I guess, will be as screwed as Scott Bacula.
      • by yoyhed ( 651244 )

        AMD, I guess, will be as screwed as Scott Bacula.
        today is spelling optional day.
        You mean Scott Bakula? :-P
  • Heat Issues (Score:4, Insightful)

    by i_am_socket ( 970911 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @12:03PM (#20011987)

    Looking at the picture in the beginning of the article, I don't think I want any system that requires a minimum of 5 case fans and a chipset fan.

    If that's what they need to hit 3.0 GHz, they're better off going with watercooling.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by kurokaze ( 221063 )
      I imagine that has more to do with the vid cards than the CPU itself. Notice that the CPU seems to cooled by a typical HSF unit.
      • Also consider that AMD has a massive "enthusiast" fanbase, which like colourful things. Having a row of fans with green LEDs gives it a '1337-halo' effect
      • Doesn't each card have its own massive fan? Those cards shouldn't be taking two slot spaces for nothing.

        I'm almost certain the fans are for show, I think side mounted fans can cause more problems than it fixes.

        Is thing just a dual channel system? Given how people are screaming that Intel's quad core is choking on a lack of bandwidth, running four cores on dual channel memory would seem to be the next bottleneck.
        • The thing is, the fans might be partly for show, but while the GPU's have their own fans to remove the heat from the card you still gotta get the heat out of the case.

          That looked like a pretty small case to me...
          • by aliquis ( 678370 )
            Thought that is why they take up 2 slot and can push the heat out of the slot not used by the actual card ...

            I think it's only there for show aswell, the CPU fan looks small and "lightweight".
    • Guess you have to be a real AMD fanboy to get one of those...

      I'm sorry, I'm sorry, please don't shoot!
      • by aliquis ( 678370 )
        I'm very sure i read somethere that THD was the same for the new quad cores as the old dual cores, and that they would use the same cooling solutions and sockets because of that. And the dual core ones doesn't run so hot do they? Aren't they on par or eventually even better than the Intel (non laptop) ones?
    • by turgid ( 580780 )

      Looking at the picture in the beginning of the article, I don't think I want any system that requires a minimum of 5 case fans and a chipset fan.

      Did you ever see the dual processor G5 power mac? It had 10 fans and was silent.

  • Alright, that's it. Money's been tight and my wife's after me to unload our house and get some place smaller and more affordable. I imagine that trading in my dual opteron for one of these new super AMD chips is just the ticket.

    I just have to have it.
  • Now, if AMD/ATI can get open source drivers out that support the card's features reliably, this will be a big gain.
    • I would buy AMD/ATI/whatever it's called now exclusively if they got open source drivers out for their gpus.

      I already buy their cpus exclusively because I like their ethos better.

      I also don't buy Microsoft products - nor use them illegally, and I only buy meat from companies that actually treat the animals humanely in real life. This may seem like a small deal but it's much more expensive.

      The truth is there are people out there that will only use their (limited) dollars to support companies that are morall
  • by Tweekster ( 949766 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @12:19PM (#20012221)
    It reminds me of an old SNL clip, the mcmacilin group.

    "on a scale of 22-46 rate ...."
  • I heard they couldn't get it to work exactly right, so they'll have to push an alternate Agena.

    (wah wah wah)

  • Shouldn't it go to eleven?

    Nigel Tufnel: The numbers all go to eleven. Look, right across the board, eleven, eleven, eleven and...
    Marty DiBergi: Oh, I see. And most amps go up to ten?
    Nigel Tufnel: Exactly.
    Marty DiBergi: Does that mean it's louder? Is it any louder?
    Nigel Tufnel: Well, it's one louder, isn't it? It's not ten. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at ten. You're on ten here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on ten on your guitar. Where can you go from ther
  • Awesome (Score:3, Insightful)

    by u0berdev ( 1038434 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @12:29PM (#20012403) Journal
    Although I lean towards Intel, it's good to hear some more positive news about AMD/ATI. Lately it seems that everyone is making AMD/ATI sound like a company that is falling behind and failing to deliver any product that compares to Intel's latest offerings. Some have even suggested that AMD could drop out of certain portions of the consumer market to focus on things such as low-power server chips. I, for one, hope that AMD/ATI's upcoming Phenom and other offerings blow Intel out of the water. Why? Cause competition is always good, for consumers that is.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Canar ( 46407 )
      I'm as much an AMD fanboy as the next guy. I'm also a realist. Realistically, Intel's on top right now. I'd love to see AMD regain that dominance. Like you say, competition is good. However, Intel is also much bigger than AMD. Still though, with a GPU manufacturer in-house, I think AMD will offer some really fantastic technology in a couple years. It's just getting the two sides to work together that will likely prove to be difficult.
  • by ganesaraja12 ( 963631 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @12:30PM (#20012413)
    Having been a dedicated AMD fanboy for many years running, I'm finding this news exciting. Also, having been a critical character, I just don't like that AMD picked that benchmark and flogging it like a dead horse. Whoop-dee-doo, your triple-Crossfire quadcore can run Vista well. Honestly, AMD need to buck up and demonstrate, directly or otherwise (ie. by reviews): 1) Server performance 2) Performance of Barcelona/Phenom vs. Kentsfield/Conroe 3) Some monumental overclockability. The halcyon days of Toledo Opteron overclocking is completely shadowed by Allensdale and Conroe now. Still, Brisbane 65nm shows promise in the overclocking stakes. And for crying out loud AMDATI, fix your drivers!
  • But will it play Crysis at 60fps?
  • by iggymanz ( 596061 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @03:22PM (#20014989)
    a number that purports to tell how well the OS I don't run will perform with applications I will never buy here rendered more meaningless by assuming CPU performance is the dominating component of such a number, just fucking great for a so-called tech site
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by GaratNW ( 978516 )
      And the fact that a majority of the world still uses XP and/or Vista.. that little fact just *whoosh*.. right past ya. You should have just run it rhough the "/. article filter" that removes all references to Windows, and makes repetitive jokes about "5.9 should be enough for anyone".. you know, that ever paraphrased quote that was never actually made by Bill or anyone at Microsoft but is continually attributed to them for cheap shots that have no substance that typically get modded funny.

      Of course, someo
      • by yoyhed ( 651244 )
        You're right about the repetitive comments - but didn't we just see a study on here showing that 81% of (web-browsing) users are still on XP, and only 4% are on Vista?

        The experience index still means no more to an XP user than it does to (for example) a Linux user, so the GP had a point.
    • The Windows Experience Index value is computed independently on five characteristics: Hard Drive Speed, CPU speed (real speed via a benchmark test, not just clock rate), RAM (not sure if it's performance, quantity, or some of both), Video hardware capabilities (not sure how they test this, though GPU speed is presumably a factor), and video RAM. After each category is rated, the computer's overall score is the LOWEST such rating. If the entire computer scored 5.9 (by the way, MS plans to extend the index as
  • But I want to have that rig with some nice nVidia cards, like in the old good times.
  • Clock speed should be irrelevant now. Better architecture methods such as pipelining and super scaling should take higher priority when it comes to performance benchmarks. The more cores that are on a processor die should also be a indicator of performance. If people programmed with parallel architecture in mind we wouldn't need a 3GHZ quad core.
    • So, if someone tried to sell you a 100MHz processor, with awesome pipelining and superscaling and 8 cores, would you buy it? Clock speed is far from irrelevant, its just not as relevant as it used to be.
      • As long as your instruction level parallelism is really high, you don't need to run at 3GHz. I'm not saying you can run at 100MHz and get the same performance at 3GHz, but you don't have to try for high speeds like both chip companies are saying what they want. 1GHz with a really high ILP will do fine enough, and probably lower power consumption.
    • by LWATCDR ( 28044 )
      Yes and no.
      Not every problem lends it's self to parallel solutions. Even for problems that do break down well into parallel solutions you will eventual reach a point of diminishing returns and complexity issues.
      So yes just clock speed isn't the simple metric it used to be. But If I have a choice between two multi-core highly parallel cpus, I will take the one with the faster clock speed if everything else is more or less equal.

  • Certain computational problems aren't easily decomposed into parallelizeable chunks. Deriding faster clock speeds as a waste of time in light of additional cores is extremely naive. We need multi-cores for problems that can be broken down into chunks and faster clocks for tearing through those chunks.

    IBM's POWER6 is an acknowledgment that parallelism only goes so far. It's around 4.5GHz per core. I'll be interested to see the benchmarks.

1 Angstrom: measure of computer anxiety = 1000 nail-bytes