Intel® Processors, Hardware and software spot

AMD to launch combo graphics-microprocessor chips in 2011

2009-11-12T20:35:00.000-08:00

AMD to launch combo

graphics-microprocessor chips in 2011

Advanced Micro Devices released new details on its long-awaited Fusion chips, which combine graphics and microprocessor functions into a single chip in a computing platform that will launch in 2011.

Rick Bergman, senior vice president and general manager of AMD products (right), said at the company’s analyst meeting today that AMD is preparing a whole series of Fusion chips that will be made using a 32-nanometer manufacturing process that will be ready for full-scale production in 2011.

The chips will hit new targets in power efficiency, performance, and size and could be used in powerful desktop computers as well as the smallest netbooks, which are smaller than laptops and are meant for surfing the web.

These chips will have more than a billion transistors on them, Bergman said, but will likely be smaller and less powerful than separate, stand-alone microprocessor or graphics chips that launch in the same time frame.

The point is that they eliminate a chip in the PC system, cutting out costs and processing bottlenecks. The new chips also puts pressure on Intel and Nvidia, which make separate chips.

Samples of these chips will be sent to customers in the first half of 2010. They’re on schedule for production in late 2010 and will likely appear in customer PCs in 2011, Bergman said. That’s a shorter timeline than ever before. AMD has been promising Fusion chips since it acquired ATI Technologies for $5.4 billion in 2006. But it has delayed the launch, due to the difficulty of designing combination chips. Today’s schedule is consistent with the roadmap AMD announced a year ago.

One of the chips under design is code-named Llano. It will have four microprocessor cores, or computing brains, as well as a powerful graphics core that can handle the latest Microsoft DX11 graphics technology. A second chip in the works is code-named Ontario, which will have two microprocessor cores and a graphics core. By comparison, AMD plans to have a 12-core microprocessor on the market by 2010. As you can see, it’s easier to fit more cores on a stand-alone microprocessor than it is on a hybrid chip.

AMD calls these hybrid chips APUs, for accelerated processing units, compared to central processing units (CPUs, or microprocessors) or graphics processing units (GPUs). In other news, AMD executives said they expect to operate profitably from now on, or at least that is the major goal.

..............................................................................................

AMD Launches 125W Phenom II X4 965 CPU

2009-11-07T21:56:00.000-08:00

AMD Launches 125W Phenom II X4 965 CPU

New 125W TDP For The 965

New 125W TDP For The 965:

Today AMD is releasing a revised Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition processor. The TDP has been lowered from 140W to 125W, and also happens to be the new C3 stepping. Along with this new processor launch the prices for the 965's have been lowered to an expected price of $195 USD, a savings of about $20.

New Phenom II X4 965 Processor:

* TDP = 125W (down from 140W)
* Hardware C1E implemented (faster switching of power states means virtually no impact to performance by power management when BIOS support is properly implemented)
* “Heavy” load support for DDR3-1333 (with proper BIOS implementation, memory controller will now support up to 4 x DDR3 DIMMs @ 1333MHz)

How do you tell the difference? The last letter of the OPN numbers are different:

* 125W = HDZ965FBK4DGM
* 140W = HDZ965FBK4DGI

This processor runs at a slightly lower voltage than the previous model. The 140W 965 has a default core voltage of 1.4v, whereas the new 125W 965 runs at 1.375v. In theory these chips should provide slightly better overclocking (on average).

The Phenom II X4 965 (140W) has been out for a while, so I'm going to go light on the benchmarks in this article. Also the Phenom II X4 965 is only 200 MHz (or 6%) faster than the Phenom II X4 955, which we have a full review here.

As with previous Athlon II / Phenom II releases, a BIOS update will probably be needed to ensure complete compatibility and functionality with existing AM2+ / AM3 motherboards. Most updates that support these chips have been out for a month or more. Worst case scenario if you are trying to run a newer chip on an older AM2+ board without an update is you will probably have to disable CnQ.

AMD Phenom II X4 965 Processor Technical Specifications:

Model Number & Core Frequency: X4 965 / 3.4GHz (Black Edition)
OPN: HDZ965FBK4DGM (“M” indicates new revision)
L1 Cache Sizes: 64K of L1 instruction and 64K of L1 data cache per core (512KB total L1 per processor)
L2 Cache Sizes: 512KB of L2 data cache per core (2MB total L2 per processor)
L3 Cache Size: 6MB (shared between cores)
Total Cache (L2+L3): 8MB
Memory Controller Type:ype: Integrated 128-bit wide memory controller*
Memory Controller Speed: Up to 2.0GHz with Dual Dynamic Power Management
Types of Memory Supported:
- PC2-8500 / DDR2-1066MHz
- PC3-10600 / DDR3-1333MHz
HyperTransport 3.0 Link: One 16-bit/16-bit link @ up to 4.0GHz full duplex (2.0GHz x2)
Total Processor Bandwidth: Up to 37.3 GB/s total bandwidth
Packaging: Socket AM3 938-pin organic micro pin grid array (micro-PGA)
Fab location: GLOBALFOUNDARIES Fab 1 module 1 in Dresden, Germany (formerly AMD Fab 36)
Process Technology: 45-nanometer DSL SOI (silicon-on-insulator) technology
Approximate Transistor count: ~ 758 million (45nm)
Approximate Die Size: 258 mm² (45nm)
Max Temp: 62° Celsius
Nominal Voltage: 0.875 - 1.4 Volts
Max TDP: 125 Watts

......................................................................................................

AMD Launches 125W Phenom II X4 965 CPU

2009-11-07T21:46:00.000-08:00

AMD Launches 125W Phenom II X4 965 CPU

Pricing and Availability

The table below lists most of AMD's newest processors according to prices I found recently at Newegg & AMD's Processor Pricing List.

CPU-Z Info:

This screen shot is with everything set at default (for the processor).

Phenom II X4 965 - 125W TDP

AMD Overdrive 3.1:

Your favorite all-in-one overclocking tool just got better. A new version of AMD Overdrive (version 3.1) should be available for download today.

Some new features / improvements include:

* CPU model-specific profiles which should benefit OC results of some key chips
* Improved compatibility with AMD Cool’n’Quiet
* More profiles, the option to auto-enable Smart Profiles during installation and various fixes and improvements

......................................................................................................

2009-11-07T21:38:00.000-08:00

AMD Launches 125W Phenom II X4 965 CPU

Test Setup, Methodology, and Benchmarks Used

Too keep things consistent and try to maintain and "apples to apples" comparison, we try to use as much common hardware across the board. Each system's BIOS was set to "Optimized Defaults", with a verification of CPU & Memory speeds and timings.

We started out with a clean install of Vista and performed all the Windows updates to bring it up to current levels as of when this review was written. Then we installed all out benchmark programs and ran a disk defrag. Afterwards we disabled some un-needed Vista features that could affect results such as SuperFetch, System Restore, Defrag, Indexing, and Remote Assistance. Furthermore we ran the Bapco Auto-Configuration Tool and used its "Level 3" settings which disables a bunch more stuff:

* Disables screen saver
* Disables Windows Update
* Disables Desktop Cleanup Wizard
* Disables User Account Control (UAC)
* Disables the Sidebar
* Disables Windows Security Center warning messages
* Disables Windows Firewall
* Disables incoming Remote Desktop connections
* Disables Windows Error Reporting to Microsoft
* Prevents the Welcome Center from running at startup
* Disables Windows Defender

Each of the benchmarks were run at least five times, with the average being reported.

The following tests were performed:

* Synthetic Benchmarks:
o SiSoftware Sandra - 2009 SP1 (15.60)
o Lavalys Everest Ultimate Edition - v4.60
o WinRAR - 3.80
* 3D Rendering Performance:
o POV-Ray - 3.7 beta 29
o MAXON CINEBENCH - R10
* Video Encoding Performance:
o Tech ARP's x264 Benchmark - v2.0
o Windows Media Encoder 9 (x64 Edition)
o Divx Encoder - 6.6.1 (Codec 6.8.5)
* Math Calculation Performance:
o Wolfram Research Mathematica - v7
o wPrime - v2.00
o PiFast - 4.3
o HyperPi - 0.99b (Contains Super-Pi Mod v1.5)
* Gaming Performance:
o Lost Planet: Colonies Edition
o Far Cry 2
o Crysis Warhead
o Enemy Territory: Quake Wars
o Valve Particle Simulation Benchmark
o Valve VRAD map compilation tool
* Miscellaneous:
o Notfred Folding @ Home Benchmark

......................................................................................................

AMD Launches 125W Phenom II X4 965 CPU

2009-11-07T21:31:00.000-08:00

AMD Launches 125W Phenom II X4 965 CPU

Everest CPU Queen's Problem

Everest CPU Queen's Problem:

This simple integer benchmark focuses on the branch prediction capabilities and the misprediction penalties of the CPU. It finds the solutions for the classic "Queens problem" on a 10 by 10 sized chessboard.

At the same clock speed theoretically the processor with the shorter pipeline and smaller misprediction penalties will attain higher benchmark scores. For example -- with HyperThreading disabled -- the Intel Northwood core processors get higher scores than the Intel Prescott core based ones due to the 20-step vs 31-step long pipeline. However, with enabled HyperThreading the picture is controversial, because due to architectural bottlenecks the Northwood core runs out of internal resources and slows down. Similarly, at the same clock speed AMD K8 class processors will be faster than AMD K7 ones due to the improved branch prediction capabilities of the K8 architecture.

CPU Queen test uses integer MMX, SSE2 and SSSE3 optimizations. It consumes less than 1 MB system memory and it is HyperThreading, multi-processor (SMP) and multi-core (CMP) aware.

Everest CPU PhotoWorxx Processing:

This integer benchmark performs different common tasks used during digital photo processing.

It performs the following tasks on a very large RGB image:

* Fill
* Flip
* Rotate90R (rotate 90 degrees CW)
* Rotate90L (rotate 90 degrees CCW)
* Random (fill the image with random coloured pixels)
* RGB2BW (color to black & white conversion)
* Difference
* Crop

This benchmark stresses the integer arithmetic and multiplication execution units of the CPU and also the memory subsystem. Due to the fact that this test performs high memory read/write traffic, it cannot effectively scale in situations where more than 2 processing threads used. For example, on a 8-way Pentium III Xeon system the 8 processing threads will be "fighting" over the memory, creating a serious bottleneck that would lead to as low scores as a 2-way or 4-way similar processor based system could achieve.

CPU PhotoWorxx test uses only the basic x86 instructions, and it is HyperThreading, multi-processor (SMP) and multi-core (CMP) aware.

Everest CPU ZLib Compression:

This integer benchmark measures combined CPU and memory subsystem performance through the public ZLib compression library Version 1.2.3.

CPU ZLib test uses only the basic x86 instructions, and it is HyperThreading, multi-processor (SMP) and multi-core (CMP) aware.

Everest CPU AES Encryption:

This integer benchmark measures CPU performance using AES (a.k.a. Rijndael) data encryption. It utilizes Vincent Rijmen, Antoon Bosselaers and Paulo Barreto's public domain C code in ECB mode.

CPU AES test uses only the basic x86 instructions, and it's hardware accelerated on VIA PadLock Security Engine capable VIA C3 and VIA C7 processors. The test consumes 48 MB memory, and it is HyperThreading, multi-processor (SMP) and multi-core (CMP) aware.

......................................................................................................

AMD Launches 125W Phenom II X4 965 CPU

2009-11-07T21:20:00.000-08:00

AMD Launches 125W Phenom II X4 965 CPU

Everest FPU Julia Fractal

Everest FPU Julia Fractal:

This benchmark measures the single precision (also known as 32-bit) floating-point performance through the computation of several frames of the popular "Julia" fractal. The code behind this benchmark method is written in Assembly, and it is extremely optimized for every popular AMD and Intel processor core variants by utilizing the appropriate x87, 3DNow!, 3DNow!+ or SSE instruction set extension.

FPU Julia test consumes less than 1 MB system memory, and it is HyperThreading, multi-processor (SMP) and multi-core (CMP) aware.

Everest FPU Mandelbrot Fractal:

This benchmark measures the double precision (also known as 64-bit) floating-point performance through the computation of several frames of the popular "Mandelbrot" fractal. The code behind this benchmark method is written in Assembly, and it is extremely optimized for every popular AMD and Intel processor core variants by utilizing the appropriate x87 or SSE2 instruction set extension.

FPU Mandel test consumes less than 1 MB system memory, and it is HyperThreading, multi-processor (SMP) and multi-core (CMP) aware.

Everest FPU SinJulia Fractal:

This benchmark measures the extended precision (also known as 80-bit) floating-point performance through the computation of a single frame of a modified "Julia" fractal. The code behind this benchmark method is written in Assembly, and it is extremely optimized for every popular AMD and Intel processor core variants by utilizing trigonometric and exponential x87 instructions.

FPU SinJulia test consumes less than 1 MB system memory, and it is HyperThreading, multi-processor (SMP) and multi-core (CMP) aware.

......................................................................................................

AMD Launches 125W Phenom II X4 965 CPU

2009-11-07T21:13:00.000-08:00

AMD Launches 125W Phenom II X4 965 CPU

POV-Ray, x264 HD, WME9, Folding@Home

POV-Ray:

POV-Ray is a free raytracing program. Version 3.7 beta has 64bit support and native SMP capability. We used the built-in benchmark to test multithreaded performance.

x264 HD Benchmark:

x264 is a free library for encoding H264/AVC video streams. Tech ARP has a nifty benchmark app to bring some automation and standardization to the encoder. Simply execute a batch file and it will run three tests using two different encoder versions. We are only reporting the newest version since its scores are a little better. This is multithreaded and maintained very high CPU usage, especially during the second pass.

Windows Media Encoder 9 - x64 Edition:

Windows Media Encoder 9 x64 Edition is free from Microsoft and is yet another multithreaded app. The conversion was actually a two pass process, but WME only reports a final time. The first pass doesn't fully utilize all CPU power, but the second pass comes pretty close to full utilization. For this test we used a 10 Min ~130 MB video to re-encode to the 2Mb/s DVD quality format.

Folding @ Home Benchmarks:

We at EXTREME Overclocking are Folding @ Home nuts! If you fold then you have probably seen the EOC Folding Stats pages. Using the Folding@Home benchmark CD created by notfred, we ran the benchmark64 app to get these numbers. The benchmark doesn't run any of the new SMP work units, but it does give general relative performance of each processor.

......................................................................................................

AMD Launches 125W Phenom II X4 965 CPU

2009-11-07T21:07:00.000-08:00

AMD Launches 125W Phenom II X4 965 CPU

Overclocking

Overclocking:

As mentioned initially (and the whole purpose of this article) is that the new 965 model is a lower power 125W TDP. We should expect that overclocking would be slightly better than than the 140W TDP version. I was able to get a pretty decent OC leaving at stock voltage, however past that I wasn't able to squeeze out much more. I tried up to 1.525v but at the rate the system crashed you could tell it was a downhill slope with the increase in voltage. I messed around a little overclocking the memory controller, I was up around 2.5GHz without any issues.

We run Windows Vista x64 edition... If you are still running only a 32-bit operation system then you could expect to see about a 200 MHz increase over these numbers.

* 3.4 GHz - Stock Speed & Voltage (1.375v)
* 3.8 GHz - Max Overclock @ Stock Voltage
* 3.9 GHz - Max Overclock @ 1.425v

3.8 GHz @ Stock Voltage (1.375v)

Max OC - 3.9 GHz @ 1.425v

......................................................................................................

AMD Launches 125W Phenom II X4 965 CPU

2009-11-07T21:03:00.000-08:00

AMD Launches 125W Phenom II X4 965 CPU

Product Summary & Final Conclusions

Product Summary & Final Conclusions:

There's really no downside to the new Phenom II X4 965 - 125W TDP model. The chip will overclock right around that 4 GHz zone, but it is just luck of the draw and each system setup will have an affect. We've seen numerous times in the past where the same model chip comes out with a new revision and often a lower TDP rating, both AMD and Intel do it. The new C3 stepping chips I'm sure will eventually trickle into all of the Phenom II's.

I did not get a chance to mess around with AOD 3.1 too much, but it is nice to see the AMD team continually strive to improve its functionality. AMD Overdrive really makes overclocking the Black Edition processors a snap, for both the novice and expert. It is much more convenient to adjust things on-the-fly than constantly rebooting the system to change settings in your BIOS.

......................................................................................................

Intel Prototypes New Cooler for Gulftown CPU

2009-11-03T23:40:00.000-08:00

Intel Prototypes New Cooler for Gulftown CPU

Intel retail boxed processors always come packed with a heatsink and fan. While they aren't the most elaborate cooling solutions, they are quiet, efficient, and even adequate for some light overclocking.

Of course, those serious about keeping their hot chips cool will opt for aftermarket solutions. For the upcoming six-core Nehalem-based Gulftown CPU, Intel will be packing it with a tower-style heatsink.

PCWorld.fr snapped pictures of a prototype of the cooler that will be paired with Gulftown. Besides just a bigger heatsink with more fins, the proposed cooler also features four copper heatpipes.

....................................................................................................

Intel's SSD firmware brings speed boost, mass death again

2009-11-03T23:33:00.000-08:00

Intel's SSD firmware brings speed boost, mass death (again)

Intel's new SSD firmware massively boosts performance with Windows 7-related ATA commands, but has a bricking bug that's lost data for many users. How much longer will Intel's streak of SSD firmware foibles continue, and how much will these problems hold back the SSD revolution?

Intel's new firmware and toolkit for its new X25 line of solid state disks (SSDs) delivered a massive improvement in their already blisteringly fast performance this week, with increased write speed and a near-elimination of usage-induced performance degradation. The update also included support for the Windows 7 "trim" feature, which will boost SSD's speed and lifespan. So with a 40 percent performance boost and extra Windows 7 goodness, what's not to like about this update? Try data corruption, which some users have reported, causing the update to be pulled not long after it was released. This latest in Intel's uninterrupted streak of firmware foibles will probably be resolved as quickly as the prior two, but it may fuel ongoing doubt about the stability of the SSD as a reliable storage device.

Intel's G1 SSD introduced a subsector remap algorithm which massively increased performance against comparable SSDs, seemingly without cost, until a PCPerspective review showed that the new algorithm's remap table would become fragmented over time and cause degradation, sometimes to below the performance of a regular laptop hard drive. Shortly after this was fixed with a firmware update, Intel's G2 SSDs, with brand-new 34nm NAND, appeared on the stage with further improvements. These, though, were plagued by a lockout problem involving BIOS drive passwords, stopping shipments of the new drive until the issue was resolved via a firmware update.

Intel's latest problem, the third, causes unpredictable, irreversible bricking of G2 SSDs that have been updated to the newest firmware. While it's likely to be fixed fast, this new bug underscores a long and disturbing trend of strange bugs in SSDs from Intel and other drive makers. From lifespan problems to the JMicron controller issue which drastically reduced performance of many makes and models of SSDs, to Intel's ongoing problems, evidence is mounting to convince the user that SSDs aren't ready for the prime time, even as the SSD turning point draws near.

More's the pity, because the new firmware and its related utility resolve one of the major problems in SSD performance: the total lack of coordination between the OS and the SSD. When operating systems "delete" files, they don't actually write zeroes to the relevant sectors, but rather declare the data deleted and move on. This is massively faster (as users who have deleted a 100GB porn pirated movie Linux ISO stash in a few seconds are acutely aware), but causes problems for SSDs. NAND flash reads in pages, but writes in much larger blocks, necessitating a "read-modify-write" operation when a partial write occurs to a block already containing data. This means that when a write occurs to the former location of a deleted file, the SSD, jealously guarding its worthless "deleted" data, performs an unnecessary RMW cycle. As the drive ages, and all available sectors are filled with detritus from deleted files, this can lower performance dramatically.

The solution is to allow the SSD and OS to communicate. The latest revisions to the ATA specification allow a command called "TRIM," which tells the SSD that the data has been deleted. While the data remains, the SSD knows it's junk, and won't trigger an RMW cycle when it's partially overwritten. Performance is nearly as good in old drives as in new. Support for TRIM is native in Windows 7, and Intel's new firmware and utility allow support, for Intel-branded SSDs only, in Windows Vista and Windows XP. Other manufacturers of SSDs have released TRIM-supporting SSDs for Windows 7, but none had TRIM support under prior operating systems.

The new update also boosted write performance of the 160GB version of the X25-M G2 by about 40 percent at open-box. The 160GB model had, confusingly, the same performance specs as the 80GB version at launch, and this has been remedied. Intel hasn't announced exactly what changes account for the performance boost.

Ultimately, both the Intel-exclusivity and the bricking problems associated with the TRIM command will dissipate, as SSD options and optimizations improve and the market expands. However, until an SSD launch is as trouble-free as an HDD launch, SSDs will continue to face challenges in the enterprise. The question is, how long will it be until inexplicable bugs stop delaying and blunting SSDs' every success?

...................................................................................................

AMD's Athlon II X3 435

2009-10-23T03:50:00.001-07:00

AMD's Athlon II X3 435

A month ago AMD introduced the world’s first quad-core processor to debut at $99. Last week, AMD announced its third quarter earnings for 2009. While the company as a whole lost money, the Product Company (CPU and GPU design) turned a small profit. I don’t want to say that the worst is behind AMD, but things are definitely looking up.

And for the consumer, AMD is providing a ton of value these days. You're getting more transistors per dollar than Intel will give you, and it's not just bloat, these things are fast:

The value train continues with todays introduction of the first triple core Athlon II processors: the Athlon II X3 435 and 425. Clocked at 2.9GHz and 2.7GHz respectively, these processors are simply Athlon II X4s with one core disabled.

They’re also quite affordable. The 435 will set you back $87 while the 425 costs $76. This puts them on par with Intel’s Pentium E6000 series dual core processors, but cheaper than the Core 2 Duo E7500. This has been AMD’s high end dual core strategy for the Phenom’s life: sell three cores for the price of two. And in the past, it has worked.

The X3s AMD is announcing today are clocked high enough that you still have good performance in single threaded applications, and in those that can take advantage of three cores you’re almost guaranteed to have better performance than the Intel alternative.

The real question you have to ask is whether it makes more sense to spend a little more than get a quad-core processor or not.

The Athlon II X3s are 45nm 95W TDP parts and work in both Socket-AM2+ and Socket-AM3 motherboards. As I mentioned before, these are architecturally identical to the X4s just with one core disabled. That means you get a 512KB L2 per core but no L3 cache.

I’ll spoil the surprise for you here: they’re faster than the equivalently priced Intel CPUs in most cases, but that’s not too surprising.

The Athlon II X3 435 is a bit more overclockable than the X4 620. Without any additional voltage we got 3.25GHz on our 620 sample, but our 435 yielded 3.33GHz:

With an extra ~15% voltage we could get 3.63GHz:

AMD is also introducing a slew of energy efficient Athlon IIs as well. They’re all in the table below:

These energy efficient processors are binned for lower voltages and thus have a 45W TDP. Unfortunately you do sacrifice clock speed in some cases as a result. There's also a hefty price premium, at the high end you lose clock speed and pay 44% more for a 45W TDP.

The Test

..................................................................................................

AMD's Athlon II X3 435

2009-10-23T03:45:00.000-07:00

AMD's Athlon II X3 435

SYSMark 2007 Performance

Our journey starts with SYSMark 2007, the only all-encompassing performance suite in our review today. The idea here is simple: one benchmark to indicate the overall performance of your machine.

Overall performance under SYSMark is pretty balanced for the Athlon II X3 435. It's faster than the $99 quad-core (620) but slightly slower than the quad core 630. We're slower than the old triple core Phenom II X3 720 though.

................................................................................................

AMD's Athlon II X3 435

2009-10-23T03:37:00.000-07:00

AMD's Athlon II X3 435

3dsmax 9

Today's desktop processors are more than fast enough to do professional level 3D rendering at home. To look at performance under 3dsmax we ran the SPECapc 3dsmax 8 benchmark (only the CPU rendering tests) under 3dsmax 9 SP1. The results reported are the rendering composite scores:

Compared to the Intel dual-core options, the Athlon II X3 435 is a definite winner here. It's got the core count and clock speed to beat the old Penryn derivatives. Its biggest competition comes from its own family, the Athlon II X4 620 is the better buy here.

Cinebench R10

Created by the Cinema 4D folks we have Cinebench, a popular 3D rendering benchmark that gives us both single and multi-threaded 3D rendering results.

As I've been mentioning this entire time, the Athlon II X3 435 doesn't really sacrifice clock speed in its three-core configuration. At 2.9GHz even its single threaded performance is comparable to the Pentium E6300. Run a multithreaded app however and the performance goes from parity to leading:

POV-Ray 3.73 beta 23 Ray Tracing Performance

POV-Ray is a popular, open-source raytracing application that also doubles as a great tool to measure CPU floating point performance.

I ran the SMP benchmark in beta 23 of POV-Ray 3.73. The numbers reported are the final score in pixels per second.

The POV-Ray results echo what we've been seeing thus far, vs. Intel there's no contest - the 435 is the better value. Compared to the quad-core Athlon IIs however, the 435 isn't very good.

Blender 2.48a

Blender is an open source 3D modeling application. Our benchmark here simply times how long it takes to render a character that comes with the application.

...................................................................................................

AMD's Athlon II X3 435

2009-10-23T03:31:00.000-07:00

AMD's Athlon II X3 435

Fallout 3 Game Performance

Bethesda’s latest game uses an updated version of the Gamebryo engine (Oblivion). This benchmark takes place immediately outside Vault 101. The character walks away from the vault through the Springvale ruins. The benchmark is measured manually using FRAPS.
Finally! We have a test where the Athlon II X3 435's clock speed gives it the advantage over the 620. If you're a gamer but want more cores, the 435 is a good balance of performance in existing games but better than dual-core performance in well threaded apps.

Left 4 Dead

I've got no complaints about the X3's performance in Left 4 Dead either, it's nearly as fast as the more expensive Core 2 Duo E7500 (and with a much tastier upgrade path).

FarCry 2 Multithreaded Game Performance

FarCry 2 ships with the most impressive benchmark tool we’ve ever seen in a PC game. Part of this is due to the fact that Ubisoft actually tapped a number of hardware sites (AnandTech included) from around the world to aid in the planning for the benchmark.

For our purposes we ran the CPU benchmark included in the latest patch:

Even in our most heavily threaded game test, the X3 435 is a bit faster than the 620.

Crysis Warhead

..................................................................................................

AMD's Athlon II X3 435

2009-10-23T03:27:00.000-07:00

AMD's Athlon II X3 435

Power Consumption

Thanks to its higher clock speed the Athlon II X3 435 draws a little more power than the 620 at idle, but uses a little less under load. The new energy efficient chips can't be touched. Personally I wouldn't spring for them, but if you're looking to upgrade a building full of machines and want as much power reduction as possible the e series can deliver.

............................................................................................

AMD's Athlon II X3 435

2009-10-23T03:19:00.000-07:00

AMD's Athlon II X3 435
SYSMark 2007 Performance

Our journey starts with SYSMark 2007, the only all-encompassing performance suite in our review today. The idea here is simple: one benchmark to indicate the overall performance of your machine.

AMD's Athlon II X3 435

2009-10-23T02:58:00.000-07:00

AMD's Athlon II X3 435

We'll start with the good news first. The Athlon II X3 435, priced at $87, is a better buy than any of the similarly priced Intel dual-core processors. In heavily threaded applications it's even faster than the more expensive Core 2 Duo E7500. Compared to Intel, the X3 435 is a clear value leader.

The problem is compared to AMD, the Athlon II X3 435 isn't that impressive. The Athlon II X4 620 is faster in nearly every multithreaded benchmark, and it's only costs $12 more. It's only in games and other lightly threaded applications where the 435's higher default clock speed makes up for its lack of a fourth core.

The Athlon II X3 435 is about $15 more expensive than it should be to make sense in AMD's lineup. It's a great step between the dual and quad-core options, but if you need the performance you're probably better off with the 620.

You do get better overclocking potential (thanks to lower thermal output of only three cores), but bring overclocking into the mix and you can narrow the clock speed gap with an overclocked 620.

Compared to Intel, I like the Athlon II X3 435. Compared to AMD, I'd take a quad-core 620.

...................................................................................

Intel Core i7 Mobile CPU (Clarksfield) Review

2009-09-29T05:38:00.000-07:00

Intel Core i7 Mobile CPU (Clarksfield) ReviewIntroduction and Specifications

For quite some time now, Intel has been the undisputed leader when it comes to laptop CPU performance. This advantage comes from the fact that Intel has successfully scaled its desktop processor technology for use in the mobile platform. That trend continues with the latest mobile processor platform being unleashed today from Intel: the "Clarksfield"-based Core i7 Mobile processor family and the new PM55 Express Chipset.

This marks the first time that the "Nehalem" Core i7 microarchitecture has been ported over to the mobile side. The fact that the mobile version of Nehalem makes its debut only two weeks following the launch of Intel's Core i5 ("Lynnfield") mainstream desktop CPU and P55 Express chipset is no coincidence. As it turns out, the Core i7 Mobile processor die is identical to the desktop version, but uses mobile packaging--as far as the microarchitecture is concerned, Clarksfield and Lynnfield are essentially the same thing. The lower power demands of Lynnfield (as opposed to the original Nehalem architecture) are in large part what enable it to also be used in notebooks.

What this means is that Core i7 Mobile-based notebooks will see a number of the same benefits that Core i7 desktops already have, such as integrating the memory controller into the processor die, using a three-level cache hierarchy, utilizing Hyper-Threading technology, and taking advantage of Intel Turbo Boost Technology. What Lynnfield/Clarksfield adds to the equation is on-die PCI Express connectivity, getting rid of the Northbridge chip, and improving the Intel Turbo Boost Technology (from the original Nehalem architecture). Additionally, whereas only the previous Intel Core 2 mobile ("Penryn") microarchitecture had primarily dual-core offerings, all of the Core i7 Mobile solutions are quad cores. The three Penryn-based quad-core mobile processors (the 2.53GHz Core 2 Extreme QX9300, 2.26GHz Core 2 Quad Mobile Q9100, and 2.0GHz Core 2 Quad Mobile Q9000) are made from two dual-core chips merged together in a single CPU package, while Clarksfield uses a single-chip (monolithic) design.

Core i7 Mobile processors are available in three versions. The flagship processor is the Core i7-920XM, which has a base speed of 2.0GHz and goes up to 3.2GHz using Turbo Boost. The middle CPU is the Core i7-820QM, which has a base speed of 1.73GHz and can go up to 3.06GHz with Turbo Boost. Last, but not least, is the Core i7-820QM, with a base speed of 1.6GHz and maximum Turbo Boost speed of 2.8GHz. The Core i7-920XM and Core i7-820QM both have 8MB of shared L3 Smart Cache, while the Core i7-720QM has 6MB of L3 Smart Cache. The other notable difference between these three processors is that the Core i7-920XM has a maximum TDP of 55W, while the Core i7-820QM and Core 720QM both have a maximum 45W TDP. (For comparison, the three quad-core Penryn processors all have a maximum TDP of 45W).

...................................................................................................

Intel Core i7 Mobile CPU (Clarksfield) Review

2009-09-29T03:43:00.000-07:00

Intel Core i7 Mobile CPU (Clarksfield) Review
Core i7 Mobile Processor Details

The Core i7 has a die size of approximately 296mm2 and contains roughly 774-million transistors. The die includes four physical execution cores, three levels of cache, an integrated memory controller, and PCI Express interconnects.

Lynnfield/Clarksfield Die Map

Since the Core i7 Mobile processor integrates the memory controller and PCI Express interconnects onto the processor, there is no need for a traditional Northbridge chip. This means that the PM55 chipset acts primarily as a Southbridge chip, handling most of the device I/O. With no Northbridge chip to communicate with, the Core i7 Mobile processor doesn't need the Intel QuickPath Interconnect (QPI) that the Core i7-900 series ("Bloomfield") processors use to communicate with the chipset. Instead, the Core i7 Mobile uses the slower Direct Media Interface (DMI) interconnect to communicate with the PM55 chipset. Another major difference between the Core i7 Mobile and the Core i7 900-series, is that unlike the Core i7 900-series support for triple-channel DDR3 memory, the Core i7 Mobile instead supports just dual-channel DDR3. The Core i7 Mobile processor supports configurations of 16 PCI Express 2.0 lanes per GPU or two sets of 8 PCI Express 2.0 lanes.

With the memory controller and PCI Express interconnects on the processor die,
the Core i7 Mobile doesn't need a Northbridge chip.

The Core i7-920XM and Core i7-820QM processors have the same three-level cache architecture as all other existing Core i7 and Core i5 processors. The cache configuration is made up of a 4 x 32K instruction L1 cache, 4 x 32K data L1 cache, 4 x 256K L2 cache, and an 8MB L3 cache that is shared between all four cores. The Core i7-720QM has the same L1 and L2 cache amounts, but instead has 6MB L3 shared cache.

All Core i7 Mobile CPUs have three levels of cache; the
Core i7-920XM and Core i7-820QM have 8MB of shared
L3 cache (the Core i7-720QM has 6B of shared L3 cache).

Also, as with all other Core i7 processors, the Core i7 Mobile includes Hyper-Threading support. Hyper-Threading allows each core to process two simultaneous threads. As a result, the Core i7 Mobile can run up to eight simultaneous threads.

With Hyper-Threading, the Core i7-920MX has four physical execution cores and
four virtual cores, for a total of eight cores available for multi-threaded workloads.

As you can see in the Windows 7 Resource Monitor screenshot above, the system sees a total of eight cores: four physical execution cores plus four virtual cores via Hyper-Threading.

..............................................................................................................

Intel Core i7 Mobile CPU (Clarksfield) Review

2009-09-29T03:36:00.000-07:00

Intel Core i7 Mobile CPU (Clarksfield) Review
Intel Turbo Boost Technology

Intel Turbo Boost Technology has been part of the Core i7 (Nehalem) architecture from day one. However, Lynnfield and Clarksfield bring a significant update to the Turbo Boost technology, making it an even more flexible and powerful performance booster.

A graphical example of how Core i7 Mobile Turbo Boost works.

The Core i7 Mobile processor is actually capable of three different speeds above its base speed, depending on the nature of the active single or multi-threaded workloads (and as long as the processor is operating within specified thermal and power limits). When a single-threaded workload is detected, the Core i7-920XM's clock speed on just a single execution core increases up to 3.2GHz, while the remaining three cores remain inactive and operate and close to zero power. When a lightly-threaded workload is detected, only two cores are active and they operate at up to 3.06GHz. With a high-threaded workload, all four cores are active and operate at up to 2.26GHz.

A single-threaded workload (left) vs. a heavily-threaded workload (right).

The image on the left was recorded while Cinebench R10 was running its single-threaded workload. As you can see in Windows 7's Resource Monitor, CPU2 is getting pegged heavily. There is also some activity on CPU1, CPU5, and CPU7, which can be attributed to Windows 7 background tasks and other apps running in the background. The Intel Turbo Boost Technology Monitor gadget shows the processor running at 3.2GHz. While this screenshot shows that the Core i7-920XM is capable of scaling up to 3.2GHz, the chip actually ran at 3.07GHz during the vast majority of the test run.

The screenshot on the right was captured while Cinebench R10 was running its multi-threaded workload. Resource Monitor shows all four physical execution cores and all four Hyper-Threading virtual cores completely saturated, with the Intel Turbo Boost Technology Monitor showing the processor running at 2.0GHz. Curiously, the processor did not run at the 2.26GHz speed that Turbo Boost supports for highly-threaded workloads, and instead ran at the processor's 2.0GHz base speed.

....................................................................................................

Intel Core i7 Mobile CPU (Clarksfield) Review

2009-09-29T03:33:00.000-07:00

Intel Core i7 Mobile CPU (Clarksfield) Review
Intel PM55 Express Chipset

If you read our recent coverage of the Lynnfield processor (Intel Core i5 and the Core i7 800-series), then the diagram below of the Clarksfield platform should look very familiar (in fact, it is the same diagram). As we previously mentioned, Clarksfield and Lynnfield have the identical architecture. The same can be said for the P55 and PM55 chipset feature sets.

Prior to the release of Lynnfield and Clarksfield, the Core i7's PCI Express interconnects were still located on the chipset; therefore the Intel X58 chipset for Bloomfield processors still required a Northbridge chip and a speedy QPI interconnect between the processor and the Northbridge chip. Now with the PCI Express interconnects and the memory controller located on the processor die, the Northbridge chip is gone from the equation and the CPU communicates directly with the Southbridge chip via a DMI interconnect.

The PM55 chipset supports up to 14 USB 2.0 ports and six SATA 3Gb/sec ports; it also supports Intel Matrix Storage Technology RAID support and Intel High Definition Audio. The PM55 chipset also includes support for up to eight PCI Express x1 ports. PCI Express ports 1 through 4 can be configured as either four x1, two x2, or one x4 lane groups; the same is true for PCI Express ports 5 through 8. This means that the PM55's PCI Express lanes could be configured as two x4. Unfortunately, it is not possible to gang all eight PCI Express lanes into single x8 skit.

Intel Core i7 Mobile CPU (Clarksfield) Review

2009-09-29T03:11:00.000-07:00

Intel Core i7 Mobile CPU (Clarksfield) Review

Test System and SiSoft SANDRA

In order to test the performance of the new Intel Core i7 Mobile platform, we got our hands on a Core i7-920XM-based whitebook from Intel. Strictly speaking, the unit we tested is not an actual shipping configuration. But since the whitebook came in a Style-Note chassis (model W870CU) from Taiwan-based notebook manufacturer Clevo, it is likely that we will see shipping Core i7-920XM-based notebooks that closely resemble the configuration and design of the whitebook. Clevo manufacturers notebooks for a number of OEMs, such as AVADirect and Eurocom. In fact, Eurocom has already announced that it will be offering a Core i7 Mobile-based system using the same Clevo W870CU notebook design come October.

*Intel Core i7-920XM 2.0GHz (2.26/3.06/3.2 Max Turbo Frequencies (4C/2C/1C))

* 4GB DDR3-1333 (2x2GB) SDRAM

* NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280M graphics with 1GB VRAM

* 17-inch 1600x900 display

* Intel 80GB X25-M SATA SSD

* DVD-Multi Recorder

* Intel Ultimate N WiFi Link 5300 WLAN

* GbE Ethernet

* 42 WHr Battery

* Windows 7 Ultimate

* ExpressCard/54 slot

* eSATA port

* DVI out

* HDMI out

* 4 USB ports

* 1394 port

The Clevo W870CU whitebook unit measures 2.25x16.25x11.0-inches (HWD) and weighs about 8 pounds. While we keep calling it a whitebook--as the images show--it is not acutally white ("whitebook" is just an expression to indicate that it is a custom design that is not available for sale.). The W870CU's chassis is an almost all-black affair with red trim. The left side of the unit includes the DVD-RW drive, USB port, FireWire port, MMC/SD/MS card slot, TV antenna input, and RJ-11 modem jack. The right side of the unit includes four audio ports, USB port, ExpressCard/54 slot, eSATA slot, DVI out, and lock slot. The back of the unit has an HDMI out port, power connector, two USB ports, and an RJ-45 Ethernet port. The bottom of the unit features no less than three separate exhaust ports for the two internal fans (one for the CPU and one for the GPU).

The estimated street price of the Core i7-290XM-based Clevo W870CU is around $3,299--depending on how the OEM configures it. Before the Intel techs sent us the unit for testing, they swapped out the notebook's 250GB SATA hard drive for an 80GB Intel X-25-M SATA SSD. Such an upgrade raises the price by about another $275 or so.

We began our testing with SiSoftware's SANDRA 2009 SP4, the System ANalyzer, Diagnostic and Reporting Assistant. We ran four of the built-in subsystem tests that partially comprise the SANDRA 2009 SP4 suite: CPU Arithmetic, Multimedia, Memory Bandwidth, and Cache and Memory.

On all of the SiSoftware's SANDRA tests, the Core i7-920XM puts in a very strong showing. While our whitebook wasn't the top performer in the Processor Arithmetic test, a closer look shows that the CPU that SANDRA automatically picked to compare the whitebook's performance too was actually another Core i7-920XM--but one running with Turbo Boost bumping up the processor speed to 3.2GHz. The whitebook is also not the winner on the Processor Multi-Media test; but the automatically-generated comparison CPU in this case is a 3.33GHz Intel Core i7 975 Extreme Edition desktop processor--which is not exactly a fair comparison.

..............................................................................................

Intel Core i7 Mobile CPU (Clarksfield) Review

2009-09-29T03:06:00.000-07:00

Intel Core i7 Mobile CPU (Clarksfield) Review
Futuremark PCMark Vantage

Next up, we ran a number of different test systems through Futuremark's PCMark Vantage system performance metric. PCMark Vantage runs through a host of different usage scenarios to simulate different types of workloads including High Definition TV and movie playback and manipulation, gaming, image editing and manipulation, music compression, communications, and productivity. Most of the tests are multi-threaded (up to three simultaneous threads), so the tests can exploit the additional resources offered by a multi-core CPU.

We pitted the Core i7-920XM against a number of other different processors and platforms. It is important to note that unlike when we test desktop processors, we can't just swap out the processor from the notebook's motherboard and pop in a new one for comparison, while keeping all other components the same. Therefore, all of the test results presented here and on the following pages include systems with different configurations, including different chipsets, memory types and speeds, hard disk drives, and GPUs. These comparisons are still valid, but the numbers represent specific configurations and models, and are not necessarily representative of all systems that use these processors.

Our primary comparison system in these pages a Dell XPS M1730, which is powered by a 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo X9000, 4GB 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM, 80GB Intel SSD hard drive, and dual Nvidia GeForce 9800M GTX GPUs using SLI. But we also included scores for a number of desktop processors as well, such as a 2.66GHz Core i5-750, 2.66GHz Core i7-920, and a 3.4GHz AMD Phenom II X4 965.

On the PCMark Vantage test, the Core i7-920XM's score of 12,517 PCMarks easily bests all of the comparison systems by a significant margin. The Core i7-920XM falters a bit on the Communications and TV & Movies workloads, but more than makes up for it on the other tests.

.........................................................................................

Intel Core i7 Mobile CPU (Clarksfield) Review

2009-09-29T02:54:00.000-07:00

Intel Core i7 Mobile CPU (Clarksfield) Review
LAME MT and X264 Encoding

In our custom LAME MT MP3 encoding test, we convert a large WAV file to the MP3 format, which is a popular scenario that many end users work with on a day-to-day basis to provide portability and storage of their digital audio content. LAME is an open-source mid to high bit-rate and VBR (variable bit rate) MP3 audio encoder that is used widely around the world in a multitude of third party applications.In our custom LAME MT MP3 encoding test, we convert a large WAV file to the MP3 format, which is a popular scenario that many end users work with on a day-to-day basis to provide portability and storage of their digital audio content. LAME is an open-source mid to high bit-rate and VBR (variable bit rate) MP3 audio encoder that is used widely around the world in a multitude of third party applications.

In this test, we created our own 223MB WAV file (a hallucinogenically-induced Grateful Dead jam) and converted it to the MP3 format using the multi-thread capable LAME MT application in single and multi-thread modes. Processing times are recorded below, listed in seconds. Shorter times equate to better performance.

The Core i7-920XM puts in a very strong showing on our LAME MT test, but its multi-threaded performance is still only on par with that of the 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo X9000-based Dell notebook. In fact, with the exception of the Core 2 Quad 9400, all of our comparisons systems were at least as fast as the Core i7-920XM or faster when it comes to multi-threaded performance on this encoding test. If you look at the scores, however, you will see that there is a very tight grouping here with very similar multi-threaded performance among them. There is a wider range of performance with the single-threaded encoding performance, and here the Core i7-920XM comes out on top--in part because the test's single-threaded workload enabled the CPU to scale up to 3.2GHz using Turbo Boost. Even though the Core i5-750 also scales up to 3.2GHz with Turbo Boost, the Core i5 processor lacks Hyper-Threading--which is what gives the Core i7-920XM the edge over the Core i5-750 here.

The x264 benchmark measures how fast a system can encode a short, DVD quality MPEG-2 video clip into a high-quality H.264 HD video clip. The application reports the compression results in frames per second for each pass of the video encoding process, and it is threaded so it can take advantage of the additional resources afforded by multi-core processors.

On this HD video encoding test, the Core i7-920XM was significantly faster that the 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo X9000-based Dell notebook. This is an indication that the new Core i7 Mobile platform should be much more efficient at encoding video than the Core 2 Duo processor--an increasingly important task for all platforms. On the other hand, all but one of the desktop-based CPUs handily beat the Core i7-920XM with their encoding speed. While the mobile processor may have come a long way in its performance capabilities, a modern desktop CPU is still the better choice when it comes to encoding video quickly.

............................................................................................