In the last several weeks, AMD has quietly introduced several Athlon 64 processors in the new 90nm die-shrink. The new Socket 939 3000+, 3200+, and 3500+ are based on the new Winchester core. They are also the first Athlon 64 processors to become available at speeds below 3500+ in Socket 939. This is very important, since the biggest news is the fact that the price of entry for a Socket 939 processor is now less than $200. Of course, a successful die-shrink and lower costs are interrelated, and in this case, the model seems to be working as we would expect.



Nothing has really changed on the outside, but if you can find a 3000+ or 3200+ in Socket 939, you can be confident that it is the new 90nm version. Since 3500+ is produced in both 90nm and 130nm versions, you will need to ask if it is a 90nm part. Most resellers that have the new 90nm Athlon 64 have been prominently advertising them.



The latest version 1.24 of CPU-Z can be downloaded at www.cpuid.com. Version 1.24 correctly identifies the die-shrink (.09), the core (Winchester), and the Revision (DH8-D0). Earlier versions of CPU-Z don't recognize the new processors, so make certain that you are using Version 1.24 or later.



A late 3800+ is identified, for comparison, as a NewCastle core, .13 process, and Revision DH7-CG.

There has been a lot of speculation about how important this die-shrink is to AMD. Most of this has revolved around the higher yield and lower cost of production for the smaller chip. Since Intel has already moved to .09, analysts believed AMD needed the yields and lower cost of the .09 shrink to effectively compete with Intel on a cost basis.

There are also potential advantages to the end-user from the die-shrink. These include lower power consumption, cooler processor operation, and greater headroom for higher overclocking. It is these advantages that will interest most of you. We will take a closer look in this review at whether these advantages are realized.

AMD Q&A
Comments Locked

89 Comments

View All Comments

  • Wesley Fink - Friday, October 15, 2004 - link

    #57 - There were NO tests on Socket 754 processors in this review, since 90nm is only available as 939. This is stated in the review. To see the impact of the new Winchester core and die-shrink on performance we downclocked a 939 .13 CPU to 1.8GHz - the same specs as the 90nm 939. This is clearly stated in bold in the review "We also ran benchmarks of the 130nm processor at Socket 939 3000+ speeds, but these results are theoretical. There is no production 130nm Socket 939 3000+, so these results were just to compare the impact of the die-shrink and Winchester core on performance."
  • Akira1224 - Friday, October 15, 2004 - link

    #56 can you post an official Nvidia link stating that. I can't seem to find the official word anywhere. I just figured since you stated that they will not support AGP as a fact you have seen something official.

    Thank you !

  • Cybercat - Friday, October 15, 2004 - link

    AMD .09 Athlon 64 3500+
    AMD .13 Athlon 64 3500+
    AMD .09 Athlon 64 3000+
    AMD .09 Athlon 64 3000+ (downclocked .13 CPU)
    AMD FX53 A64 (.13-2.4GHz-1MB Cache)

    So, does this mean that the Socket 754 3000+ was downclocked to 1.8GHz?
  • IceWindius - Friday, October 15, 2004 - link

    #44

    Fraid not, nForce 4 will only support PCI-E video cards from this point forward.
  • thebluesgnr - Friday, October 15, 2004 - link

    The 1.8GHz Winchester is faster than the Sempron 3100+ for a few reasons:

    1) dual channel support;

    2) 512KB L2 cache (versus 256KB on the Sempron);

    3) small improvements on the Winchester core.

    Not to mention the lack of 64-bit support on the Sempron. But that's not so bad for a chip that's half the price (they cost $100 and $199 on newegg). The price difference is too big, the suggested price for the A64 3000+ is $165, so I expect to pay 150-165 for the OEM version. Newegg's logistics is too good. ;)
  • Wesley Fink - Thursday, October 14, 2004 - link

    #50 - All Athlon 64 processors can be set to lower CPU ratios. Only the FX can be set either lower or higher multipliers. I was testing and had set the 3800+ to a 9 multiplier in BIOS. The 3800+ is at stock a 12 multiplier and runs at 2.4GHz.

    To minimize confusion we replaced the 9x capture with a 12x 3800+ screen capture in the review.

    #52 is correct - the Sempron PR is based on Celeron and not A64. The Sempron 3100+ is actually a bit slower than a 2800+ Athlon 64. The Sempron is also 32-bit only and does not support 64-bit operation even though it will fit in Socket 754.
  • Wesley Fink - Thursday, October 14, 2004 - link

    #47 - the 3400+ is for Socket 754. The only 90nm chips are for Socket 939 at present. 3500+ is the correct name and you can buy the chip from Monarch Computers for one at http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merchant2/merchant.... New Egg does have the 3200+ and 3000+ 90nm in stock - but not the 3500+. Look for Core: Winchester and Process: 90nm in the description. I don't have any idea what the 3400+ Socket 939 chip is that is advertised at NewEgg, but it's not Winchester core or 90nm process.

    #48 - All Athlon 64 processors can be set to lower CPU ratios. Only the FX can be set either lower or higher multipliers. I was testing and had set the 3800+ to a 9 multiplier in BIOS. The 3800+ is at stock a 12 multiplier and runs at 2.4GHz.
  • Keypo - Thursday, October 14, 2004 - link

    The Sempron PR is based towards the Celeron Performance and the Athlon is PR is for Pentium
  • Keypo - Thursday, October 14, 2004 - link

  • Araemo - Thursday, October 14, 2004 - link

    Soemone tell me I'm crazy.. please?

    Two things: one, on page 1 of the review, look at the second cpu-z screenshot.

    Why is the 3800+ running at 1.8?

    Anyways..

    Amd Athlon64 3000+ on S939 = 1.8 Ghz.
    Amd Sempron 3100+ on S754 = 1.8ghz

    Why does a sempron have a higher 'rating' than an identically clocked athlon64?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now