AMD CPU Roadmap Update

We haven't updated our AMD roadmap for a few months, in part due to overlapping NDAs and product launches. Unfortunately we are just about to go under NDA for AMD's next low clock X2 processor - but rather than postpone another roadmap we decided to carry on just without that information. Our last detailed AMD roadmap was actually back in December, and we have quite a bit of new information to cover. We'll focus primarily on the upcoming parts, which will be highlighted in red in our tables, but we'll also list details on many of the currently shipping parts. Let's start with the desktop sector.

Introducing M2

The big news of course is the upcoming transition from socket 939 to socket M2. M2 will have 940 pins, and while the actual layout of motherboards with the new socket will be very similar to socket 939, processors will obviously not be pin compatible. The same goes for current socket 940 processors: they won't work or fit in socket M2. That makes sense, considering that M2 will require the use of DDR2 memory. The similarity in layout will allow motherboard makers to quickly adapt 939 designs to M2, however.

Initially slated to support up to DDR2-667, the socket M2 processors will launch in the second quarter of 2006. Codenamed Orleans for the single core processors, the roadmaps include few details on the clock speeds or cache amounts of the new parts. Without speculating too much, we would assume that the specifications will be the same as equivalent 939 processors, but we could be wrong. Another possibility is that the DDR2 parts will outperform the socket 939 parts, allowing AMD to modify their names (again). Either option seems equally likely, and we wouldn't be surprised to see the 4000+ M2 ship as a 2.6 GHz 512K part, as that would allow the use of a single design for the three listed chips.

Processors running on the new M2 socket are dubbed Revision "F". Revision "F" processors carry all the features of existing "E" CPUs, but along with the new socket comes some significant changes in power. For example, a typical Revision "E" San Diego Athlon 64 utilizes 80 amps with a maximum TDP around 90W. The new Revision "F" CPUs will use 95 amps instead. However, although the processors require a bump in the current, the power remains the same. Unfortunately, expect massive increases in TDP. From the roadmap we expect the FX M2 processors to have a max TDP of 125W, 110W for dual core and 104W for single core. Revision "F" implements a new Bi-Directional PROCHOT so that the motherboard can throttle the processor dynamically, but the CPU can also override and throttle itself if necessary.

The main changes to the processor diagram only appear to be the integrated DDR2 controller instead of the integrated DDR1 controller.

The Desktop
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • john matthews - Saturday, January 21, 2006 - link

    The Sempron 3200+ socket 939 processors are being used in Compaq presario's, model # SR1603. I have been trying to find any documentation I could on this chip because AMD's website said it did not exist despite the fact that SANDRA and CPU-Z were telling me that I had a socket 939 Sempron. CPU-Z reports the chip as a Sempron 3200+, Code Name Palermo, Brand ID 38, socket 939, Family F, Model F, Stepping 2, Ext Family F, Ext Model 2F, Revision E6. I have been searching the web for the last three weeks looking for some info on this processor and this is the first documentation I have found on it. I even EMailed AMD tech support and they denied any knowledge of it.
  • Griswold - Friday, August 5, 2005 - link

    Guess I'll just buy me a X2 soon and dont bother with M2 for a year or two (from the time it is released)
  • Anemone - Friday, July 29, 2005 - link

    Presently I have a relatively cheap Intel chip and a nice 2gb of ram (it makes what I do work out fine). If AMD were to have DDR2 support right now, I'd switch cpu's and mobo in an instant. Guess I'm just kinda sad it'll take a year before that's a possibility.

    However, saying that I am still wishing they'd spend till 2007 supporting upgrades for the 939 socket folks. Imo, supporting them with better cpu's to plug in to their systems would be a nice thank you for giving the business to AMD. I know, but it's my $.02.

    So I guess I wait till next year, as I'm not going to invest in 2gb of DDR at this point. OH well!

  • OC DETECTIVE - Monday, July 25, 2005 - link

    Strange you say you cant mention the lower speed X2 aka 3800+ after all it is on AMD's website if you look hard enough.(Just click on processor)">
    Couple of other comments - to date there are no cache disabled Manchesters (they have a different die size to the Toledo 147 v 199mm2) and the X2 3800+ and X2 4200+ TDP is only 89W.
  • KristopherKubicki - Monday, July 25, 2005 - link

    That's the unfortunate problem of NDA. AMD hasn't actually leaked the specs yet, even though they leaked the name it looks like. I don't think anyone from AMD is going to hammer us about talking about the chip, but I'm not in the mood to push my luck either.

  • aldamon - Monday, July 25, 2005 - link

    Kristopher, could you please back up this statement:

    "As virtually any socket 754 board should have no trouble supporting these mobile variants, 754 owners looking to upgrade for additional CPU performance might be interested in checking out these parts."

  • KristopherKubicki - Monday, July 25, 2005 - link

    aldamon: In comparison to Turion, Athlon 64-M is pretty well supported by motherboard manufacturers. I've heard various horror stories of getting Turion to work in desktop motherboards, howeever.

  • aldamon - Wednesday, July 27, 2005 - link

    You didn't say "well supported" in the article. You said "virtually any socket 754 board" could run the 4000+. As far as I know, only the DFI Lanparty UT nForce3 can run mobiles without problems. The MSI and Chaintech boards can do it too but with quirks. That's a far cry from "virtually any socket 754."

    Also, mobiles do not come with an IHS. That messes with the HSF spacing for a lot of mobo / HSF combos.

    What I'm getting at here is that virtually any S754 SHOULD be able to run the chip but they can't. Maybe if AT called out a few of these companies we'd get proper BIOS support. I'd love to have an upgrade path for my Epox 8KDA3J.

    How about an AT article on 4000+ Newark support?
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, July 27, 2005 - link

    First it has to be realeased. Then we need to email the board manufacturers and ask about support for Athlon 64-M and Turion. We may be looking at a Turion/64-M article in the future, so that will give me a good reason to email a variety of manufacturers and ask about support.
  • aldamon - Thursday, July 28, 2005 - link

    That would be great. Thanks.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now