AMD's Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition
by Anand Lal Shimpi on August 13, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Power Consumption
Idle power consumption is a strong point of the Phenom II architecture, only the i7s manage to draw less power. Under load, the 965 draws the most power of anything on the chart - there's its 140W TDP hard at work.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
58 Comments
View All Comments
andrenb91 - Tuesday, August 18, 2009 - link
amd's only hope to beat the i7s is the istambul core, if it brings istambul to the desktop market, I guess this future cpu can beat some high-end i7 processors, and after some revisions on the deneb core, amd will place it to ''fight'' the i5s leaving the athlon x4 playing against the i3s, but most denebs must be at 95W to be efficient against i5. of course this strategy depends if amd is economically capaple of putting a 300mm squared die in the desktop market...deneb is already too large to compete against the i7!Reply
Denithor - Friday, August 14, 2009 - link
You measured performance in video encoding and then power consumption under the same test. Why not take the obvious next step to calculate performance/watt and post those results?And I was quite disappointed to see that you posted only about half of each CPU list on each of those charts - a few chips overlap but many do not so we cannot even do the calculation for ourselves except in less than half the cases. Reply
- Monday, August 17, 2009 - link
Two things : Intel's SSE extentions are used by everyone, and should be the difference in some of these tests.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...">http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=719">http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=719
The other disturbing thing is the FarCry benchmark, the writer:
FarCry 2 is another example of a title well optimized for Intel's architectures and thus we see that the 965BE can't even win against its Q9550 competition. Thankfully for AMD, I do not believe FarCry 2 is representative of the majority of titles on the market.
I believe this is an example of how SSE extentions deliver; but looking at the game benchmark data closer, we see that all cpu's are comparatively the same even the i7's vs Intel Core ll. Most, if not all vendors optimize in Intels favor
asH
Reply
- Tuesday, August 18, 2009 - link
Note the extention differences between the two designs-Phenom ll X4 945
Processor core Deneb
Core stepping C2
Manufacturing process 0.045 micron SOI
758 million transistors
Die size 243 mm2
Data width 64 bit
Number of cores 4
Floating Point Unit Integrated
Level 1 cache size ? 4 x 64 KB 2-way associative instruction caches
4 x 64 KB 2-way associative data caches
Level 2 cache size ? 4 x 512 KB 16-way associative caches
Level 3 cache size 6 MB shared 48-way associative cache
Virtual memory (TB) 256
Features MMX
3DNow!
SSE
SSE2
SSE3
SSE4a ?
Advanced Bit Manipulation ?
AMD64 technology ?
AMD-V (virtualization) technology
Enhanced Virus Protection ?
Low power features Cool'n'Quiet 3.0
CoolCore Technology ?
Dual Dynamic Power Management ?
Core C1 and C1E states
Package S0, S1, S3, S4 and S5 states
On-chip peripherals Integrated 144-bit DDR2 Memory Controller
HyperTransport 3 technology
-----------------------------------------
Type CPU / Microprocessor
Family Intel Core i7
Model number ? I7-920
CPU part number AT80601000741AA (Q1CM, Q1H7, SLBCH, SLBEJ)
Box part numbers BX80601920 (SLBCH, SLBEJ)
BXC80601920 (SLBCH, SLBEJ)
Frequency (MHz) ? 2667
Bus speed (MHz) ? 2400 MHz QPI
Package 1366-land Flip-Chip Land Grid Array (FC-LGA8)
Socket Socket 1366 (LGA1366)
Introduction date Nov 17, 2008
Price at introduction $284
Architecture / Microarchitecture
Processor core Bloomfield
Core steppings C0 (SLBCH)
D0 (Q1H7, SLBEJ)
Manufacturing process 0.045 micron Hi-k metal gate technology
731 million transistors
Die size 263 mm2
Data width 64 bit
Number of cores 4
Floating Point Unit Integrated
Level 1 cache size ? 4 x 32 KB instruction caches
4 x 32 KB data caches
Level 2 cache size ? 4 x 256 KB
Level 3 cache size Inclusive shared 8 MB cache
Features MMX instruction set
SSE
SSE2
SSE3
Supplemental SSE3
SSE4.1 ?
SSE4.2 ?
EM64T technology ?
Hyper-Threading technology
Turbo Boost technology ?
Virtualization technology
Execute Disable bit ?
Low power features Thread C1, C3 and C6 states
Core C1, C3 and C6 states
Package C3 and C6 states
SpeedStep technology ?
On-chip peripherals Integrated triple-channel DDR3 SDRAM Memory controller
Quick Path Interconnect
Reply
- Tuesday, August 18, 2009 - link
Type CPU / Microprocessor
Family Intel Core 2 Quad
Model number ? Q9650
CPU part number AT80569PJ080N (QHGF, SLB8W)
Box part numbers BX80569Q9650 (SLB8W)
BXC80569Q9650 (SLB8W)
Frequency (MHz) ? 3000
Bus speed (MHz) ? 1333
Clock multiplier ? 9
Package 775-land Flip-Chip Land Grid Array (FC-LGA8)
1.48" x 1.48" (3.75 cm x 3.75 cm)
Socket Socket 775 (LGA775)
Introduction date Aug 10, 2008
Price at introduction $530
Architecture / Microarchitecture
Processor core Yorkfield
Core stepping E0 (QHGF, SLB8W)
Manufacturing process 0.045 micron
Data width 64 bit
Number of cores 4
Floating Point Unit Integrated
Level 1 cache size ? 4 x 32 KB instruction caches
4 x 32 KB data caches
Level 2 cache size ? 2 x 6 MB 12-way set associative caches (each L2 cache is shared between 2 cores)
Features MMX instruction set
SSE
SSE2
SSE3
Supplemental SSE3
EM64T technology ?
Virtualization Technology
Execute Disable Bit technology ?
SSE4.1 ?
Trusted Execution technology
Low power features Enhanced SpeedStep technology ?
Stop Grant state ?
Halt state
Extended Halt state
Extended Stop Grant State
Sleep state ?
Deep Sleep state ?
Deeper Sleep state ?
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Core_2/Intel-Core%20...">http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Core_2/In...BX80569Q... Reply
- Thursday, August 13, 2009 - link
Intel's biggest (only?) advantage is hyperthreading; realize Windows 7 had to be optimized (how much more code?)for hyperthreading..how will Intel's i7's react in an openCL, CPUGPU environment (WARP) compared to Phenoms II's and an ATI graphics card, is it cost efficient(less code) and more efficient (faster) to go with CPUGPU over hyper..Will multicores do away with hyperthreading? These current comparisons on vista or XP do not necessary reflect comparisons on Windows 7 or DirectX 11. staytuned Reply- Thursday, August 13, 2009 - link
I would also love my excel spreadsheets to have the advantage of CPUGPU...Photoshop too Reply- Thursday, August 13, 2009 - link
oh yeah, Intels game plan to fight AMD's CPUGPU concept-a)license the SLI technology from Nvidia for Nehelam
b)get Microsoft to optimise Windows 7 for hyperthreading (sidebar-Intel pushes Windows 7 for corporate upgrades- can you say payoff))
innovative genius
but in reality they will probably make sure this great technological concept dies, thereby assuring comp's remain in the dark ages for another 10 years
Reply
JumpingJack - Sunday, September 21, 2014 - link
You really had zero clue what you were talking about .... it is funny to come back in time and re-read all this AMD fanboy nonsense. Very entertaining, thank you for the horrendously great laugh. Replyash9 - Thursday, August 13, 2009 - link
"Now once you start throwing in background tasks and look at future titles being more threaded then the picture becomes a little more muddy"I dont understand where the writer is going with these conclusions. As CPUGPU or OpenCL begins to take hold, the old comparative model of simply looking at raw speed becomes obsolete, now, overall power can be reduced while concurrent events run parallel in multicores and GPU, thats is where AMD is heading. These comparisons with Vista may not be as eye opening as compared on Windows 7 or DirectX 11, this is where AMD planed to rock and roll from the start. Reply