 | |||
|
|
|
|
|
 |
AMD Athlon 64 FX-62/X2 5000+ AM2 Performance Preview May 23, 2006 Brandon Sandman Bell |
|
 |
|
| |
Summary: Today AMD is introducing the successor to today's 939-pin Athlon 64 processors, the 940-pin AM2 socket. The new socket brings with a number of changes, most notable of which is DDR2 memory, while CPU's based on the new platform boast such features as lower power consumption and AMD's virtualization technology. But that's not all, as today AMD is also introducing two new processors: the Athlon 64 X2 5000+ and the FX-62. See how the new chips perform in comparison to their predecessors with both single-card and SLI configurations in today's article!
 Introduction | Page:: ( 1 / 13 ) |
Despite the lack of new processor introductions from AMD, demand hasn’t stopped for their Athlon 64 X2 processors, in fact if anything demand has only picked up. Last month AMD even raised prices on some of their processors slightly. And now Dell plans to integrate AMD’s Opteron line into some of their servers later this year. Make no mistake about it, this isn’t the same AMD of six years ago that was often forced to compete on price with Intel, AMD is now in the enviable position of market leader when it comes to performance and power consumption, while Intel counters by pricing their dual-core processors at bargain-bin prices. On Newegg.com right now Intel’s Pentium D 805 can be found for less than $130, while the Pentium D 820 sells for under $185. In comparison AMD’s Athlon 64 X2 3800+ is priced at $297: you can buy two Pentium D 805’s for the price of just one X2 3800!
But the lack of new Athlon 64 X2 processor introductions from AMD over the course of the past year doesn’t mean AMD hasn’t been up to something. The company is about to embark on a brand new 65-nm manufacturing process and introduce a newer generation of Athlon 64 CPUs based on a tweaked K8 architecture. But before those chips are introduced AMD’s got one other big project to tackle: the DDR2 transition.
DDR times two
AMD’s relied on DDR400 to carry them for three years now. DDR400 has served AMD well over this time, but it’s definitely beginning to show signs of age. DDR memory consumes more power than DDR2, and just flat out doesn’t have the frequency headroom that DDR2 has.
When DDR2 was initially released, AMD stuck with DDR400 as it was more widely available, and thus cheaper than DDR2. Early DDR2 modules also shipped at higher latencies and clock speeds that weren’t much greater than the fastest DDR modules of the time – the performance advantage just wasn’t there. Of course, it also didn’t hurt that by sticking with DDR400, it kept infrastructure costs down either.
The memory market is completely different today however. DDR2 modules sell for the same price, if not lower than equivalent DDR modules, while the latencies of newer DDR2 modules are lower than before. The latest DDR2 modules run at higher speeds as well, the 800MHz DDR2 memory in today’s latest AM2 processors provides up to 12.8GB/sec of peak memory bandwidth, that’s twice the bandwidth of the DDR400 memory found in the latest Athlon 64 processors.
The added bandwidth provided by DDR2 is going to play an increasingly important role as AMD cranks up the clock speed of their processors, and as more processor cores are integrated onto the CPU’s die.
| Same old Athlon 64/X2 | Page:: ( 2 / 13 ) |
With the move from DDR400 to DDR2, AMD’s taken the opportunity to also introduce a new processor socket, Socket AM2.
[image]
| <% print_image("01"); %> | <% print_image("02"); %> | <% print_image("03"); %> |
Physically Socket AM2 looks practically identical to Socket 939. Unlike Intel, AMD continues to mount the processor’s pins to underside of the CPU rather than on the motherboard, while the AM2 socket itself only has one additional pin over the Socket 939 interface it replaces for a grand total of 940 pins. A layman would probably be hard-pressed to see any differences between Socket 939 and Socket AM2 at first glance.
This keeps things simple on AMD’s infrastructure. Motherboard manufacturers won’t have to go back and make sweeping changes to their existing tools used to fabricate the boards, in fact, since both ATI and NVIDIA’s Xpress 3200 and nForce4 chipset are compatible with Socket AM2, all motherboard manufacturers have to do is swap out the CPU socket and memory on their current motherboards to support Socket AM2. Indeed, this is exactly the strategy both ATI and NVIDIA have in place for their integrated offerings; no changes in that space are going to be made in the immediate future.
Architecture changes
With the debut of the new Socket AM2 platform, many AMD enthusiasts were hoping AMD would use the opportunity to integrate new architectural enhancements designed to improve performance, particularly with Intel’s upcoming Conroe processor right around the corner. AMD saw things differently however.
In order to ease the transition into the new AM2 platform, AMD wanted to keep things simple, there are no significant changes to the processor’s core architecture, at least when it comes to enhancing performance. A Socket AM2 Athlon 64 4800+ features the same cache configuration and clock speeds as a Socket 939 Athlon 64 4800+ CPU would. In other words, it runs at the same 2.4GHz with 1MB L2 cache per core and 128K of L1 cache. The HyperTransport interface is the same on both processors, running at 1GHz DDR, shuttling along up to 8GB/sec of peak bandwidth.
The key difference between both processors is that the AM2 Athlon 64 X2 4800+ boasts up to 20.8GB/sec of total system bandwidth (8GB/sec HyperTransport link + 12.8GB/sec memory) whereas the Socket 939 Athlon 64 X2 4800 tops out at 14.8GB/sec (8GB/sec HyperTransport link + 6.4GB/sec memory), nearly a 30% increase.
By keeping the basic configuration between both processors similar, the model numbers AMD has previously established carry over to their AM2 processors. This is important, as AMD is introducing a top-to-bottom lineup of AM2 processors including the Sempron line, Athlon 64 (single-core), Athlon 64 X2, and Athlon 64 FX lines of processors.
While the core architecture of AM2 carries over basically unchanged, that doesn’t mean that AMD hasn’t incorporated improvements into AM2 however…
| Lower power, virtualization, new CPUs | Page:: ( 3 / 13 ) |
If that’s not enough power savings for you, AMD’s also introducing a new energy efficient lineup of CPUs that’s completely separate from the aforementioned CPUs. Last week AMD announced energy efficient Athlon 64 X2, Athlon 64, and Sempron processors. The energy efficient Athlon 64 X2 processors (4800+, 4600+, 4400+, 4200+, 4000+, and 3800+ ) require just 65-watts max of juice, while the energy efficient Athlon 64 X2 3800+, Athlon 64 3500+, and Sempron CPUs 3400+, 3200+, and 3000+ peak at just 35 watts.
Keep in mind that all these power figures come under full load, when the system is taxed hard, typical power consumption can be significantly lower.
[image]
| <% print_image("04"); %> |
DDR2 support
While the memory controller inside all of the new AM2 processors supports DDR2 memory, only the Athlon 64 X2 and Athlon 64 FX line provide official support for faster 800MHz DDR2 modules; DDR2 support is limited to 667MHz for the AM2 Athlon 64 and Sempron AM2 processors.
Virtualization
For the first time, AMD is offering virtualization in all of their new AM2 processors. With virtualization, multiple operating systems can be run “virtually” from a single machine. This technology is particularly important in the server space, where one machine could host Windows, Linux, and Novell to run as a web server, database server, domain controller, etc all from one box, all running on different operating systems. Each virtual server would be completely independent and secured from the others.
New processors
In addition to converting much of their existing lineup to Socket AM2, AMD’s also introducing two brand new processors that will be exclusive to AM2: the Athlon 64 X2 5000+ and the Athlon 64 FX-62.
The Athlon 64 FX-62 fuses the clock speed of the Athlon 64 FX-57 with the dual-core heritage of the Athlon 64 FX-60. Clocked at 2.8GHz, the Athlon 64 FX-62 is AMD’s fastest dual-core desktop processor yet, essentially giving you two FX-57 processors on one die.
Like previous FX processors, the FX-62 contains 2MB of L2 cache total (1MB cache per core) with 256KB total L1 cache (64K - L1 instruction + 64K - L1 data cache per core). The chip sports a 230mm2 die size and contains 227.4 million transistors. Despite the higher clock speed, max power is the same as FX-60 at 125W.
The Athlon 64 X2 5000+ runs at 2.6GHz and ships with 1MB of L2 cache total (512KB per core). With less cache onboard, the 5000+ measures just 183mm2 with 153.8 million transistors. Max thermal power peaks at 89W, which is the same power figure as a single-core Athlon 64 processor from a year ago.
| Pricing and the future | Page:: ( 4 / 13 ) |
So now that you’ve read all about AMD’s new AM2 processors, how much does one cost? The following chart summarizes AMD’s latest bulk processor pricing:
| AM2 CPU Pricing | |
| FX-62 | $1,031 |
| X2 5000+ | $696 |
| X2 4800+ | $645 |
| X2 4600+ | $558 |
| X2 4400+ | $470 |
| X2 4200+ | $365 |
| X2 4000+ | $328 |
| X2 3800+ | $303 |
| Athlon 64 3800+ | $290 |
| Athlon 64 3500+ | $189 |
| Sempron 3600+ | $123 |
| Sempron 3500+ | $109 |
| Sempron 3400+ | $97 |
| Sempron 3200+ | $87 |
| Sempron 3000+ | $77 |
| |
And the energy efficient models:
| AMD AM2 Energy Efficient CPU Pricing | |
| 65 Watts: | |
| X2 4800+ | $671 |
| X2 4600+ | $601 |
| X2 4400+ | $514 |
| X2 4200+ | $417 |
| X2 4000+ | $353 |
| X2 3800+ | $323 |
| 35 Watts: | |
| X2 3800+ | $364 |
| Athlon 64 3500+ | $231 |
| Sempron 3400+ | $145 |
| Sempron 3200+ | $119 |
| Sempron 3000+ | $101 |
| |
The future
If history is any indication, don’t expect AMD to add much to their existing core architecture in the way of added performance with the move to the new process, at least at first. AMD tends to prefer getting the process nailed down before adding any new goodies (such as more L2 cache), which can get pretty costly if you find yourself with poor yields.
Looking further out, AMD acknowledged that they’re hard at work on a mid-life extension of sorts for the K8 family, codenamed K8L. Speaking at the Spring Microprocessor Forum, AMD divulged quite a few details on this new chip, not only will it have improved HyperTransport, quad core support, and a new L3 cache, K8L will also boast enhanced SSE and floating-point performance and eventually support DDR3 memory.
But 65-nm and K8L may not be the only items on AMD’s immediate roadmap however. In fact, we’ve heard pretty solid rumors that AMD’s got something else planned to help contend against Intel’s upcoming Conroe processors, now known as the Core 2 line. If these rumors are true, the CPU market could be gearing up for a war the likes of which we haven’t seen in quite some time.
So what does the future hold for Socket 939? AMD states that they plan to continue to support the socket as long as market demand warrants it. Don’t expect AMD to release a Socket 939 X2 5200+ or FX-64 anytime soon, in all likelihood 939 CPUs will likely be largely out of AMD’s production mix by this time next year. The Athlon 64 4000+ was just recently axed, and the 3200+ will most likely join it after the next round of price cuts.
| System Setup | Page:: ( 5 / 13 ) |
System Setup
AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 (2.8 GHz)
AMD Athlon 64 FX-60 (2.6 GHz)
AMD Athlon 64 FX-57 (2.8 GHz)
AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+ (2.6GHz)
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (2.4 GHz)
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ (2.2 GHz)
AMD Athlon 64 3500+ (2.2 GHz)
Intel Pentium Extreme Edition 840 (3.2 GHz)
ASUS A8N32-SLI Deluxe Motherboard
ASUS M2N32-SLI Deluxe Motherboard
1GB OCZ Technology DDR-400 CAS 2 Memory (2x1GB)
1GB Corsair TWIN2X2048-6400C4 (2x1GB)
NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GTX with ForceWare 91.27
Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 1
DirectX 9.0c
Benchmarks
Windows Media Encoder 9
3DMark06
F.E.A.R. 1.04
Pacific Fighters 4.04
Quake 4 1.2
Oblivion
SiSoft Sandra 2007
Notes
Unlike previous tests where we’ve mixed low resolution and high-res tests, for today’s article we’re running our 1600x1200 testing with a pair of GeForce 7900 GTX cards running together for SLI. As you’ll see in today’s results, even at resolutions as high as 16x12, two GeForce 7900 GTX cards are still CPU-bound. We disabled all of NVIDIA’s performance options (such as LinkBoost and GPU overclocking) in the ASUS M2N32’s BIOS, as well as ASUS’ own dynamic clock speed adjustment tool and ASUS PEG Link.
| Media encoding and rendering | Page:: ( 6 / 13 ) |
Microsoft Windows Media Encoder 9
Cinebench 9.5
Notes
AMD’s dual-core processors have always shined in our media encoding benchmarks, so it’s no surprise to see the X2 5000+ and FX-62 perform so well in WME9 testing. Interestingly enough, the AM2 X2 4800+ encoded our 1080p clip of the Magic of Flight two seconds quicker than the DDR system. The dual-core processors also perform well in our rendering test, which uses Cinebench 9.5 (in place of 2003 which was used previously).
| 3DMark 06 | Page:: ( 7 / 13 ) |
Futuremark 3DMark05
Notes
FutureMark has added support for multi-threading into 3DMark 06, and the results definitely speak for themselves as the dual-core processors have a profound advantage in this benchmark.
| F.E.A.R. | Page:: ( 8 / 13 ) |
F.E.A.R.
Notes
With its 2.8GHz clock speed, the FX-62 is finally able to overtake the previous CPU champion when it came to F.E.A.R. performance, AMD’s FX-57 CPU. In fact, the FX-62 PC ran F.E.A.R. up to 3% faster than the FX-57 system.
| Quake 4 | Page:: ( 9 / 13 ) |
Quake 4
Notes
We’re taking advantage of the latest patch for Quake 4, which adds official support for multi-threading, and the performance impact is definitely profound, with the so-called gaming CPU, the FX-57 holding down next to last place next to all these dual-core processors. We’re running network demos for this article, but that still doesn’t hold back the GeForce 7900 GTX SLI system from being CPU-bound at 1600x1200. When we saw the FX-62 scores we actually went back to check and make sure that LinkBoost and all the other performance-enhancing features ASUS and NVIDIA have integrated into the nForce 590 SLI’s BIOS was turned off. Sure enough, they were. We’re still a little shocked at the performance showing of the FX-62 in this benchmark.
| Pacific Fighters | Page:: ( 10 / 13 ) |
Pacific Fighters
| Oblivion | Page:: ( 11 / 13 ) |
Oblivion
| SiSoft Sandra 2007 | Page:: ( 12 / 13 ) |
| Conclusion | Page:: ( 13 / 13 ) |
For starters, AMD’s significantly reduced AM2’s power consumption. Max power goes down from 110W in Socket 939 Athlon 64 X2 to just 89 watts for AM2. That’s a pretty remarkable swing, especially when you consider that AM2 CPUs are built on the same 90-nm manufacturing process as their 939-pin predecessors. It just goes to show you that AMD’s made some pretty significant enhancements to their 90-nm process over the course of the past year.
What does this mean in terms of real-world usage? Well most importantly, lower power means that AM2 processors generate less heat. This in turn means that the CPU’s fan generates less noise, as it doesn’t have to crank up to high RPMs in order to combat excessive heat. The end result is a quieter, more energy efficient system. The Athlon 64 X2 5000+/GeForce 7900 GTX setup was one of, if not the quietest 1-2 punch that we can recall in some time (Editor’s Note: For stock cooling that is).
Typically the words “energy efficient” and “performance” were diametrically opposed to each other: you couldn’t have one without the other suffering. But the performance results we just saw with AMD’s Athlon 64 X2 5000+, AM2-based X2 4800+ and the FX-62 clearly showed otherwise: these processors were consistently the top performers, with the FX-62 in particular running faster than any other processor tested. Meanwhile, DDR2’s additional bandwidth ensures that AM2 has headroom for the future.
And while we haven’t had a lot of time to play with overclocking, we have a feeling that hardware enthusiasts are going to love poking and prodding these new parts. We hit 3.02GHz and 3.12GHz with the 5000 and FX-62 respectively on AMD’s bone stock air coolers and stock thermal paste, we’ve got an AM2-ready Zalman CNPS9500 that we’re eager to try out. Perhaps with a little bit more work we could soon be pushing 3.2GHz with the FX-62!
The one dark cloud ominously hanging over AMD’s AM2 launch today is Intel’s Core 2 “Conroe” processor. Intel has not so subtly made some pretty bold claims when it comes to Conroe’s performance. If Intel is able to hit these numbers, the FX-62 and 5000+ could be hard-pressed to keep up, but the question is how much will Conroe cost when it’s released, and what kind of availability will Intel be able to deliver? No one knows the answer to those questions right now.
In the meantime, AMD’s new AM2 processors are here now, and they’re wickedly powerful. The only real downside to AM2 is something that’s dogged AMD’s Athlon 64 X2 since its launch over a year ago: the price of admission for dual-core. The X2 3800+ is priced at $303. We think AMD would see killer demand if they were to produce a $250 X2 3500+ part. It’s a good thing AMD’s producing Athlon 64 and Sempron AM2 CPUs…