AT News Update: Athlon 64 name revisions
by Kristopher Kubicki on March 3, 2004 6:00 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Hopefully you got a chance to check out our roadmap updates over the last several months; particularly our AMD 2004 roadmap forecast. It is not unusual for supplements for these roadmaps to show up several months later, particularly with product naming. Below you can see that we have updated our Socket 939 Roadmap as AMD has changed the names of two of its upcoming processors.
| Socket-939 Roadmap for 2004 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock Speed | Cache Size | Release Date | |
| AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 | 2.6GHz |
1MB |
??? |
| AMD Athlon 64 FX-53 | 2.4GHz |
1MB |
May '04 |
| AMD Athlon 64 4200+ | 2.6GHz |
??? |
H1 '05 |
| AMD Athlon 64 4000+ | 2.4GHz |
1MB |
Q4 '04 |
| AMD Athlon 64 3800+ | 2.4GHz |
512KB |
May '04 |
| AMD Athlon 64 3500+ | 2.2GHz |
512KB |
May '04 |
Correction: There was a Typo in our original roadmap. The Socket 939 FX-55 does not have a release date yet. FX-53 for Socket 940 has a release date planned for March, and FX-53 for Socket 939 has a release date planned for May.
According to the roadmaps, the Athlon 64 3700+ on Socket 939 has been renamed to Athlon 64 3800+. Athlon 64 3400+ has been renamed to Athlon 64 3500+. Notice these changes are effective on the Socket 939 platform only. "The innuendo is that equivalently clocked Athlon 64s will perform better on Socket 939".
| Socket-754 Roadmap for 2004 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock Speed | Cache Size | Release Date | |
| AMD Athlon 64 3700+ | 2.4GHz |
1MB |
Apr '04 |
| AMD Athlon 64 3400+ | 2.2GHz |
1MB |
Already Available
|
| AMD Athlon 64 3200+ | 2.0GHz |
1MB |
Already Available |
| AMD Athlon 64 3000+ | 2.0GHz |
512KB |
Already Available |
| AMD Athlon 64 2800+ | 1.8GHz |
512KB |
Q1 '04 |
| AMD Athlon XP 3200+ | TBD |
256KB |
Q1 '05 |
| AMD Athlon XP 3000+ | TBD |
256KB |
Q4 '04 |
| AMD Athlon XP 2800+ | TBD |
256KB |
Q3 '04 |
However, the updated roadmap has a few surprises in store for Socket 754 as well. First of all, there has been the addition of Athlon XP 3200+ for socket 754. Athlon 64 2800+ will begin showing up very soon as the roadmap simply states Q1 for the release date. Since AMD has planned more Socket 754 processors (albeit budget oriented) the architecture is beginning to look much more forward looking than many originally expected. As we pointed out in the previous roadmap, the Athlon XP chips on the Socket 754 interface have a reduced cache and only run in 32-bit mode.
Of course the largest issue here is why the changes in the Socket 939 processors were made. It seems plausible that a new instruction set addition or optimization may give the Newcastle processors better performance than originally anticipated. Or perhaps the real answer is more mundane; AMD may have just renamed the processors to avoid confusion between Socket 939 and Socket 754.
Regrettably even though we know SSE3 instructions are set to start showing
up on Athlon 64, AMD officials could not confirm upcoming release schedules
for the technology.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
12 Comments
View All Comments
ripdude - Friday, March 5, 2004 - link
Does anyone have an idea when the 939's mobo/cpu's will be available in europe?I'm considering to wait for the 939's for my upgrade, running a duron 1,2 gets on your nerves after a few years.
KristopherKubicki - Thursday, March 4, 2004 - link
Trogdor: There was a typo which we updated. Thanks for pointing this out.Kristopher
ybee - Thursday, March 4, 2004 - link
Can anyone explain how the 90nm process fits in?If Athlon FX-55 is launched as a 130nm part will it be later replaced by a 90nm part in Sep-Nov or will the FX line be simply discontinued?
Also, will Athlon 64 4000+ be a 90 nm part or still a 130nm part? Which other athlon 64s will be moved to 90nm and when?
I am totally confused by all this roadmappery.
Pumpkinierre - Thursday, March 4, 2004 - link
And you (AT) told us emphatically that the A64 3000+ was an early release of the Newcastle. So what are these 512k Sckt939 A64s called?klah - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
"Strange... I see FX-53 and FX-55 both launching in May '04."Maybe they changed it... now it has FX53-March, FX55-May.
TrogdorJW - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
Strange... I see FX-53 and FX-55 both launching in May '04. I thought the AMD interview you did recently had them stating that there would only ever be one FX class CPU in circulation at any given time, and that when a new version came out, they would discontinue the old one. Apparently, they had second thoughts. No real surprise there, since that will allow old inventories to clear much nicer.As for the renaming, while it makes it clear what you're getting (a 3400+ is a S754 chip and a 3500+ is a S939 chip), I find the halved L2 cache plus dual-channel RAM to be a questionable upgrade to S754. Then again, I've never like AMD's PR ratings. Bah! I suppose they really couldn't release 1 MB L2 cache on S939 without totally marginalizing the FX CPUs.
Finally, I'm still curious what the real performance of the "new" Athlon XP 3200+ chips will be. Sure, they only have half the L2 cache of the Barton core, but Barton didn't benefit from the doubled L2 cache nearly as much as Northwood. The on-die memory controller will probably make the new XP chips at least as fast as the old XP chips, I would imagine. Too bad there doesn't seem to be an option for the XP 256K chips on S939, as the dual-channel would probably help them overcome the lack of L2 cache even more. Hopefully, though, with the new XP chips we'll have faster clock speeds than the current XP chips. I think the 3200+ really needs 2.4 GHz to match the P4 3.2 GHz.
UlricT - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
how bout if only the S-939 versions get the new stuff like SSE3 quoted here:http://www.techreport.com/onearticle.x/6363
That should validate the rating increase!
tombman - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
And what´s up with Socket 940 FX-53? Is it dead?Ecmaster76 - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
"The innuendo is that lower clocked Athlon 64s will whip up on Socket T".oops, I misquoted.
KristopherKubicki - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
Yeah :) Fixed.