home

AMD Phenom II processor: characteristics, description, reviews. Twice two: AMD Phenom II X2 and Athlon II X2 processors Selection of opponents for testing

In this article we will talk about choosing the optimal video card for AMD AM3 and FM1 processors:

Phenom X6 1035T, 1045T, 1055T, 1065T, 1075T, 1090T, 1100T
Phenom X4 910, 920, 925, 940, 945, 955, 960T, 965, 970, 975, 980
Athlon II X4 620, 630, 635, 640, 645, 655
Athlon II X4 631, 641, 638, 651, 651K

Due to the unstable economic situation, many PC users do not want or do not have the opportunity to change the platform, “sitting” on the old one for as long as possible. Therefore, many people face the question of choosing the optimal combination of an old multi-core CPU and a more or less modern video card. We will try to select the most comparable solutions from those available on the market.

Video card for AMD Phenom X6 1035T, 1045T, 1055T, 1065T, 1075T, 1090T, 1100T and AMD Phenom X4 910, 920, 925, 940, 945, 955, 960T, 965, 970, 975, 980

These processors are close in performance to solutions from the AMD FX-4000 and FX-6000 lines. Consequently, older four- and six-core models when overclocked will be able to work in tandem with video cards of the levelAMD Radeon R7 370/RX 460 And NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti. We recommend using the younger ones together with solutions of the levelAMD Radeon R7 360 And NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750.

Video card for AMD Athlon II X4 620, 630, 635, 640, 645, 655, 631, 641, 638, 651, 651K

We recommend using the more productive solutions listed above in conjunction with video adapters of the level AMD Radeon R7 360 And NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750. As for models with low frequencies, somewhat outdated ones are best suited to them. AMD Radeon R7 250/R7 250X And NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 / GT 740.

Today, AMD is known throughout the world as a supplier of technologically advanced, high-performance, but at the same time affordable processors for various types of personal computers. In Russia, the AMD Phenom II line of chips, which are produced by this brand, is currently very popular.

The modification of X4 processors, which belong to the corresponding line, has also become more widespread. These chips can be characterized as universal high-speed devices, optimally suited for overclocking. What are their main technical characteristics? What do modern IT specialists think about the effectiveness of Phenom II chips in the X4 modification?

general information

Processors of the AMD Phenom II family are built on the basis of a high-tech K10 microarchitecture. In the corresponding chip line, there are solutions that are equipped with a number of cores from 2 to 6. X4 chips, which belong to the family in question, also belong to the Dragon platform developed by AMD. Chips with 6 cores each belong to the Leo platform. AMD produces Phenom II chips in several modifications: Thuban, Deneb, Zosma, Heka and Callisto.

All these microcircuits are united by one technological process - 45 nm. There can be significant differences between them. Since Thurban modification processors have 6 cores and 904 million transistors, on chips of this level the size of the third level cache is 64 GB. The same volume is reserved for instructions. The volume of the second level cache is 512 KB, and the volume of the third level cache is 6 MB. The processors support work with DDR3 and DDR2 RAM modules.

The power consumption value ranges from 95 to 125 W. Processors that belong to this proprietary line can operate at frequencies from 2.6 to 3.3 GHz when using the Turbo Core option - 3.7 GHz. In the Zosma modification, AMD Phenom chips have 4 cores. They have the same cache memory performance as Thuban processors. The situation is also the same with support for RAM modules. As for the level of power consumption of the device, the Zosma line contains chips that can operate at 65 W.

There are also those that consume power of 140 W. In this modification, the processors operate at a frequency of 3.3 GHz in Turbo Core mode. They can accelerate up to 3.4 GHz. The Deneb line of chips also has 4 cores. These processors have 758 million transistors. The area is 258 square millimeters. The cache memory parameters in this case are the same as in the modifications discussed above. The same can be said about the level of support for major technologies and memory modules.

Processors that belong to the Deneb modification support operation at frequencies from 2.4 to 3.7 GHz. The characteristics of the Heka line chips are almost similar to the Deneb chips. The only difference is that they have 3 cores. Technically speaking, they are Deneb processors with one core disabled. It is also worth noting that the frequencies supported by Heka chips range from 2.5 to 3 GHz. In addition, among the processors in this line there are no modifications whose power consumption level exceeds 95 W.

Another modification of Phenom II chips is Callisto. The chips that belong to this modification are virtually identical to Deneb processors, only they run on two cores. Thus, they are Deneb chips with 2 cores disabled. Processors in this line operate in the frequency range from 3 to 3.4 GHz. The power consumption is 80 W. The most common types of Phenom II processors in Russia include representatives of the Deneb line. Chips that belong to this technological series are produced in the following modifications: X4 940, X4 965, X4 945, X4 955. The X4 line also includes a flagship model - X4 980. Next, we will take a closer look at the features of these modifications of chips.

X4 940 processor: technical specifications

The first processor that we will consider is the X4 940. This chip has the following technical characteristics: the processor frequency is 3 GHz using a multiplier of 15 units, the chip has 4 cores, and is manufactured within the 45 nm process technology. The volume of cache memory of the 1st level is 128 KB, the second level is 2 MB, the third level is 6 MB. The set of instructions supported by the chip includes MMX, SSE 3DNow! The X4 940 processor is compatible with AMD 64/EM65T and NX Bit technologies. The maximum temperature of the X4 940 chip is 62 degrees. The chip supports AM2+ socket type. It can be noted that the X4 945 processor has almost the same characteristics. The only difference is that the X4 945 can work with socket AM3.

X4 955 chip: characteristics and capabilities

Let's look at the specifics of the AMD Phenom II X4 955 chip. This chip has the following technical characteristics: in the modification under consideration, the processor operates at a frequency of 3.2 MHz using a multiplier of 16. There is also a built-in memory controller with a bandwidth of 21 Gbit/s.

The cache memory size of the processor is practically no different from that of the models discussed above. In terms of support for computing and multimedia technologies, the chip has the same characteristics as younger processors. The maximum operating temperature of the microcircuit is 62 degrees. The most significant advantages of the X4 955 include compatibility with DDR3 RAM modules.

What practical capabilities does this chip have? It is worth paying attention to the results of some tests of this processor. It is worth noting that such results were achieved using the device in combination with the ASUS M4A79T motherboard, which supports AM3 sockets, and 4 GB of DDR3 RAM.

Tests conducted by IT experts show that, in combination with DDR3 memory modules, the AMD Phenom II processor is noticeably ahead of similar chips installed in computers equipped with DDR2 RAM. Therefore, in practice, a significant factor in the use of this chip is its addition to other technologically advanced and high-performance hardware components.

X4 955: overclocking

Let's look at another important aspect of using the X4 955 processor, namely overclocking. Experienced IT experts advise overclocking using the multifunctional Overdrive 3.0 utility. You can, of course, overclock through the BIOS, but using the marked version of the program allows you to solve the problem without the need to restart your personal computer. The most notable functions of this utility include the BEMP function.

Its use makes it much easier to configure the processor in overclocking mode. This function involves establishing a connection between the Overdrive program and a database, which contains lists of optimal values for frequencies and other options that are necessary to speed up the operation of the chip. Also very useful is the Smart Profiles option, which is available in the Overdrive program. Using this option, the user has the opportunity to fine-tune the chip overclocking process.

The Overdrive program makes it possible to adapt the overclocking of the AMD Phenom II X4 processor to the applications running on the computer. For example, if a program operates in single-threaded mode, then using the appropriate software the user can reduce the frequencies of 3 out of 4 cores so that the speed limits of the fourth core increase. At the same time, the operating temperature of the device will remain optimal.

AMD Phenom II X4 955: comparison with competitors

How competitive is the version of the AMD Phenom II X4 processor we are considering? A review comparing this chip with analogues will most likely not be detailed enough. However, we can examine the results of tests of the chip, which were carried out by specialists in the field of IT technology. The closest competitor to the model we are considering is the Intel Core 2 Quad Q 9550. Tests show that in terms of performance, the Intel solution is slightly faster.

However, the difference identified by experts does not play a practical role when launching games and applications. Solutions such as the Intel Core i7, in turn, are noticeably ahead of the AMD Phenom II X4. Moreover, all three microcircuits have comparable market values. It can also be noted that the AMD Phenom II X4 processor is more competitive in multimedia tests than in arithmetic tests. When testing, it is important to measure the performance level of the compared solutions in different modes. This will make it possible to get an objective idea of the capabilities of the microcircuit.

AMD Phenom II X4965: technical specifications and capabilities

This chip has the following technical characteristics: the standard processor frequency is 3.4 GHz, the voltage on the chip is 1.4 V. Otherwise, the processor parameters are identical to the younger models in the line. It is worth noting that this chip can be used on two types of sockets – AM2+ and AM3. The memory controller installed in the processor, in turn, is also compatible with two RAM standards - DDR2 and DDR3.

AMD Phenom II X4 965: overclocking

Let's see how successful overclocking the AMD Phenom II X4 965 chip can be. Processors in this line are well adapted to the ability to adjust the voltage level. For example, some advanced solutions from Intel can operate unstably at a voltage of 1.65 V. Chips from AMD function quite stably in such modes. Tests show that overclocking the AMD Phenom II X4 965 chip can reach a frequency of 3.8 GHz.

It is worth noting that approximately the same result was achieved when accelerating the processor in the 955 modification. IT specialists note that, theoretically, the AMD Phenom II X4 965 chip can be accelerated to a frequency of 4 GHz. At the same time, the stability of the computer will be maintained. However, if this indicator is exceeded, the processor may become unstable in some modes. Experts who tested this version of the AMD Phenom II X4 processor claim that overclocking makes it possible not only to capture the advantages of this chip in tests, but also allows you to significantly speed up the computer.

It is worth noting that overclocking the processor in the AMD Phenom II X4 modification is possible not only by conducting experiments with coefficients. Many experts use a technique in which chip acceleration can be achieved by increasing the frequency of the north bridge. It can be increased to an indicator that corresponds to 2.6 GHz.

In this case, the motherboard on which the processor is installed must support the appropriate operating modes of the chip. An extremely important point when overclocking any chip is the appropriate characteristics of the cooling system. If the system copes well with normal operation, this does not mean that it will be able to ensure stable operation of the chip during overclocking. Therefore, it may be necessary to install a higher RPM cooling system.

When conducting experiments with overclocking chips, it will be useful to have programs on hand that allow you to monitor the processor temperature in real time. At some point, even the most efficient chip cooling system may not work stably. In this case, it is important for the user not to miss such moments and detect overheating in time. Work related to increasing processor frequencies must be carried out systematically, avoiding sudden changes in the relevant parameters. If the chip operates flawlessly at a given frequency with acceptable heating, then you can slightly increase the frequency. This can be done until the maximum performance is reached, at which the chip still operates stably.

AMD Phenom II X4 980: flagship model

The closest attention, perhaps, should be paid to the flagship model of the line. Its BE modification is quite popular. Its advantage is that it has an unlocked coefficient and therefore has become popular among overclocking enthusiasts. The key capabilities of this processor are, in principle, the same as those of the AMD Phenom II X4 945. In terms of supported standards and cache memory, the characteristics remain the same as those of the younger models in the line. At the same time, the chip has a fairly high level of power consumption - 125 W. However, for a high level of processor frequency this indicator can be considered optimal.

AMD Phenom II X4 980: testing

Testing of the AMD Phenom II X4 980 chip showed that its performance is quite consistent with that of the leading models of the Intel brand, which are based on the Sandy Bridge microarchitecture. In addition, in some tests, for example multimedia, the chip even outperforms more powerful analogues such as the Intel Core i5-2500. If we talk about effective tools for measuring the speed of chips, then you should definitely pay attention to the Everest program.

This program is a whole collection of synthetic tests. These include CPU Photoworx, CPU Queen, CPU Zlib. These tests make it possible to comprehensively evaluate the performance of microcircuits. It is also noteworthy that the benchmarks included in the Everest program are perfectly suited to testing operating speed while simultaneously using several computing threads. This means that during tests the processor cores can be fully loaded.

The more of them there are, the higher the actual processor performance turns out to be. Experts consider chip performance when performing floating point operations to be an important indicator. The AMD solution is confidently ahead of competing processors from Intel in the relevant tests.

Another notable tool that can be used to measure chip speed is PC Mark. Its characteristic feature is a comprehensive study of the capabilities of the chip. The testing modes in this program are as close as possible to real conditions. So, for example, this program makes it possible to test the processor by activating web browsing or converting one type of file to another.

Testing the AMD Phenom II X4 chip in this modification demonstrates simply excellent results.
Another popular test among IT specialists is 3D Mark. It makes it possible to evaluate the capabilities of processors in a mode that corresponds to the loads in 3D games. Experts note that the AMD Phenom II X4 980 is the absolute leader in its price segment according to 3D Mark tests. In addition, the superiority of this processor over some Thuban chips, which are equipped with 6 cores, was recorded. There are no stability problems when working in major screen resolutions.

If we talk about frame playback speed, then in some modes the AMD Phenom II X4 980 turns out to be preferable to AMD processors. In addition, in real gameplay, the difference in processing speed between solutions from AMD and Intel, which is observed during testing, will most likely be unnoticeable.

Conclusion

In this review, we looked at the characteristics of the AMD Phenom II X4 line. If we are talking about the AMD Phenom II X4 965 model or its younger version 940, then the characteristics of these chips are similar to each other. The main difference between the chips is the frequency, and in some cases, the types of sockets supported. All modifications of this line can be overclocked.

The devices look quite competitive compared to similar solutions from Intel. If we talk about the technological capabilities of the AMD Phenom II X4 line of chips, the supported standards allow us to conclude that AMD has brought to the market truly advanced solutions that look more than competitive against the background of similar solutions from Intel.

AMD is known as a supplier of high-performance, technologically advanced, and at the same time affordable processors for various types of PCs. The AMD Phenom II line of chips produced by this brand has become very popular in Russia and around the world. In turn, the modification of X4 processors belonging to the corresponding line has become more widespread. These chips are characterized as high-speed, universal and, moreover, optimally suitable for overclocking. What are their main characteristics? What do modern IT specialists say about the efficiency of Phenom II chips in the X4 modification?

General information about the line of microcircuits

The processors of the AMD Phenom II family are based on the high-tech K10 microarchitecture. The corresponding chip line contains solutions equipped with a number of cores from 2 to 6. X4 chips belonging to the family in question also belong to the Dragon platform developed by AMD. Those chips that have 6 cores belong to the Leo platform.

AMD produces AMD Phenom II chips in several proprietary modifications: Thuban, Zosma, Deneb, Heka, and Callisto. All of them are united by a technological process of 45 nm. But the differences between them can be quite significant.

Thus, processors in the Thuban modification are equipped with 6 cores and 904 million transistors, and have an area of 346 square meters. mm. The size of the third level cache on chips of this type is 64 GB, the same amount is reserved for instructions. The second level cache is 512 KB, the third is 6 MB. The processors are compatible with DDR2 and DDR3 RAM modules. The power consumption of the chips is in the range between 95 and 125 W. Processors belonging to this proprietary line can operate at frequencies from 2.6 to 3.3 GHz, with the Turbo Core option enabled - up to 3.7 GHz.

AMD Phenom II chips in the Zosma modification have 4 cores. The cache memory indicators in them are the same as in Thuban processors. The situation is similar with support for RAM modules. Regarding power consumption, within the Zosma line there are chips that operate at 65 W, but there are also those that consume power of 140 W. Processors in this modification operate at a frequency of 3 GHz; in Turbo Core mode they can be accelerated to 3.4 GHz.

Deneb line chips also have 4 cores. They are equipped with 758 million transistors and have an area of 258 square meters. mm. The cache memory indicators are the same as in the chip modifications discussed above. The same can be said about the level of support for memory modules and core technologies. Processors belonging to the Deneb modification can operate at frequencies from 2.4 to 3.7 GHz.

Chips within the Heka line of chips actually correspond in basic characteristics to Deneb chips, but they only have 3 cores. From a technological point of view, they are Deneb processors with 1 core disabled. It can also be noted that the frequencies supported by Heka chips are in the range from 2.5 to 3 GHz. In addition, among the processors in this line there are no ones that have a consumption higher than 95 W.

Another modification of AMD Phenom II chips is Callisto. In turn, the chips that belong to it are also virtually identical to Deneb processors, but run on 2 cores. That is, they are Deneb chips with 2 cores disabled. Processors in this line operate at frequencies from 3 to 3.4 GHz and consume 80 W of power.

Among the most common types of Phenom II processors in Russia are those belonging to the Deneb line.

AMD Phenom II chips belonging to this technological series are available in the following popular modifications: X4 940, X4 945, X4 955, X4 965. There is also a flagship model of the X4 line - the X4 980 processor. Let's take a closer look at the features of these chips.

X4 940

The first processor we will study is the AMD Phenom II X4 940. The characteristics of this chip are as follows.

The processor in the X4 940 modification operates at a frequency of 3 GHz using a multiplication factor of 15 units. The chip is equipped with 4 cores. The technical process within which the microcircuit is made is 45 nm. The level 1 cache of the AMD Phenom II processor is 128 KB, the second level is 2 MB, and the third level is 6 MB. Instruction set supported by the chip: MMX, SSE in version 2, 3 and 4, 3DNow! The processor is compatible with technologies such as AMD64/EM65T as well as NX Bit. The maximum operating temperature of the AMD Phenom II chip is 62 degrees. The socket type supported by the chip is AM2+.

It can be noted that the AMD Phenom II X4 945 processor has almost the same characteristics. The only difference is that the X4 945 chip can run on

Characteristics and capabilities of the chip in the X4 955 version

Let us now study the specifics of the AMD Phenom II X4 955 chip. The characteristics of this chip are as follows.

The processor in the modification under consideration operates at a frequency of 3.2 MHz with a multiplication factor of 16. It has a built-in memory controller - its bandwidth is 21 Gbit/s. The volume is no different from that of the models we reviewed above, in particular, the AMD Phenom II X4 945. The characteristics of the chip in terms of supporting basic multimedia and computing technologies are the same as those of younger processors. The maximum operating temperature of the microcircuit is also 62 degrees. Among the most significant advantages of the AMD Phenom II processor in the X4 955 modification is compatibility with DDR3 RAM modules.

What are the practical capabilities of the chip? You can pay attention to the results of some tests of this processor. Note that these were achieved provided that the chip was used in combination with such components as:

Motherboard type supporting AM3 sockets;

4 GB RAM in DDR3 modification.

As tests conducted by IT experts show, the AMD Phenom II processor in combination with DDR3 memory modules is noticeably ahead of chips with similar characteristics that are installed in PCs equipped with DDR2 RAM. Therefore, a significant factor in using the capabilities of a microcircuit in practice is its addition to other high-performance and technologically advanced hardware components.

Overclocking X4 955

Let's consider another aspect of using the AMD Phenom II X4 955 processor - overclocking. Experienced IT experts recommend using the multifunctional Overdrive utility in version 3.0 to implement it.

Of course, you can overclock through the BIOS, but using the marked program allows you to solve the tasks without rebooting the PC. Among the most notable functions of the utility is BEMP. Its use makes it much easier to configure the processor in overclocking mode. This function involves establishing a connection between the Overdrive program and an online database, which contains lists of optimal values for clock frequencies and other options necessary to speed up the operation of the chip. The Smart Profiles option, which is available in the Overdrive program, is also very useful. With its help, the user can fine-tune the chip overclocking process.

The Overdrive program's capabilities also allow you to adapt the Phenom II X4 to various applications running on your computer. So, for example, if any program operates in single-threaded mode, then the user can, using the appropriate software, reduce the frequencies of 3 of the 4 cores of the chip so that the 4th has increased speed limits while maintaining the optimal operating temperature.

Comparison of X4 955 with competitors

How competitive is this version of the Phenom II X4? The review we are conducting in terms of comparing the capabilities of the chip with analogues may not be sufficiently detailed, but, again, we can examine the results of comparative tests of the chip conducted by IT specialists. The closest competitor to the processor in question is the Intel Core 2 in the Quad Q 9550 modification.

As chip performance tests show, the Intel solution is faster than the AMD chip, but not by much. The difference identified by experts most likely will not be of practical significance when launching games and applications. In turn, solutions such as the Intel Core i7 version 920 are noticeably ahead of both the AMD solution and the Q9550 processor. Moreover, all 3 microcircuits have generally comparable market values. It can be noted that in multimedia tests the AMD Phenom II processor in the modification under consideration is significantly more competitive than in arithmetic tests. Thus, when testing, it is important to measure the performance of the compared solutions in different modes - in order to have a more objective idea of the capabilities of the chips.

Characteristics and capabilities of the chip in the X4 965 version

Let us now study the capabilities of the AMD Phenom II X4 965 chip. The characteristics of this chip are as follows.

The standard processor frequency is 3.4 GHz. The voltage on the chip is 1.4 V. Other processor parameters are generally identical to the younger models of the X4 line. It can be noted that the chip can be used on 2 types of sockets - AM3 and AM2+. The memory controller, which is installed in the processor, is compatible, in turn, with 2 RAM standards - DDR2 and DD3.

Overclocking the X4 965 chip

Let's study how successful overclocking the AMD Phenom II X4 965 can be. It can be noted that the processors of the line in question are well adapted to adjusting the voltage level. So, for example, if some of the advanced solutions from Intel can work unstable at 1.65 V and higher, then AMD chips operate completely stably in such modes.

As tests of the AMD Phenom II X4 show, overclocking the chip in this modification allows us to reach a frequency of 3.8 GHz. By the way, approximately the same result can be achieved by accelerating the processor in the X4 955 modification. As IT specialists note, it is theoretically possible to accelerate the X4 965 chip to a frequency of 4 GHz, at which the stability of the computer is maintained. But if this indicator is exceeded, the processor may operate unstable in some modes. According to experts who tested the version of AMD Phenom II in question, overclocking this chip allows not only to capture the advantages of the chip in tests, but also to achieve significant acceleration of PC operation in practice.

It can be noted that overclocking a processor in the X4 965 modification is possible not only through experiments with the main coefficients. Experienced IT specialists also use a technique according to which chip acceleration is achieved by increasing the frequency of the north bridge. This can be increased to a value corresponding to 2.6 GHz. It is important that the motherboard on which the processor is installed supports the required operating modes of the microcircuit.

An extremely important aspect of overclocking any chip, including the AMD Phenom II, is the characteristics of the cooling system. One that does a good job when the processor is running in normal mode may not be able to ensure stable operation of the chip, and therefore the entire PC as a whole. Therefore, it may be necessary to install a cooling system with higher speeds.

When experimenting with overclocking chips, it is also useful to have programs that allow you to monitor the temperature of the processor in real time. Even the most efficient chip cooling system can be unstable at some moments - it is important for the user not to miss such moments and detect chip overheating in a timely manner.

Work that is directly related to increasing processor frequencies should be carried out systematically, avoiding sudden changes in the values of the relevant parameters. If the chip operates without errors and with acceptable heating at a given frequency, you can increase it slightly, and so on until the maximum performance of the chip is reached, operating stably.

Flagship model - X4 980

Perhaps the closest attention should be paid to the flagship model of the X4 line - the AMD Phenom II X4 980 processor. Its BE modification is very popular, which has an unlocked coefficient and therefore has become especially attractive for fans of overclocking chips.

In principle, the key technological capabilities of this processor coincide with those of, for example, the AMD Phenom II X4 945. The characteristics of the chip in terms of cache memory and supported standards are generally the same as those of the younger models of the X4 line. The chip, however, has a fairly high level of power consumption - 125 W. But for a high level of processor frequency - 3.7 GHz - this indicator is considered quite optimal.

The flagship of the Phenom II X4 line: testing

Testing of the chip in question shows that its performance is quite consistent with that of the leading models of the competing brand - Intel, made, in particular, based on the Sandy Bridge microarchitecture. Moreover, in some tests, for example in multimedia, the chip outperforms some powerful analogues, such as the Intel Core i5-2500. If we talk about effective tools for measuring the speed of chips like the AMD Phenom II X4 980, then you can pay attention to a program such as Everest. This program is a package that contains a large number of synthetic tests. Among them are CPU Queen, CPU Photoworx, CPU Zlib. These tests allow you to evaluate the performance of integrated circuits.

It is very noteworthy that the benchmarks that are part of the Everest program are perfectly suited to testing the speed of processors in the mode of simultaneous use of several threads of calculations. That is, during tests the chip cores can be fully loaded. The more there are, the higher the actual processor performance will be.

IT specialists consider the results of measuring the performance of the X4 980 chip in floating point operations mode to be very indicative. In the relevant tests, the AMD solution, as experts note, is confidently ahead of competing processors from Intel. Another notable tool for measuring chip speed is PC Mark. It is also characterized by complexity in the study of processor capabilities. At the same time, chip testing modes are as close as possible to their actual conditions of practical use. For example, this program can provide testing of processors by activating the mode of browsing web pages, or converting one file type to another.

Testing the capabilities of the AMD Phenom II chip in the modification under consideration shows excellent results. Another popular test among IT experts is 3D Mark. It allows you to evaluate the capabilities of processors in a mode corresponding to the degree of load of 3D games. As experts note, the X4 980 chip is among the absolute leaders in its market segment based on speed testing in the 3D Mark program. Moreover, experts have recorded the superiority of this processor in 3D Mark modes over some Thuban chips, which, as we noted at the beginning of the article, are equipped with 6 cores.

There are no stability issues with the X4 980 chip when running at mainstream screen resolutions. But as for the speed of frame playback, in some modes, AMD solutions, as experts note, still look preferable to AMD processors. However, in real gameplay, the difference in frame processing speed between Intel and AMD chips observed in tests will most likely not be noticeable.

Summary

The first thing worth saying about the Phenom II line we reviewed, be it the X4 965 model or the younger AMD Phenom II X4 940, is that the characteristics of the chips presented in it are very similar. Microcircuits differ mainly in frequency, and in some cases, in the type of socket supported. All modifications of the X4 line of processors lend themselves well to overclocking and look more than competitive against the background of analogues from Intel. As for the technological capabilities of the AMD Phenom II X4 line of chips, the characteristics of the chips and the standards they support allow us to conclude that AMD has brought to the market fully advanced solutions that can be considered among the most advanced in the corresponding chip segment. Processors belonging to the X4 line are equally optimal for both solving ordinary user tasks and running demanding computer games.

IntroductionIf you regularly read the materials published on our website, you have probably noticed that the number of reviews of dual-core processors released over the past year can be counted on one hand. And this fact does not at all mean our ardent commitment to the concept of multi-cores. On the contrary, at every opportunity we never tire of reminding you that at the current stage of development of the software market, processors with two computing cores are quite capable of demonstrating a more than sufficient level of performance. The weakening of attention to the “dual-core” market segment is explained by the fact that its development has almost completely ceased, since the leading manufacturers of x86 processors for desktop computers focus their main efforts on the development and promotion of quad-core models. All the activity associated with dual-core processors for a long time, in fact, consists of either a slight increase in clock speeds of existing product families, or a reduction in their prices.

However, small quantitative changes of this kind eventually yielded a qualitative result, which we were able to discover in the recently published article “”. As it turned out, AMD's dual-core offerings have ceased to be serious competitors to Intel Core 2 Duo processors, contenting themselves only with competing with inexpensive Intel Celeron models. Our testing has shown that even the relatively new Athlon X2 7000 series cannot be considered as a worthy alternative to at least Pentium processors based on the Wolfdale-2M core, not to mention the more “serious” offerings from Intel.

However, the renaissance AMD is currently experiencing, associated with the emergence and distribution of new cores produced using the 45-nm process, makes certain adjustments to this gloomy picture. So, in fact, the three-core Phenom II X3 700 processors turned out to be quite competitive, which, with certain assumptions, can be considered as some kind of alternative to Intel's Core 2 Duo. However, undoubtedly, for AMD to have a full presence in the middle part of the market, it still lacks normal dual-core processors capable of providing the modern level of performance. AMD specialists also understand this, so the release of updated dual-core processors based on the latest 45-nm cores was one of the company’s main priorities.

And finally, today AMD is closing the gap in the structure of its own offerings by releasing the much-anticipated dual-core processors, whose “official” (that is, manufacturer’s recommended) price ranges from $70 to $120, which is one of the peaks in consumer demand. . Moreover, AMD decided to give its fans an unexpected surprise and prepared two new-generation dual-core families at once: Phenom II X2 and Athlon II X2. The processors of the first family are stripped-down derivatives of the Phenom II processors with a large number of cores, while the Athlon II X2 is in some way an independent product, although similar in microarchitecture and other characteristics to the Phenom II. In this article, we will get acquainted with the processors of both families, compare them with each other, and also see whether we can say that dual-core processors have appeared in the structure of AMD’s offerings, which can somehow change the situation on the market.

AMD Phenom II X2

The entire motley variety of Phenom II processors is a striking example of unification. The Phenom II X2 500 family being considered today is already the fourth version of the CPU, using the same Deneb semiconductor crystal, which was first used in the Phenom II X4 900 processors. Moreover, Phenom II X2 is, at first glance, one of the most irrational application options the original quad-core crystal, because in this case as many as two cores are disconnected. However, on the other hand, the remaining dual-core CPU with a third-level cache is also an amazing example of thrift: thanks to the Phenom II X2, AMD is able to use crystals with multiple defective blocks.

The resulting “cut” was codenamed Callisto. On the Phenom II family tree, it occupies an extreme position: AMD has no plans for even more stripped-down versions of its new quad-core crystal, produced using 45 nm technology.

It is not difficult to guess that due to the use of the same semiconductor crystal, the new Phenom II X2 500 inherited the basic properties from their older brothers. This primarily concerns their compatibility with Socket AM3 motherboards and the ability to use high-speed DDR3 memory. Naturally, as for all other Phenom IIs, the possibility of installing new dual-core processors in Socket AM2/AM2+ of the board is also retained. In other words, the new dual-core Phenom II X2 can be used both to create new systems and to improve old ones.

At the same time, despite the fact that the Phenom II X2 is essentially a by-product for AMD, the company treated the quantitative characteristics of this family quite responsibly. So, along with the fact that these processors have a 6 MB L3 cache (the same size as the representatives of the Phenom II X4 900 family), their clock frequencies are at a fairly high level. The senior Phenom II X2 550 processor operates at a frequency of 3.1 GHz, and this is only 100 MHz less than the frequency of the flagship of the entire Phenom II squadron, the Phenom II X4 955 processor. At the same time, the estimated maximum heat dissipation of the representatives of the Phenom II X2 500 series due to the smaller number active cores turns out to be lower than the calculated heat dissipation of all other tri-core and quad-core Phenom IIs (with the exception of energy-efficient models) - it is 80 W.

In order to form a clear and complete picture of the position of dual-core new products among other processors of the Phenom II set, we have compiled a table with their main characteristics.

For testing, AMD sent us the older model of the new generation dual-core processor, the Phenom II X2 550. Its specific characteristics can be gleaned from the screenshot of the CPU-Z diagnostic program.

The utility, as we see, shows that the code name of our processor is Deneb, which, of course, is not inherently incorrect. But at the same time, it should be borne in mind that AMD itself calls the quad-core crystal used at the heart of the Phenom II X2 550 with two disabled computing cores its own code name Callisto.

Also, from the screenshot you can see that the Phenom II X2 550 processor belongs to the Black Edition class, that is, it has an unfixed multiplier, which means that it can be easily and easily overclocked. Considering the cost of this processor, which, according to official data, should be 102 US dollars, the Phenom II X2 550 may well be a good option for inexpensive overclocking platforms. Moreover, the new AMD processors, based on a 45 nm core, have quite good frequency potential.

The AMD Phenom II X2 550 is not the only processor in the Phenom II X2 500 series launching today. At the same time, AMD is releasing the 3-GHz Phenom II X2 545, which, like its twin brother, will compete with Intel Core 2 Duo E7000 processors. However, before looking at the results of comparative tests, let's take a look at another dual-core product that AMD prepared today.

AMD Athlon II X2

Judging by the characteristics, the Phenom II X2 500 series processors should be a very good offer in the price category of “about $100”. However, the release of such processors is a very expensive pleasure for AMD. The die area of this CPU can be compared to the area of the die used in Intel's flagship Core i7 processors, which means that their production cost for the Phenom II X2 500 is relatively high. From here it is obvious that the Phenom II X2 500 series was born only due to AMD’s desire to put defective quad-core Deneb crystals to good use. Most likely, if it happens, it will be with great reluctance to sacrifice full-fledged quad-core crystals for dual-core AMD processors. Simply put, AMD's ability to bring the Phenom II X2 500 to market is very limited, and these processors are unlikely to fully solve all of the company's problems with mid-price dual-core processors.

Therefore, it is not at all surprising that, simultaneously with the Phenom II X2, AMD is introducing another processor - the Athlon II X2, which, although similar in characteristics, is based on the Regor core, which is much cheaper to produce. The main differences between Regor and Deneb lie on the surface: this semiconductor crystal contains only a couple of computing cores, and in addition, to further reduce area and reduce cost, it is also devoid of third-level cache. Architecturally, the computing cores of the Athlon II X2 do not differ from the computing cores of the Phenom II X2 processors: they use an absolutely identical K10 (Stars) microarchitecture, which does not differ in any details. The only change made by AMD engineers is an increase in the size of the L2 cache belonging to each computing core from 512 KB to 1024 KB, which, obviously, should somehow compensate for the lack of a shared third-level cache in the Regor core.

As a result, the total area of the Regor semiconductor chip is 117.5 sq.mm, which is more than half the area of the Deneb core. And this value roughly corresponds to the area of the cores of dual-core Intel processors belonging to the Core 2 Duo E8000 family, which are also produced using a 45-nm process technology. However, it must be borne in mind that Intel processors are much more “complex”: they consist of approximately 410 million transistors, while the number of transistors in a Regor semiconductor chip reaches only 234 million. That is why modern dual-core Intel processors based on The Wolfdale core has a 6 MB L2 cache, while the similar Athlon II X2 cores are equipped with only 2 MB of L2 cache in total.

A semiconductor chip specially designed by AMD engineers with a dual-core Regor design, among other things, made it possible to lower the bar for heat dissipation and power consumption. Dual-core Phenom II X2 500, based on the Deneb core, have a calculated heat dissipation of 80 W, and the TDP characteristic of Athlon II X2 processors, built on the Regor core, is reduced to 65 W. Therefore, AMD hopes that as a result of the introduction of the 45 nm process technology in the production of dual-core processors, they will be able to compete with Intel's offerings not only in terms of performance, but also in terms of efficiency.

At the same time, AMD wants to present the Athlon II X2 family as if it were a simpler and cheaper processor than the Phenom II X2 500. That is why the clock frequencies of this family of processors will be lower, as well as the prices: for example, the older model Athlon II X2 250 has an official price of $87 - $15 cheaper than the Phenom II X2 550. However, looking at the differences between these processors, it is impossible It’s clear to say that the Athlon II X2 200 is at least in some way qualitatively inferior to the Phenom II X2 500. For greater clarity, let’s compare the characteristics of the new dual-core processors: the Phenom II X2 500 series and the Athlon II X2 200.

In our opinion, both processor families are dual-core solutions of the same class. And the fact that Athlon II X2 and Phenom II X2 are equally compatible with the new Socket AM3 platform makes all these inexpensive processors an excellent locomotive for promoting this platform to the market, interest in which, against the backdrop of lower prices for DDR3 SDRAM, will certainly only grow. Moreover, inexpensive Socket AM3 motherboards based on the AMD 770 logic set are currently appearing on store shelves.

To explore the capabilities of the Athlon II X2 200 processors, today we will use the senior representative of this model range, the 3-GHz Athlon II X2 250. The characteristics of this particular processor are visible in the CPU-Z screenshot below.

The diagnostic utility we use is still new to the new Regor processor core. However, it displays all the parameters correctly, and now you can notice that the core stepping of the Athlon II X2 processor differs from the Callisto core stepping used in the Phenom II X2, which once again emphasizes their different origins.

AMD Athlon II X2 Cache

Considering that the only fundamental innovation made in the cores of the Athlon II X2 family of processors was a change in the cache memory layout, we decided to pay a little additional attention to it. As we found out in our review of the first Phenom II processors, when introducing a technological process with 45 nm production standards, AMD engineers did not make any changes to the cache operation algorithms. As a result, the cache memory of Phenom II processors based on the Deneb core operates at exactly the same speed as the cache memory of the first generation Phenom processors. However, the Regor core may be fraught with some surprises, because its second level cache has doubled in size.

Phenom II X2 (Callisto)

Athlon II X2 (Regor)

However, despite this, the associativity of the L2 cache remained the same as it was: the Athlon II X2, like the Phenom II X2, uses a second-level cache with 16-channel associativity. This gives reason to expect approximately equality in L2 cache performance between the Athlon II X2 and Phenom II X2 processors. The advantage of the more capacious L2 cache of the Athlon II X2 will be a higher probability of data getting into it.

In practice it looks like this.

Phenom II X2 545 (3.0 GHz). Note that Everest incorrectly identifies the codename for this processor.

Athlon II X2 250 (3.0 GHz)

As expected, in real measurements we obtained approximately the same L2 cache speeds for both processors with the Deneb core and the new products with the Regor core. At the same time, the Athlon II X2 memory subsystem turned out to be slightly faster, which can be explained by the absence of overhead costs associated with the need to search for data in the third level cache.

Description of test systems

To fully test the new dual-core Callisto and Regor processors, we decided to compare them not only with competing offerings from Intel, but also with their predecessors offered by AMD, although they belong to a slightly different price segment. Therefore, when preparing this material, we had to use three different platforms.

1. Socket AM3 platform:

Processors:

AMD Phenom II X3 710 (Heka, 2.6 GHz, 3 x 512 KB L2, 6 MB L3);
AMD Phenom II X2 550 (Callisto, 3.1 GHz, 2 x 512 KB L2, 6 MB L3);
AMD Athlon II X2 250 (Regor, 3.9 GHz, 2 x 1024 KB L2).

Motherboard: Gigabyte MA790FXT-UD5P (Socket AM3, AMD 790FX + SB750, DDR3 SDRAM).
Memory: Mushkin 996601 4GB XP3-12800 (2 x 2 GB, DDR3-1600 SDRAM, 7-7-7-20).

2. Socket AM2 platform:

Processors:

AMD Athlon X2 7850 (Kuma, 2.8 GHz, 2 x 512 KB L2, 2 MB L3);
AMD Athlon X2 6000 (Brisbane, 3.1 GHz, 2 x 512 KB L2);
AMD Athlon X2 6000 (Windsor, 3.0 GHz, 2 x 1024 KB L2).

Gigabyte MA790GP-DS4H (Socket AM2+, AMD 790GX + SB750, DDR2 SDRAM).

3. LGA775 platform:

Processors:

Intel Core 2 Duo E7500 (Wolfdale, 2.93 GHz, 1067 MHz FSB, 3 MB L2);
Intel Core 2 Duo E7400 (Wolfdale, 2.8 GHz, 1067 MHz FSB, 3 MB L2);
Intel Pentium E6300 (Wolfdale-2M, 2.8 GHz, 1067 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2);
Intel Pentium E5400 (Wolfdale-2M, 2.7 GHz, 800 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2).

Motherboards:

ASUS P5Q Pro (LGA775, Intel P45 Express, DDR2 SDRAM);
ASUS P5Q3 (LGA775, Intel P45 Express, DDR3 SDRAM).

Memory: GEIL GX24GB8500C5UDC (2 x 2 GB, DDR2-1067 SDRAM, 5-5-5-15).

In addition to the components listed, all tested platforms included the same general set of hardware and software components:

Graphics card: ATI Radeon HD 4890.
Hard drive: Western Digital WD1500AHFD.
Operating system: Microsoft Windows Vista x64 SP1.
Drivers:

Intel Chipset Software Installation Utility 9.1.0.1007;
ATI Catalyst 9.5 Display Driver.

It should be noted that in the framework of this study, we found it possible to use a full-fledged Socket AM3 platform equipped with DDR3 SDRAM to test relatively inexpensive dual-core AMD processors. This decision is explained by significantly reduced prices for memory of this type and its active distribution on the market.

At the same time, we continue to test LGA775 processors in a system with DDR2 SDRAM, since the use of higher-frequency memory with CPUs of the Core 2 Duo and Pentium families, whose bus frequency does not exceed 1067 MHz, is impossible due to the limitations inherent in the logic sets used with them. However, when overclocking LGA775 processors, where the use of memory operating at higher frequencies than 1067 MHz becomes possible, we replaced the above ASUS P5Q Pro board with a similar ASUS P5Q3, but equipped with slots for DDR3 SDRAM.

The evolution of dual-core AMD processors

AMD dual-core processors have a rich history: the first CPUs under the Athlon X2 brand were released back in 2005. And, surprisingly, many subtypes of dual-core AMD processors released since that time remain interesting to this day and do not leave store shelves. Speaking about such older, but relevant models, we, first of all, mean that among the Athlon X2 processors sold today, intended for use in Socket AM2 motherboards, there are representatives of the 5000 and 6000 series with the old K8 microarchitecture, released using technological processes with standards of 90 and 65 nm; and Athlon X2 7000, based on 65 nm cores with K10 microarchitecture. Now they are being supplemented by Athlon II X2 and Phenom II X2 processors with modern 45-nm cores, but this does not mean at all that the old Athlon X2 will disappear from retail offerings overnight. Dual-core CPUs based on the K8 microarchitecture continue to remain to this day, even in the official price list.

Therefore, it is very easy to trace the evolutionary development of dual-core AMD processors: most representatives of different generations of Athlon X2 have not yet become part of history. The following table contains the characteristics of the main cores used in CPUs compatible with the current Socket AM2 processor socket.

What did AMD bring from such multi-stage improvement of its products, which are, in fact, part of the same platform? Will the new Athlon II X2 and Phenom II X2 be much faster than the time-tested dual-core processors with 90 and 65 nm cores and K8 microarchitecture? Having asked this question, we tested all five types of processors listed above, forcing them to the same clock frequency - 3.0 GHz.

Progress does not stand still. With each new core (with the exception of one - Brisbane), AMD consistently improved the performance of its own processors. And all this has led to the fact that today's pinnacle of evolution - the Phenom II X2 processors - are about 25% faster than the first Athlon X2 in Socket AM2 version, operating at the same clock frequency. At the same time, the most significant increase in speed occurred with the introduction of the K10(Stars) microarchitecture, however, new products with 45 nm cores do not lose face. When operating at the same clock speed, the new Athlon II X2 is able to outperform the Kuma-based Athlon X2 7000 series by an average of almost 7%, and the Phenom II X2 increases this advantage to 11%.

In other words, the emergence of new dual-core processors manufactured using 45nm technology not only opens up room for AMD to further increase clock speeds, but also raises the bar for mid-range processor performance thanks to improvements in microarchitecture and increased cache capacity.

Phenom II X2 vs Athlon II X2

Despite the fact that the underlying reasons for the emergence of two similar families of dual-core processors are generally clear, the advisability of launching them simultaneously raises some questions. Comparison of the test results of the Phenom II X2 and Athlon II X2, operating on identical platforms and at the same clock frequency - 3.0 GHz, can help answer them.

In general, the Callisto core, which has a third-level cache, showed better results in the vast majority of tests. And this fully corresponds to how their manufacturer positions the new families of dual-core processors relative to each other: Phenom II X2 will cost potential buyers about 7-10% more than the equal-frequency Athlon II X2.

In addition, it is quite interesting that the third-level cache memory of the Phenom II X2 processor gives the greatest positive effect in games and during office work. It is in applications of this nature that it makes sense to use Phenom II X2 500 series processors first. When processing media content, rendering, and other computing tasks, the presence of L3 cache memory provides a much smaller performance gain, so in these cases, cheaper processors of the Athlon II X2 family can boast a more favorable combination of price and performance.

The average advantage of the Phenom II X2 over its younger brother operating at the same clock frequency is not a very convincing 5%. This means that the Athlon II X2, which has at least a 200 MHz higher frequency, will already outperform the processor from the more expensive Phenom II X2 family. Therefore, in order to maintain harmony in product positioning, AMD will have to carefully monitor the “cleanliness of the ranks” of its new dual-core offerings, and not allow the standard frequencies of processors in the Athlon II X2 model range to grow too quickly.

Performance

Overall Performance

From the point of view of the SYSmark 2007 test, which evaluates system performance during normal operation, the new AMD processors look very, very tempting. Thus, the Athlon II X2 250 outperforms Intel's new product in the Pentium line with the processor number E6300, and the Phenom II X2 550 competes evenly with the Core 2 Duo E7500. That is, in both cases, the new AMD processors confidently outperform competing Intel offerings, which have a higher cost. And in light of our recent comparison of Ahlon X2 and Pentium processors, we can say that thanks to the transfer to the 45-nm process technology, AMD is truly returning to the mid-level dual-core processor market.

However, as you can see, the new Athlon II X2 and Phenom II X2 processors pose a hidden threat to AMD's triple-core processors. Thanks to their high clock speed, these dual-core models are faster than their triple-core counterpart Phenom II X3 710, which, by the way, is positioned by AMD as a higher-level processor that competes with the Intel Core 2 Duo E8000 series.

Analysis of the results shown by new products in various SYSmark 2007 scenarios allows us to draw several more interesting conclusions. For example, the ratio of CPU speeds in the Productivity subtest suggests that for normal office work, a very important characteristic of a processor is the size of its cache memory, the size of which is often more significant than the clock frequency. But when working with video content, the Athlon II X2 250 processor without L3 cache shows even higher speed than the Phenom II X2 550. Another interesting case is working in 3D modeling programs. In such tasks, despite the general lag in other scenarios, Intel processors show their strengths, outperforming not only the new dual-core AMD products, but even the new generation triple-core CPU Phenom II X3 710.

Gaming Performance

The new dual-core AMD processors also perform very well in games. This is especially true for the Phenom II X2 550, which, thanks to its L3 cache, outperforms not only the Pentium E6300 and Core 2 Duo E7400, but often also the Core 2 Duo E7500. This makes the Phenom II X2 550 an excellent budget dual-core gaming processor. As for the Athlon II X2 250, its performance in gaming applications turned out to be weaker than that of its older brother. However, it significantly outperforms its 65 nm predecessor, the Athlon X2 7850 - by 13-17%. True, the new Athlon II X2 250 still does not reach the performance level of Core 2 Duo processors.

In addition, it should be noted that many modern games can already quite effectively use more than two processor cores. That is why the triple-core Phenom II X3 710, operating at a frequency of 2.6 GHz, in some cases can offer better performance than dual-core three-gigahertz CPUs with a similar microarchitecture.

Audio and video encoding performance

Encoding mp3 audio in Apple iTunes is much faster if the heart of the system is an Intel processor. Here, AMD's new dual-core processors are not helped by either the increased cache or the K10 (Stars) microarchitecture. But when encoding video both using the DivX codec and using the increasingly popular x264, the Athlon II X2 and Phenom II X2 processors can boast relatively good speed. In fact, thanks to the clock frequency finally reaching a decent level, the new products may well compete for the palm with representatives of the Core 2 Duo E7000 series. By the way, please note that media content encoding tasks relate to applications that are quite indifferent to the size and structure of cache memory. And the clock frequency plays a decisive role here.

Other Applications

We have repeatedly drawn attention to the relatively low performance of AMD processors when performing final rendering, especially in the popular 3ds max package. With the advent of new 45 nm cores in AMD processors, the situation has not changed. The eldest of today's new products, the Phenom II X2 550, can only boast of the fact that its performance has reached the performance level of the budget Intel Pentium E5400 processor. It is generally a shame to talk about the younger Athlon II X2. Thus, in this case, only triple-core AMD processors can compete with Core 2 Duo.

Although Folding@Home also applies to computing tasks, the results of the new dual-core AMD processors are slightly better here. The Athlon II X2 250 performs on par with the Pentium E5400, and the Phenom II X2 550 is as fast as the Core 2 Duo E7400.

When performing arithmetic calculations using Microsoft Excel, the new dual-core AMD processors continue to show dismal performance. Just like in 3ds max, today only the triple-core Phenom II X3 can become a worthy alternative to dual-core Intel processors.

Things aren't going well in Adobe Photoshop either. As can be concluded from the results, the new dual-core processors Phenom II X2 and Athlon II X2 are not always able to solve AMD's problems with the performance of mid-range processors. There are still a fairly large number of popular tasks where AMD products are significantly inferior to Intel processors, and the roots of this state of affairs lie in the weaknesses of the K10 (Stars) microarchitecture. It is especially annoying that there is no hope for correcting the situation in such applications in the foreseeable future.

But new processors built on cores produced using a 45-nm process technology can boast high data compression speeds in archivers. The test results in WinRAR are a clear illustration of this. Even the Athlon II X2 250 is ahead of the Core 2 Duo processors of the E7000 series. The Phenom II X2 550, in comparison with its younger brother, demonstrates another 11% higher result.

Energy consumption

Previous tests have shown that AMD's offerings based on cores produced using the 65nm process technology cannot compete with modern dual-core Intel processors. It seems that AMD’s release of the new Phenom II X2 and Athlon II X2 CPU series is quite capable of turning this situation around, because these new processors use obviously more economical semiconductor crystals produced using a 45-nm process technology. This is especially true for the Athlon II X2, since it is based on the new Regor core with significantly reduced complexity. In addition, for this processor AMD itself indicates a 65-W typical heat dissipation level - the same as Intel sets for its dual-core models.

That is why we approached testing the power consumption of AMD's new products with particular interest. The figures below represent the total power consumption of the test platforms assembled (without monitor) “from the wall outlet”. During measurements, the load on the processors was created by the 64-bit version of the LinX 0.5.8 utility. In addition, to correctly assess idle power consumption, we activated all available energy-saving technologies: C1E, Cool"n"Quiet 3.0 and Enhanced Intel SpeedStep.

Despite AMD's best efforts to reduce the power consumption of its platforms and the introduction of Cool"n"Quiet 3.0 technology, which introduces additional power-saving states for 45nm processors, systems built on dual-core Intel processors remain slightly more energy efficient.

We see approximately the same picture under load: Pentium and Core 2 Duo processors clearly consume less than the new dual-core models from AMD. Unfortunately, in terms of performance per watt, AMD has never been able to catch up with its competitor's products. At the same time, it is impossible not to notice the tendency that the power consumption of AMD processors is gradually entering acceptable limits. The consumption of the Phenom II X2 550, which, by the way, is built on an initially quad-core semiconductor chip, turned out to be almost 20 W less than that of the dual-core processor of the previous generation, the Athlon X2 7850.

But the consumption of the platform with the Athlon II X2 250 processor is much more impressive. The 65-watt thermal package was assigned to it for good reason. Under load, the power consumption of a platform with these processors is only 10 W higher than that of a system built on a Core 2 Duo E7500. This means that from the point of view of electrical characteristics, the Athlon II X2 250 can be compared with the Core 2 Duo E8000 series, which is a significant achievement for AMD.

However, so far there is no talk of any particular success by AMD in creating dual-core processors that are efficient in terms of performance and power consumption. However, AMD has not yet exhausted all its capabilities. In the near future, the company is going to introduce even more economical dual-core processors based on the Regor core, which differ from the Athlon II X2 250 being reviewed today with a lower TDP of 45 W.

Overclocking

Another aspect of practical research of new dual-core AMD processors that we could not leave aside is overclocking. The fact is that the emergence of new cores, the production of which uses a technological process with 45 nm production standards, has returned the interest of enthusiasts to AMD products. The new Phenom II class processors can be overclocked very well, especially in comparison with their predecessors. And although we know that the overclocking limit for processors based on the Deneb core and its derivatives when using air cooling is around 3.7-3.8 GHz, we tried to overclock the Phenom II X2 550 and Athlon II X2 that came into our laboratory 550. The relatively old but proven Scythe Mugen was used as a cooler in our experiments.

First of all, the Phenom II X2 550 went to the test bench. Note that this processor belongs to the Black Edition class, and therefore it can be overclocked by simply changing the multiplication factor, which is not blocked by the manufacturer.

To be honest, we did not expect overclocking results from this processor that would be significantly different from those we received when testing the Phenom II X3 and Phenom II X4. But, nevertheless, this processor was able to surprise us a lot. The fact is that by increasing the supply voltage by 0.15 V above the nominal (up to 1.475 V), it was able to operate at a frequency of 3.98 GHz. The stability of operation in this mode was confirmed by testing using the LinX utility, which severely loads the processor by executing Linpack code.

This is a very unexpected result, contrary to the achievements that we were able to obtain earlier when overclocking AMD processors on Deneb and Heka cores. However, unfortunately, the joy was short-lived, and as further performance testing showed, despite passing many “heavy” processor tests in this mode, the system turned out to be unstable in 3D applications, including games.

Therefore, we had to reduce the achieved frequency quite significantly. The Phenom II X2 550 could boast of unconditionally stable operation only at a frequency of 3.8 GHz.

As can be seen from the screenshot, the CPU supply voltage was increased to 1.475 V. The second processor voltage, related to the CPU NB, did not change during overclocking, since even increasing it did not allow increasing the frequency of the north bridge built into the processor above the standard 2.0 GHz. Already at 2.2 GHz the test processor began to have memory problems. As a result, despite the promising start, the Phenom II X2 550 processor behaved almost the same as its older brothers. Obviously, the use of the same semiconductor crystal as in the Phenom II X3 and Phenom II X4 predetermined the results of overclocking this processor.

Another thing is the Athlon II X2 250. This processor is based on a truly unique semiconductor core, which is not yet used in any other processors. And since this core has a smaller area and lower calculated heat dissipation, you can expect some surprises from it in terms of overclocking.

However, we did not obtain fundamentally different results. By increasing the voltage by 0.175 V (to 1.5 V), this processor was able to operate stably at 3.9 GHz - and this turned out to be the limit.

Note that since the Athlon II X2 250 does not belong to the Black Edition class, it was overclocked by increasing the clock generator frequency, which eventually reached 260 MHz. Here, by the way, the absence of an L3 cache in the processor played into our hands: thanks to this, the Athlon II X2 250 was quite calm about the acceleration of the northbridge built into it, and we didn’t even have to reduce the corresponding multiplier. The result of the overclocking was an increase in its frequency to 2.6 GHz, which it handled perfectly with a slight increase in its supply voltage by 0.1 V.

As a result, the Athlon II X2 250 proved to be a slightly more overclocking-friendly processor than its older brother, the Phenom II X2 550, even though it does not belong to the “Black Edition” overclocking series. Of course, it is too early to draw any conclusions based on the results of studying the first copies, but it seems that the Regor core does have a slightly better frequency potential than Deneb and its derivatives - Heka and Callisto.

We would like to supplement what has been said with a small number of tests. The fact is that after overclocking, we wanted to compare the performance of the Phenom II X2 550 and Athlon II X2 250 with each other, as well as with the performance of dual-core Intel processors, also operating in free-lance mode. Therefore, the charts below contain the performance indicators of the following overclocked processors:

AMD Phenom II X2 550 at 3.8 GHz = 19 x 200 MHz. Memory – DDR3 1600 with timings 7-7-7-20;
AMD Athlon II X2 250 at 3.9 GHz = 15 x 260 MHz. Memory – DDR3 1386 with timings 6-6-6-18;
Intel Pentium E5400 at 4.0 GHz = 12 x 333 MHz. Memory – DDR3 1333 with timings 6-6-6-18;
Intel Pentium E7400 at 4.0 GHz = 10 x 400 MHz. Memory – DDR3 1600 with timings 7-7-7-20.

Note that the overclocking frequency of 4.0 GHz for Intel processors was chosen as the most typical result, easily achievable with air cooling.

Performance testing has shown that dual-core Intel processors are more attractive solutions for use in overclocked systems. Even compared to AMD's new 45nm processors, they are able to offer better overclocking potential, higher final frequencies and, as a result, faster performance in overclocked systems. However, the situation for AMD processors is not so dramatic, and often the gap in the speed of platforms is not so great. So given that overclocking is a bit of a lottery, we don't think enthusiasts should give up on AMD's new dual-core offerings.

At the same time, choosing the most optimal option for overclocking from the reviewed AMD products is quite difficult, even after familiarizing yourself with the tests. Although we were able to increase the frequency of the Athlon II X2 250 more than the Phenom II X2 550, it was not able to demonstrate a clearly superior result. After all, the L3 cache found in the Phenom II X2 in some cases turns out to be much more important than a high clock frequency.

Enabling locked kernels

It seems that there is no need to remind our readers in all details of the main pleasant surprise that accompanied the release of the three-core Phenom II X3 processors. Since these processors were based on the same quad-core semiconductor die as their Phenom II X4 family brethren, it suddenly appeared that there was an undocumented ability to enable a deactivated core and turn a tri-core processor into a quad-core processor. Moreover, what’s especially nice is that this procedure does not require any hardware modifications; you just need to activate the BIOS option, which is responsible for the operation of the Advanced Clock Calibration (ACC) technology. Of course, the fourth core is not successfully enabled in all processors, but only in those that are based on a full-fledged semiconductor crystal without defects. Fortunately, for the first batches of the Phenom II X3, the likelihood of getting a “successful” processor was quite high, and the trick of increasing the number of cores in the Phenom II X3 significantly increased the popularity of this AMD product.

Whether a similar number will work with dual-core processors is a question that worries many enthusiasts. Let's figure it out.

First of all, it is necessary to recall that talking about enabling locked cores in dual-core processors makes sense only in relation to the Phenom II X2. After all, its younger brother Athlon II X2 initially uses a dual-core core, in which there are no blocked parts.

Secondly, since the release of the Phenom II X3, something has changed in the situation with the implementation of Advanced Clock Calibration technology in the BIOS of many motherboards. AMD did not quietly look at the rejoicing of enthusiasts and tried to get board manufacturers to update the microcode so that the unlocking capabilities would be eliminated. But, fortunately, not all companies satisfied AMD’s desire. For example, new BIOS versions of the Gigabyte MA790FXT-UD5P motherboard we used in our tests received an additional option that allows you to choose which version of the microcode to use: the new one, without the ability to enable cores, or the old one.

This option is called EC Firmware for Advanced Clock Calibration, and setting it to Hybrid and then activating Advanced Clock Calibration allows the cores to turn on as before. Moreover, to our great joy, we can report that this method works not only for the Phenom II X3, but also for the new Phenom II X2 too.

Thus, our instance of the Phenom II X2 550 allowed us to activate both locked cores and in the blink of an eye turned into a full-fledged quad-core processor. Which, by the way, was immediately overclocked to 3.8 GHz.

In other words, the dual-core Phenom II X2 550 could easily be a high-speed quad-core processor. But it may not turn out to be - everything here, naturally, depends on what kind of semiconductor crystal underlies a particular instance: fully functional with blocked cores, or still defective. Moreover, given the fact that AMD is going to sell its dual-core processors at very affordable prices, the likelihood of a favorable outcome of unlocking cores in dual-core models seems to us extremely low. Most likely, successful copies of Phenom II X2 processors will be found quite often only in the first deliveries. Therefore, if you seriously hope to get a “lucky” dual-core device, then we recommend that you do not delay the purchase.

In addition, we should not forget that to successfully unlock the Phenom II X2, you need not only a good processor, but also a suitable motherboard that has the ability to enable “old-style” ACC, the number of which is steadily decreasing under pressure from AMD.

By the way, it should be noted that the unlocked Phenom II X2 is still different from the real Phenom II X4. Firstly, it is identified by the motherboard as an unknown processor called Phenom II X4 B50. And, secondly, just as in the case of triple-core processors, unlocking the cores leads to the inoperability of processor thermal sensors.

conclusions

Unfortunately, we still cannot say that AMD has managed to unconditionally surpass its main competitor in at least something. But this does not mean at all that the new dual-core processors are a failure. On the contrary, compared to their predecessors, the Phenom II X2 and Athlon II X2 look more than revolutionary. If previously dual-core AMD processors could only be opposed to the younger representatives of the budget Intel Pentium series, and even then with certain reservations, now we can say that among AMD’s offerings there are quite worthy dual-core processors that cover the price category from 80 to 100 dollars.

Among the new products, the Phenom II X2 processors look especially attractive, which aroused exclamations of admiration from us several times during testing. Among the main positive aspects, we should note the high (for their price) performance of these processors in games, office applications and video encoding, as well as the existing non-zero probability of unlocking two additional cores. These qualities make the Phenom II X2 a very attractive proposition, even despite its relatively high power consumption for dual-core processors and not the best overclocking results. In other words, thanks to Phenom II X2, AMD has a real chance to squeeze out some models of competing processors from the Core 2 Duo family on the market.

However, some concern is caused by the availability of these models. The use of quad-core Deneb semiconductor crystals in their basis makes the production of such dual-core chips a low-profit endeavor for AMD. Therefore, most likely, their production will mainly be made from rejects from the production of three-core and quad-core processors. This means that supply volumes of Phenom II X2 will directly depend not on demand, but on the quality of the 45-nm technological process and production volumes of older processor models. That is why you should be mentally prepared for the fact that there will be some shortage of Phenom II X2 on the market, entailing an undesirable price increase.

AMD assigns the role of a truly massive dual-core solution to another family of processors – the Athlon II X2. But it has noticeable weaknesses in comparison with the Phenom II X2. These processors use Regor's own dual-core semiconductor chip, which lacks L3 cache. As a result, the performance of the Athlon II X2 in a number of applications is significantly lower. In fact, we can even say that processors of this type are capable of real competition only with the older representatives of the Pentium series, but not with the younger Core 2 Duo. In addition, the Athlon II X2 does not present any gifts such as the ability to activate locked cores.

However, in comparison with the previous generation Athlon X2, the new Athlon II X2 family is still a huge step forward. These processors offer good overclocking potential, much lower power consumption and, of course, increased performance. At the same time, it is obvious that AMD is not going to stop there, and the Athlon II X2 series will soon receive further development both in the direction of increasing clock frequencies and in the direction of reducing power consumption and heat dissipation.

And, of course, we cannot deny the fact that to promote the Phenom II X2 and Athlon II X2, as well as all its other processors built on 45 nm cores, AMD has chosen an extremely attractive pricing policy from a consumer point of view. It obeys a very simple rule: any Phenom II and Athlon II models currently offer higher average performance than Intel processors of similar cost.

Name	AMD Phenom II X6	AMD Phenom II X4	Core i5
Model	1055T	925	750
Core	Thuban	Deneb	Lynnfield
Stepping	E0	C3	B1
Technical process, nm	45nm SOI	45nm SOI	45 high-k
Connector	AM3	AM3	LGA1156
Rated frequency, MHz	2800	2800	2666
Maximum frequency, MHz	3300*	2800	3200**
Factor	14-16,5*	14	20-24**
HyperTransport/QPI, GT/s	4000	4000	4800
L1 cache, KB	6x128	4x128	4x(32+32)
L2 cache, KB	6x512	4x512	4x256
L3 cache, KB	6144	6144	8192
Supply voltage, V	1,125-1,40	0,90-1,40	0,65-1,40
TDP. W	125	95	95
Limit temperature, °C	62	71	72,5
Set of instructions		ISC, IA32, x86-64, NXbit, MMX, 3DNow!, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a	RISC, IA32, XD bit, MMX, EM64T, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4.2

CPU	Processor frequency, MHz	Memory frequency, MHz	Basic delays (CL-tRCD- tRP- tRAS-CR)	Uncore frequency for Intel, NB for AMD, MHz	QPI frequency for Intel, NT for AMD, MHz	Vcore, V
Phenom II X6 1055T	2800	1600	9-9-9-28-1T	2000	2000	1,425
Phenom II X6 1055T	3710	1412	8-8-8-24-1T	2385	2385	1,46
Phenom II X4 925	2800	1333	8-8-8-24-1T	2000	2000	1,425
Intel Core i5-750	2666	1333	8-8-8-24-1T	2130	2400	1,125
Intel Core i5-750	3800	1520	8-8-8-24-2T	3040	3040	1,325

AMD Phenom II processor: characteristics, description, reviews. Twice two: AMD Phenom II X2 and Athlon II X2 processors Selection of opponents for testing

Video card for AMD Phenom X6 1035T, 1045T, 1055T, 1065T, 1075T, 1090T, 1100T and AMD Phenom X4 910, 920, 925, 940, 945, 955, 960T, 965, 970, 975, 980

Video card for AMD Athlon II X4 620, 630, 635, 640, 645, 655, 631, 641, 638, 651, 651K

General information about the line of microcircuits

X4 940

Characteristics and capabilities of the chip in the X4 955 version

Overclocking X4 955

Comparison of X4 955 with competitors

Characteristics and capabilities of the chip in the X4 965 version

Overclocking the X4 965 chip

Flagship model - X4 980

The flagship of the Phenom II X4 line: testing

Summary

AMD Phenom II X2

AMD Athlon II X2

AMD Athlon II X2 Cache

Description of test systems

The evolution of dual-core AMD processors

Phenom II X2 vs Athlon II X2

Performance

Energy consumption

Overclocking

Enabling locked kernels

conclusions

Other materials on this topic

What else to read

THE LAST NOTES

AMD Phenom II processor: characteristics, description, reviews. Twice two: AMD Phenom II X2 and Athlon II X2 processors Selection of opponents for testing

Video card for AMD Phenom X6 1035T, 1045T, 1055T, 1065T, 1075T, 1090T, 1100T and AMD Phenom X4 910, 920, 925, 940, 945, 955, 960T, 965, 970, 975, 980

Video card for AMD Athlon II X4 620, 630, 635, 640, 645, 655, 631, 641, 638, 651, 651K

General information about the line of microcircuits

X4 940

Characteristics and capabilities of the chip in the X4 955 version

Overclocking X4 955

Comparison of X4 955 with competitors

Characteristics and capabilities of the chip in the X4 965 version

Overclocking the X4 965 chip

Flagship model - X4 980

The flagship of the Phenom II X4 line: testing

Summary

AMD Phenom II X2

AMD Athlon II X2

AMD Athlon II X2 Cache

Description of test systems

The evolution of dual-core AMD processors

Phenom II X2 vs Athlon II X2

Performance

Energy consumption

Overclocking

Enabling locked kernels

conclusions

Other materials on this topic

What else to read

THE LAST NOTES

Categories