AMD's Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition

54 Comments

View All Comments

• MODEL3 - Thursday, August 13, 2009 - link

  Well if it's true that Core i5 750 is going to launch at 6th of September at 196$,
  then the only option for AMD is to drop the price around what you suggested! (199$)
  Traditionally AMD official pricing translates around 5% lower (in actual street price) than Intel equivalent price
  (although in the recent years Intel had various questionable tactics like direct rebates to Retailers & to System Builders without a specific sales target - in the Europe region)
  
  I just hope that AMD is clever to understand, that in no way has to release a higher clocked model (975 3,6GHz, & 985 3,8GHz)
  before Intel release in Q1 2010 & in Q3 2010 the higher clocked models of i5 7XX (i5 760 2,8GHz & i5 770 2,93GHz) (if this is indeed the Intel future roadmap at 196$)
  
  Already some sites, that are with Intel side can easily fix the testing method, in order the Core i5 750 to appear more powerful than even a future 975 3,6GHz!
  
  The performance difference between Phenom II architecture & Nehalem architecture can have wide variation depending on the testing method!
  
  So if Intel wants, it can influence some sites to use specific methods to declare a Core i5 750 better than even a future 975 3,6GHz!
  
  What good will do to AMD to release a 975 at a 245$ in Q4 2009?
  
  Of cource AMD can price it at at 219$ (20$ difference with 965) but the whole situation is becoming depressing (they are fighting for +20$ for only a quarter until Q1 2010)
  
  Well, i guess they must make everything, in order to survive!
  

• GeorgeH - Thursday, August 13, 2009 - link

  "AMD ought to get rid of the Xn suffix and just use simple model numbers at this point."
  
  I understand what you're saying, but I think it's the most straightforward processor naming scheme in a long time. You get the architecture, cores, relative speed, and locked/unlocked instantly. Unless AMD is going to stop selling 2 and 3 core chips and never offer more than 4 cores in the consumer space, I say keep the "Xn".
  
  Intel could really learn from AMD here; from your writeup on ix branding, I fully expect to be needing a decoder ring to figure out what a particular i3/i5/i7 really is.

• Drazick - Thursday, August 13, 2009 - link

  It seems Intel advantage is more about optimization than much better processor, is this assumption true?
  
  Why isn't AMD put efforts into that?
  
  Thanks.

• Drazick - Thursday, August 13, 2009 - link

  It should be easy to create some test scenarios and measure time.
  
  Many High End users use those kind of software.

• GourdFreeMan - Thursday, August 13, 2009 - link

  The problem with benchmarking such packages is that depending on their target application they will not stress systems in a uniform way. Large matrix computation will likely be bound by memory bandwidth, while numeric computation at machine precision will hinge on FPU/SSE performance, and symbolic calculations will largely be bound by integer and branching performance. There isn't one uniform application that is representative of the needs of all scientists and engineers.

• XtAzY - Thursday, August 13, 2009 - link

  I got my i7 920 for $200 at MicroCenter, much cheaper than $280 online deals! This AMD definately does not worth $245!!

• Griswold - Thursday, August 13, 2009 - link

  And how much did you pay for the mobo and triple channel kit, dumbass?

• Exar3342 - Thursday, August 13, 2009 - link

  LOL, your the dumbass. :)
  
  6GB triple Channel - (Newegg) $85.00
  8GB dual channel (newegg) $95.00
  
  X58 MB - $165-175
  AM3 MB $85-120
  
  So you are talking a difference or $40-60, which if you can get the i7 at Microcenter (I was there last week and they had a ton) erases any price differences.

• Griswold - Saturday, August 15, 2009 - link

  Oh, lets look at the other article anand just put up, dumbass. Your shit doesnt quite add up...

• rhog - Thursday, August 13, 2009 - link

  Since when can you get a "good" x58 for lest than 200?
  
  I assume the 200 Bucks is a Mail in rebate price as well. I own 2 i7 920 great processor but hardly any faster at 3.6ghz than a 3.8ghz AMD 955 (at most 20%) which is in line with the "real" 100-125 Buck difference in cost. You can get a really nice Video card upgrade for that money. Don't forget the i7 920 never runs at 2.6ghz but always overclocks itself making it hard to do a good clock for clock comparison. The AMD 965 is better than Core2 and I doubt that the Core i5 will be faster than a Core i7 so they should compete well. Oh, and the Core i5 will overclock itself as well I here as much a 3 mults