TechSpot

Rumor: AMD has stopped Phenom II X2, X4 production

By Shawn Knight
Aug 2, 2011
Post New Reply
  1. The latest rumor regarding AMD claims that the company has already pulled the proverbial plug on the production run for their budget-minded Phenom II X2 and X4 processors.

    Read the whole story
     
  2. Cueto_99

    Cueto_99 TS Enthusiast Posts: 248   +12

    IMO The Phenom II X4 955 will always be remembered as one of the best price/performance CPU's from AMD, aside from it's unlocked multiplier and easy overclockability, it could handle almost everything in the middle/enthusiast segment for quite a while...

    First edition phenoms will also be remembered as a total failure because of that annoying bug...

    Now it's time to see what bulldozer brings to the table! :)
     
  3. Mizzou

    Mizzou TS Enthusiast Posts: 930

    I had one of the original Phenoms, it was disappointing to say the least. Assume this action means that we're full speed ahead on the FX series. I also am looking forward to some legitimate benchmark results on Bulldozer.
     
  4. Route44

    Route44 TechSpot Ambassador Posts: 12,168   +37

    Agreed. I am holding off building a new PC system until solid information and user experiences are given; I am really hating the rumors and speculations.

    As for the topic in hand, I've always wondered what AMD and Intel did with their unsold stock. Most likely destroy.
     
  5. R3DP3NGUIN

    R3DP3NGUIN TS Enthusiast Posts: 154

    Amen!!!, although getting to 4Ghz was a pain on most 955's, the C2 chip which I have is only stable at 3.9GHz
     
  6. Sarcasm

    Sarcasm TS Enthusiast Posts: 343   +20

    Doesn't this make sense anyway seeing as how they're moving onto their next generation processors.
     
  7. Mizzou

    Mizzou TS Enthusiast Posts: 930

    That's how I read it, leads me to believe that any remaining issues with Bulldozer have been resolved. After all, if AMD has something can really compete with Sandy Bridge you'd think they would want to get it to market.
     
  8. my AMD 955 is running just fine in my AM3+ 970 mobo while holing a seat for BD
     
  9. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,915   +718

    OEM's and lower-tier high-volume markets (PR China primarily)
    Dell will quite happily sell you a C2D based system, but then, Dell are nothing if not cuttting-edge.
    More a case of damned if you do, damned if you don't.
    Llano will pretty much destroy the Athlon II/Phenom II x4 market in any case. If you're in the market right now for an AMD based system then the majority of people would likely be swayed by the APU. It also doesn't make a lot of sense to market old-technology directly against your new models. Phenom II X6 is seen (generally) as the only series that offers a credible alternative to an Intel system...so it stays in the lineup. At least until BD is in the retail channel in sufficient numbers. When AMD announce the X6's demise, that will signal that all is right with BD (yields and volume).
     
  10. As you can read here http://www.donanimhaber.com/islemci/haberleri/AMDnin-8-cekirdekli-Bulldozer-FX-islemcisi-ve-test-sonuclari.htm , the Donanim Haber's review was a bad joke by this guy http://obrovsky.blogspot.com/ . His name is Zdenek Obermaier (OBR means "giant" in Czech), and he writes first class reviews for this site http://pctuning.tyden.cz/ . He had at least three engineering samples of Bulldozer for testing in previous months, and he has a full production sample now. All his reports say one thing - Bulldozer is not a real competition for the best Intel processors, it is even weaker than the i7-2500K. Its strenght is multithreading, and the most aparent weaknes is very low one core power. At Zdenek's blog, there will be more bengmarks leaked in the following days (probably - some day ago, he deleted one graph after the AMD request ... it was sumarized FX-8150 performance (better than the best AMD six core processor, but worse than 2500K ..).
     
  11. Good riddance.
     
     
  12. Breech

    Breech TS Member Posts: 79

    I'd be happy really happy if my C2 would go that far. My third core starts getting really unhappy after 3.7 no matter what I do.
     
  13. OBR is a great big phony who hates AMD.

    He admitted to faking multiple screenshots and still is faking more, newer ones; attempting to make AMD look bad.

    "more benchmarks soon"...more like
    "I need more time to photoshop"

    ALL of his "benchmarks" are incredibly fake and any future ones will probably be fake as well. I've looked at his screenshots and the benchmarks for known processors in existence do not match actual legit benchmarks.

    He can't even get the already released cpu benchmarks faked right lol!
     
  14. red1776

    red1776 Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe Posts: 5,906   +90

    It's hard to know where to start telling you whats wrong with that paragraph.

    inbetween the fake ones does he?:rolleyes:
     
  15. "He can't even get the already released cpu benchmarks faked right lol!"
    as we can't check his claims, we can yours :) - be more specific, please ...

    "It's hard to know where to start telling you whats wrong with that paragraph"
    you can, no problem for me ..

    "inbetween the fake ones does he?"
    you can read some of them, if you want - first class work, totally different from some of his blogs's drivel .. I think his benchmarks are not faked, of course, future production units can be more powerful .. but still waiting for "official" reviews too
     
  16. red1776

    red1776 Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe Posts: 5,906   +90

    I nominated your post for the ' most incoherent of the year' ...keep your fingers crossed! :)

    Huh?
     
  17. "He can't even get the already released cpu benchmarks faked right lol!"
    as we can't check his claims, we can yours :) - be more specific, please ...


    1) There isnt enough information on the benchmarks. Sometimes only the resolution is posted, fsaa/aa or high/medium/low quality information is unavailable.

    2) When trying to compare "benchmarks" to legit sites or benchmarks done by people with ---actual--- screenshots of cpuz/gpuz and settings posted, they dont seem to match. It's hard to compare with almost no game settings posted, but overall they seem faked since all I could find to compare them to didnt match.

    3) The "benchmarks" seem to rise on the intel side based on cpu speed but when it comes to amd/bulldozer side the "results" are sometimes lower than older amd cpus.

    Real benchmarks have shown that sometimes the x4 phenoms can be faster than the x6 in certain benchmarks. The gradual increase in the intel "benchmarks" from cpu speed just seems incredibly faked.

    4) I dared him on his website to run 3dmark11 and screenshot the advanced results with cpuz/gpuz in the picture. Pretty sure this will never happen. He faked this one before but the screenshots were so small it was laughable and it was a bunch of separate small blurry screenshots.
     


Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.