Fastest quad-core, new six-core AMD chips in September

By on August 12, 2010, 10:20 AM
AMD is getting ready to add a new member to its six-core chips family as well as a new flagship quad-core and a couple more budget processors, according to a report on X-bit labs. The Phenom II X6 1075T should bridge the gap between the current 1055T and 1090T six-core parts, with a $230-240 price tag and 3GHz base clock speed. The chip will be able to go as high as 3.5GHz when AMD's Turbo Core technology kicks in, but otherwise specs should look familiar to those of its predecessors, with support for DDR3-1333 memory and a total 9MB of cache.

The forthcoming AMD Phenom II X4 970 Black Edition should become AMD's fastest quad-core offering and will reportedly come in two flavors -- a retail boxed version based on Deneb with four cores in total, and an OEM version based on the Zosma design, which is basically a six-core Thuban chip with two disabled cores. In other words, enthusiasts should be on the lookout for the latter if they want to squeeze some extra performance by unlocking these cores.

The X4 970 will cost around $200, clocked at 3.50GHz with 8MB of cache, dual-channel DDR2/DDR3 memory support and AM3/AM2+ motherboard compatibility. Last but not least, a dual-core Phenom II X2 560 clocked at 3.30GHz, as well as a quad-core Athlon II X4 645 clocked at 3.1GHz should hit the scene with a price tag hovering around $100. If X-bit's sources are accurate, you should be able to find one of these in stores starting September 21.

User Comments: 13

Got something to say? Post a comment
raybay said:

Let's hope their prices remain a lot lower than Intel... Nice to see AMD plugging away and getting better and better.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

At $230-240 it makes the 1055T ($200-210) rather superfluous, no?

princeton princeton said:

Sadly the i7's still have no competition when you factor in power consumption, heat and features like hyperthreading and triple channel ram.

9Nails, TechSpot Paladin, said:

"...and AM3/AM2+ motherboard compatibility." Hey Intel - are you taking notes? You don't need a new socket with every CPU design upgrade.

LinkedKube LinkedKube, TechSpot Project Baby, said:

No you dont need a new socket to increase cores in a cpu. But to stay 30% performance increase core for core you may need to.

I can understand why so many people go with amd. Lots of room for upgrades w/o shelling out wads of cash. I on the other hand dont mind it much. I think its great they're trying to appeal to the low end market. AMD and intel just appeal to two different parts of the market right now, and I think that's okay.

gwailo247, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

I have to say I look forward to my new AM3 motherboard having a long lifetime. I bought a $74 CPU which was the first time I spent way more on the motherboard than the CPU, but I was looking towards the future. It really is like the old days in the 90s when you could replace your CPU one or even two times with a single motherboard.

Guest said:

Well looks like AMD is going to release processors that are behind the performance margin again. They should learn to beat the competition instead of always trailing behind in the dust.

The price for CPU's is actually in intel's favor right now since you can get a i7 930 for $200 and the best AMD 6-core overclocked at 4.0Ghz doesn't even perform as well as the 930 at stock 2.8Ghz. The AMD 6-core cost $300 and is beaten by something $100 cheaper so you can be AMD fan boys all you want but why not buy something that actually performs better for your money.

AMD just likes to trail behind the competition all the time and doesn't realize all they need to do is release a processor that beats Intel and everyone will then buy them but until then there is no reason to own an AMD.

DokkRokken said:

I think the only place you can buy a $200 i7 930 is at a Microcenter, and you have to walk in. There aren't many locations, so it's more or less a moot point. But feel free to care lots about computer chips and companies that don't care if you live or die.

teklord teklord said:

I don't understand why people get into such flame wars over AMD/Intel & nVidia/ATI. I always get whichever is the best bang for the buck, whichever company that is. I'm not loyal to any company and all 4 make great products.

Hope to get an i7 950 @ $200 @ Micro Center here near me soon as the 950 is going to be in the 930's price slot @ the end of the month per reports on the interwebz.

Guest said:

I have both Intel and AMD, with Intel your paying for the name.

AMD=Cheaper > Intel=Over priced.

Regenweald said:

I look at it like this: If you are in the market for a 6 core proc, then you should be doing professional work, (rendering, adobe products, 3D etc) since there is like one game and few other products that see benefits beyond 2, far less 4 cores. So if you ARE in the market for 6 cores for professional work, the cheapest intel offering comes in around $900 the most expensive AMD offering comes in at around $300. (using newegg prices). Hell yes, Intel gets the performance crown, but AMD's offering aren't exactly slow and they beat the i7 series in multi-threaded workloads. So what does your wallet say ?

Guest said:

Well I agree with price ,and the reason is you give how much for i7 so it will be obsolete as far as performance goes in oh I don't know lets say six months lol and if you are really rich and you can afford to blow money on an overpriced i7 so you can have performance gains of a few frames per second in games,well it might be time to review your idea of life lol.I just want a pc that does what I want it to do and doesnt cost me my vacation money,and when you break it down you can run all the benchmarks in the world but when you turn on warhammer or BHD or whatever after you hit 3gHZ it pretty much all the video card, so buy a good video card and descent cpu and forget about it.Oh unless your a number cruncher and you spend several terrible nighmare nights trying to figure out how many minutes of your life you will waste or could have saved if only you had a pc that would have loaded win7 30 seconds faster over the course of your life(LMAO). Oh and I have had many intel and amd and I like them both performance wise and to tell you the truth the faster they get and fancier the more I'm not impressed, cause like I said duel channel or single after 3GHZ I just haven't seen alot of difference and benchmarks are nothing like the actual games (nothing)!!!!!

Guest said:

The AMD versus Intel battle is a hot topic in the computing industry that has been fiercely discussed for many years. However, there has never been a clear winner, and it looks like it is just going to run and run. has a series of articles discussing various aspects of this fascinating debate.

Load all comments...

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.