AMD FX-series processors clock speeds detailed

By on July 15, 2011, 8:30 AM

More details have surfaced today about AMD's highly anticipated FX-series processors, codenamed Zambezi. The latest tidbit comes courtesy of Turkish site DonanimHaber, which has been the source of quite a few AMD leaks recently, and basically details the entire lineup complete with their respective clock speeds -- something that had eluded us until now.

According to the report there are eight FX-series models on the cards comprising four eight-core FX-81xx parts, two six-core FX-61xx processors, and a couple of quad-core FX-41xx models. The chips are all based on GlobalFoundries' 32nm process technology, come in an AM3+ package, and have a built-in dual-channel DDR3-1866 memory controller. They also feature 1MB of L2 cache per core, 8MB of shared L3 cache, and unlocked multipliers.

The top of the range eight-core model is supposed to be the FX-8150, which boasts a core clock of 3.6 GHz (up to 4.2GHz in Turbo mode) and has a TDP of 125W. The FX-8120 comes next in standard (125W) and low-power (95W) variants, both featuring 3.1-4GHz clock speeds, while the FX-8100 offers 2.8-3.7GHz clock speeds and a TDP of 95W.

The six-core FX-6120 and quad-core FX-4120 have a TDP of 95W but there's no information on their clock speeds. Meanwhile, the FX-6100 and FX-4100 come with the same TDP and feature base/Turbo clocks of 3.3/3.9 GHz and 3.6/3.8 GHz, respectively. Now for the bad news, DonanimHaber says to have heard that AMD will miss its initial Q3 release plan, and as a result the FX-series is now scheduled for an October launch.




User Comments: 28

Got something to say? Post a comment
LinkedKube LinkedKube, TechSpot Project Baby, said:

Does it not bother anyone that its looking like 2004 all over again? Oh no's/ Can I haz one? Why are they upclocking cpu's and still no socket change.

Puiu Puiu said:

@supersmashbrada: Compared to intel which has a new socket for each new generation (or even several per generation) i think it's much better. Cheap, good and matured (tech-wise) motherboards are always a good thing.

hahahanoobs hahahanoobs said:

Socket AM3+ is new.

BMfan BMfan said:

People are getting stuck in the intel way of life,rather replace the socket every year and rip your customers off because they have to buy a new board rather than use a existing socket that works fine.

Sandy bridge could have stayed socket 1156 but then intel couldn't sell more chipsets and boards.

As soon as the new AM3+ boards become available here i'm getting myself one and it's great too know i can use my current CPU till the new ones come out.

howzz1854 said:

socket change actually contributed to AMD's demise back in 2005. going from socket 939 to AM2 showed little to no benefit to the end user consider CPU by itself wasn't much of a improvement already.

less socket change = better for the consumer.

i actually dislike intel's smart business model. they get you everything you upgrade. now to think about it, socket 939 and socket A were the golden days. you used to be able to ride on several iterations of CPUs all with one socket.

howzz1854 said:

meant: "they get you 'everytime' you upgrade"

Mizzou Mizzou said:

Just waiting for the FX-8150 to hit the streets, think it will be a nice upgrade from my 965BE. I do a lot of media recoding and am hoping to cut my processing time roughly in half.

R3DP3NGUIN R3DP3NGUIN said:

I sure hope they release it before October. The suspense is killing me!!!

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

a new architecture, a new node 32nm, a new process (from SOI to HKMG) and from what I have been able to read on the architecture, its not a reverse engineer of Intels offerings , but a sophisticated new approach to 'hyperthreading', and core efficiency. If Sandy Bridge did not exist, these would probably be out now as a lesser performing line of CPU's. While I wish they were out already i am not particularly alarmed or surprised that it has been set back a few times. Seems like competition at work. but thats just me.

Guest said:

BMfan,

If you bought a Core i7 920/930 on Socket 1366 in 2008, you wouldn't have to upgrade to a faster CPU probably until SB-E or perhaps IB. So for 3 years you would have had an incredible fast machine without any requirement to upgrade even once.

If you bought a Core i5 750/760 / i7 860 etc on Socket 1156 in 2009, then you can also easily wait to upgrade until Ivy Bridge as well.

On the other hand, if you purchased a Phenom II during this period, you would have had a slower CPU in the last 2-3 years AND on top of that inferior SATA 3 performance too.

I have been building computers for 11 years now and I have never upgraded the CPU only. Technology advances so fast - we went from AGP to PCIe 1.0 to PCIe 2.0 and soon PCIe 3.0, from IDE to SATA 1 -- > 2 --> 3. All these upgrades required new motherboards anyway. So it was only natural to get a brand new board every major CPU upgrade (Athlon XP+ --> P4 / A64 --> Core 2 D/Q --> Core i7 (1st gen) ---> Core i7 (2nd gen).

If you purchased an AMD processor starting with Core 2 Duo days, sure you would have saved $150 on perhaps 1 motherboard swap, but you also would have had a MUCH slower CPU in the last 5 years!!

Guest said:

I think this is great. I was debating how to do my next upgrade (I do incremental and always try and pick a board that can go thru multiple processors and video cards over 4-5 years).

This way I can move my 965BE into a new board, buy new RAM (as I was already planning) then wait for the FX I want to hit the pricepoint I want. Swap in and done.

These chips look great. Lower TPD to go with higher clock speeds and faster RAM speeds before overclocking. The fact that it will already let me start with a socket I am used to using (and can keep the same cooling fan). I really don't see the downside.

Anyone else noticing no mention of the Ondie GPU nonsense for these? They know exactly who they are selling these to!

Mizzou Mizzou said:

from what I have been able to read on the architecture, its not a reverse engineer of Intels offerings , but a sophisticated new approach to 'hyperthreading', and core efficiency.

That's exactly the impression I got reading the article in your thread from yesterday. Looks like AMD is incorporating some of the more successful aspects from a number of Intel's processors along with some very innovative changes of their own. Also, didn't realize how much power conservation was being built into Bulldozer, pretty impressive.

Guest said:

Will be a Black Edition Llano Processor X4 3Ghz+ ???

Guest said:

Not every single generation of Intel CPUs requires a new socket though, IB will use the current one.

jeffz6 said:

I feel very unsatisfied if I upgrade my cpu but not the motherboard, besides, unless you went for a top product , motherboards are the cheapest component.

Guest said:

@the guest pointing that IB isnt ganna require a new socket , will stop defending intel while u dont even know , IB will require the new socket that they are currently calling it LGA 2011 , but i think the name would be stupid if they didnt change it coz its already late to call it 2011 , and there is a chance to be out by 2012 , anyway the point is , it is a new socket .. , afterall yes i do like AMD but any sane human will think that intel is a ripoff company and AMD is much much much more customer-friendly , anyway i would love to see AMD owning intel , so the 2nd guys maybe would consider to stop the ripoffs , and make some prices that have logic or so , anyway im not ganna support a company like intel , check all the lawsuits , scams , non-competitive immoral work and all of that ,if u dont know what im talking about google it , AMD vs Intel lawsuit , and Intel antitrust lawsuit , they did much immoral things with many decent ppl , anyway i buy whats best for me price vs performance, and i have trust that AMD will deliver that as usual .

Guest said:

"DonanimHaber says to have heard that AMD will miss its initial Q3 release plan, and as a result the FX-series is now scheduled for an October launch."

Any truth to this? If true then this whole launch of Bulldozer has turned into an absolute shambles. The perfect example of how not to launch a processor or run a company for that matter.

Mizzou Mizzou said:

Hard to know what's really true on the release date of Bulldozer. Haven't seen October mentioned anywhere other than DonanimHaber, so hopefully it will be a bit sooner. In any case, as important as this launch is for AMD I think it best they get it right even if that means some additional delays.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

@the guest pointing that IB isnt ganna require a new socket , will stop defending intel while u dont even know* , IB will require the new socket that they are currently calling it LGA 2011

*LGA 2011 = Sandy Bridge-E

*LGA 1155= Sandy Bridge & Ivy Bridge

but i think the name would be stupid

Are you sure you're not thinking of your name ?

fpsgamerJR62 said:

All we have are news leaks and rumors but not a single Bulldozer CPU in sight. I would like to see some actual CPUs at the retail level soon. If Intel manages to launch LGA 2011 / Sandy Bridge-E ahead of Bulldozer, that will put even more pressure on AMD.

pcnthuziast said:

I actually feel like AMD hasn't felt pressured for a long while. They are comfortable being #2. They have their priorities straight and putting customer satisfaction before the coveted performance crown. I've always gone with Intel, but fully respect AMD for their push to provide bang for the buck and consistent innovation.

venomblade said:

Not impressive, sandy bridge probably still beats it.

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

Not impressive, sandy bridge probably still beats it.

...and this opinion based on a chart of clock speeds?

what exactly about a list of clock speeds is either impressive or not impressive?

Guest said:

I have been building computers for 11 years now and I have never upgraded the CPU only. Technology advances so fast - we went from AGP to PCIe 1.0 to PCIe 2.0 and soon PCIe 3.0, from IDE to SATA 1 -- > 2 --> 3. All these upgrades required new motherboards anyway.

Except the thing is, both PCIe and SATA are backwards compatible to previous versions. In other words, you can use a PCIe 2.0 card on a PCIe 1.0 mobo (as I had done switching my ATI x800 for a 3750). On the other hand, sometimes a CPU socket would match, but you'd still have to change the mobo to use a newer CPU because of stupid power requirements (thus why, despite using an LGA 775 socket, the 925X mobos were incompatible with Core or even Pentium D chips).

Obviously, you've been building PCs, not upgrading them. This is what your thinking gets you.

darkzelda said:

I recently bought a Gygabyte 870A-UD3 motherboard and I was greatly surprised because for a low price i got an AM3+ board that was still able to handle my old Phenom II processor. So I'm actually ready for these new processors and when they hit stores I'll just need to buy the cpu.

Guest said:

Really? A 920 will still perfectly fine way more than 3yrs after 2008.

Where as this AMD crap, you know it sucks when they have to crank it up to outragously high speeds to give it any hope of competing, which you know will be incredibly hard to cool.

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

Really? A 920 will still perfectly fine way more than 3yrs after 2008.

Where as this AMD crap, you know it sucks when they have to crank it up to outragously high speeds to give it any hope of competing, which you know will be incredibly hard to cool.

The High clocks are because of the architectural aspects. What you just stated was a kin to saying that a HD 6970 needs 1536 shader cores to compete with the GTX 580's 512 cuda cores. They are completely different architectures and comparing them by operating frequency makes no sense.

A 920 will still perfectly fine way more than 3yrs after 2008.

Huh?

which you know will be incredibly hard to cool

Oh really? You know this ?

BTW, I wonder how you arrive at the conclusion that 3.6Ghz (the speed of the 8150P flagship) is "outragously high speeds"? [sic]. Intel's flagship (i7 990) is clocked @ 3.46Ghz . So 3.46Ghz is just fine, and 3.6Ghz is "outrageous"? While the new AMD CPU's appear to be clocked a bit higher, I guess outrageous starts where the blue box ends ey?

Another great guest contribution.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

On a related note Sandy Bridge-E will be shipping without a stock cooler....and according to VR-Zone, current steppings are running at ~180 watts and:

[link]

While I'd doubt that anyone looking at buying an X79 system doesn't already have (or will have) an 80 Plus certified PSU with at least 23A on mobo ATX rail, 180 watts doesn't sound overclocker friendly.

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.