AMD-branded memory coming to the US

By on November 28, 2011, 5:30 PM

Advanced Micro Devices has announced that they will be bringing company-branded memory modules to the United States. The brand will be introduced with two strategic launch partners: Patriot Memory and VisionTek.

AMD has been supplying and validating memory for Radeon graphics cards for years and they feel that jumping into the volatile system memory market is a clear opportunity for the company. They have used the AMD OverDrive performance optimization tool to test and optimize DRAM in conjunction with their APUs, CPUs, GPUs and chipset platforms. Such insight is now helping them create memory modules for other manufacturers as well.

AMD hopes to take the guesswork out of selecting memory by introducing three different performance tiers. All modules will be available in 2GB, 4GB and 8GB capacities. The Entertainment level will feature 1333MHz and 1600MHz speeds designed for quiet home theater PC applications. AMD’s Performance category will support speeds up to 1600MHz in matched pairs with low latency. The top-end Radeon Edition modules will run at 1866MHz and are tuned, tested and certified for specific AMD platforms.

AMD Memory will be available through major retails including Amazon.com, Bestbuy.ca, Fry’s, Memory Express, Micro Center, NCIX, Newegg, Tiger Direct, VIP Computers (UK) and others in the near future. There’s no word on module pricing but given the state of the market, we don’t expect them to carry much of a premium (if any) over existing kits. AMD has been selling similar kits in Japan dating back to August, albeit under different performance categories.




User Comments: 32

Got something to say? Post a comment
Guest said:

oh boy!! but i guess this is a logical move, seeing how they are "defaulting" out of the CPU market; to stay relevant, not only in the tech industry, but also in the public eyes, they are setting up a safety net in the "start-up" segment.

H3llion H3llion, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Guest said:

oh boy!! but i guess this is a logical move, seeing how they are "defaulting" out of the CPU market; to stay relevant, not only in the tech industry, but also in the public eyes, they are setting up a safety net in the "start-up" segment.

They aren't going anywhere.

They still got the GPU market, their APUs and now this etc...

ikesmasher said:

Yey! i like the idea of keeping everything in my rig AMD.

Guest said:

Actually there is word on pricing - http://www.rage3d.com/index.php?cat=75#newsid33984273

AMD Memory, Entertainment Edition | 2GB | 1333 | 9-9-9 | 1.5v | $12.99

AMD Memory, Entertainment Edition | 2GB | 1600 | 9-9-9 | 1.5v | $13.99

AMD Memory, Entertainment Edition | 4GB | 1333 | 9-9-9 | 1.5v | $22.99

AMD Memory, Entertainment Edition | 4GB | 1600 | 9-9-9 | 1.5v | $24.99

LinkedKube LinkedKube, TechSpot Project Baby, said:

If you can't beat em. Do something else! AMD's new philosophy.

ikesmasher said:

Except that AMD beats intel at gaming. Well. With the nicest PHIIs anyway.

Guest said:

Dude, have you checked any review at least in techspot? Even Phenoms have a hard time beating a Core 2 Duo. And don't come with the same old bad argument of the "integrated graphics processor" in both Intel (Sandy Bridge, Arrandale) and new AMD's APUs. If you pair an Intel CPU and an AMD CPU with the same GPU you'll have a big surprise fanboy [and no, I'm not an Intel fanboy -I hated all SK478 and non-Core 2 SK775 processors]. You just give unfundamented opinions.

ihaveaname said:

^Dude, 'unfundamented'? 'Unsubstantiated' maybe, or 'unwarranted' at a stretch ... you've just lowered my opinion of anti-fanboys.

LinkedKube LinkedKube, TechSpot Project Baby, said:

^Dude, 'unfundamented'? 'Unsubstantiated' maybe, or 'unwarranted' at a stretch ... you've just lowered my opinion of anti-fanboys.

Maybe the wrong use of a word, but his point is still valid, and factual.

DokkRokken said:

I suppose RAM that has Overdrive profiles will make for simpler overclocking. But that's all I can really see it being advantageous for.

Arris Arris said:

Maybe he meant "Except that AMD beats intel at gaming in terms of bang for buck performance"?

gwailo247, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

Arris said:

Maybe he meant "Except that AMD beats intel at gaming in terms of bang for buck performance"?

AMD does beat Intel in bang for buck for a non-gaming computer, but in my experience when putting together a hard core gaming rig, AMD doesn't usually keep up.

Burty117 Burty117, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

I've just jumped off the AMD band Wagon and gone intel.

I've gone from a Phenom II x4 3.4Ghz to an Intel Core i7 2600K and I can tell you now the Intel beats the old Phenom Hands Down and a little bit more.

I can't see myself changing back any time soon.

ikesmasher said:

Arris said:

Maybe he meant "Except that AMD beats intel at gaming in terms of bang for buck performance"?

^

Burty117 Burty117, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

ikesmasher said:

Arris said:

Maybe he meant "Except that AMD beats intel at gaming in terms of bang for buck performance"?

^

But thats not true? a Core i5 for instance beats everything AMD has to offer and is cheaper (at least in the UK) than the FX top end chips? Bang for Buck wise, the Core i5 is best?

Guest said:

...Bulldozer armed with radeon memory.. yes, perfect couple

bulldozer + radeon memory + radeon vga card = very hardcore three some

mailpup mailpup said:

bulldozer + radeon memory + radeon vga card = very hardcore three some
add an AMD motherboard chipset.

Burty117 Burty117, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

mailpup said:

bulldozer + radeon memory + radeon vga card = very hardcore three some
add an AMD motherboard chipset.

So a Foursome?

mailpup mailpup said:

For now, yes. It doesn't seem like much of a stretch of the imagination for AMD to get into the SSD business one day. Then you'd have a ... fivesome.

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

So a Foursome?

well of course , if you have the chipset +AMD CPU and....OH you minx!:p

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

For now, yes. It doesn't seem like much of a stretch of the imagination for AMD to get into the SSD business one day. Then you'd have a ... fivesome.

That kind of presupposes that GloFo gets it act together. Intel, Micron and Samsung are already at 20nm for NAND. I'd much prefer AMD to sort out their s&#+ with the first component of the "foursome" before venturing off into new territory.

As for the vRAM (don't know why this wasn't reported)- it makes sense if AMD can leverage buying quantity to attain some design enhancement, or as a springboard to other avenues (XDR2 ?)... The desktop DIMM's - not really- low margin- average speed and timings- rebranded Patriot IC's.

Are AMD offering the lifetime warranty afforded by standard Patriot kits? (and Corsair, Kingston, G.Skill etc.) ?

Why not include 16GB kits ?

Why not include DDR3-1866/2133+ now? AMD systems (noteable Llano and BD) seems performance sensitive with regards memory bandwidth, why handicap the ensuing review rigs?

On the other hand, the red heatspreaders are simply diiiiiivine, a definite must for people who really need to colour co-ordinate!

/Carson Kressley'ed

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

On the other hand, the red heatspreaders are simply diiiiiivine, a definite must for people who really need to colour co-ordinate!

I'll say! I am relegated to using Corsair blue with my red rig!, It's horrible I tells ya! ...horrible!

ikesmasher said:

burty117 said:

ikesmasher said:

Arris said:

Maybe he meant "Except that AMD beats intel at gaming in terms of bang for buck performance"?

^

But thats not true? a Core i5 for instance beats everything AMD has to offer and is cheaper (at least in the UK) than the FX top end chips? Bang for Buck wise, the Core i5 is best?

Its the first set of CPUs on their first new architecture in a while. Give them a year or so, and chances are, they will be better.

Oh, and it is still better. You could get a quad core 3.3 GHz, or a eight core, overclocked probably around 4.4 GHz.

And might i ask, it is known that intel is faster, but why? on paper, the main difference I noticed between a phenom II 955 and some i5 (cant remember which) was that the i5 has the bigger L3 cache...but does that really make it faster?

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

Its the first set of CPUs on their first new architecture in a while. Give them a year or so, and chances are, they will be better.

Sorry. You get your chance when you're good enough to compete, not on what might be, could be and maybe. People are generally fickle and impatient...and they've already spent 4+ years waiting for the promised performance. BD now can't compete with Sandy Bridge, and in a year?....well, AMD will be looking at competing with Haswell -the refined Ivy Bridge on a mature 22nm process

Oh, and it is still better. You could get a quad core 3.3 GHz, or a eight core, overclocked probably around 4.4 GHz.

Not much help when Helen Keller could OC a 2500K/2600K to 4.7+ with a press of a button and gain better performance.....and still use markedly less power.

And might i ask, it is known that intel is faster, but why? on paper, the main difference I noticed between a phenom II 955 and some i5 (cant remember which) was that the i5 has the bigger L3 cache...but does that really make it faster?

Basically it comes down to a number of factors

-It's the architecture that AMD chose for future computing and thread scheduling...not the architecture for today.

-Cache latency and performance

-Immature process node for AMD's foundry partner meaning too many design targets missed ( clockspeed, power requirement)

-CPU that wasn't designed with desktop applications in mind. Server orientated (although that remains to be seen)

-While not necessarily bad, the competition is good...very good, and they have the resources (manpower and money) to stay good.

This article -and the links within (esp. the Dave Kanter articles at RWT) - at ArsTechnica breaks down the hits and misses.

If you're looking for some straight-up confidence from AMD in their own design...here it is. You may need to find an BS to English online translator. Hopefully the next time they are asked questions....they'll answer them. If this is the best they can do with cherry-picked questions and weeks of preparation I don't hold out much hope for a miracle leap in IPC and overall performance....but we'll see. AMD are locked into BD, and it's still better than what they had previously...it just isn't good enough in any recognizable metric to trouble Intel.

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

If you're looking for some straight-up confidence from AMD in their own design...here it is. You may need to find an BS to English online translator. Hopefully the next time they are asked questions....they'll answer them. If this is the best they can do with cherry-picked questions and weeks of preparation I don't hold out much hope for a miracle leap in IPC and overall performance....but we'll see. AMD are locked into BD, and it's still better than what they had previously...it just isn't good enough in any recognizable metric to trouble Intel.

Of course AMD's architecture is not that of just 'todays' software, but that of forward thinking and applications that will fuel the imagination of tomorrows technology.

As multi-threading becomes more and more common, AMD's forward thinking architecture will come into it's own and be the performance standard that the industry will follow. for the current slate of processors, we do not look at ours as that of declining popularity...but that the public is becoming more selective and discriminating....

....sorry I can't .....

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

I just got around to reading the comment thread from that Q&A. Emporer Kyle said that AMD approached [H] to do the article!...and the kicker is, that the guy at AMD whose idea it was is one of the 1400 that got canned.

They had the perfect opportunity to beg off the project and still went ahead with what was a stone certain PR failure.

I knew before reading the first answer that it would be meaningless generalizations, but knowing that AMD could have avoided the whole thing?!......textbook bonehead play.

Loved the " [FX-8150] up to 18% faster than i7 2600 in Civ 5" claim. Would be interesting to see what kind of parameters you would have use for that to happen...and probably not the best thing to quote given that Kyle used the game in [H]'s BD review...oops.

Maybe AMD offers a really good severence package

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

We also looked at CPU utilization on the AMD FX-8150 to see how well the game was utilizing the CPU. We noticed that all 8 cores were being utilized while we played the game, each core carried a load, none laid flat on the graph. We also noted that the highest peak total CPU usage while gaming was 76%. This indicates that the CPU is being used well in the game as far as utilization goes.

show me a game where "cores lay flat" windows tries to distribute something to any core available and shows a modicum of activity. Doesn't count as 'used core' afaic.

Loved the " [FX-8150] up to 18% faster than i7 2600 in Civ 5" claim. Would be interesting to see what kind of parameters you would have use for that to happen.

probably @ 5760 res with forced 32 AA while balancing an egg on a spoon or something

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

Rrrrofllll

ikesmasher said:

and, and with liquid cooling, you could probably get a FX to 6ish.

But yea, your points ARE valid. im just hoping for the best, which isnt likely going to happen.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

I think we're all hoping for the best, but in the greater scheme of things, desktop performance/enthusiast CPU segment would likely be a drop in the bucket with regards AMD's overall portfolio and their need to increase marketshare.

For all the talk of people who buy AMD to keep "competition alive", it is basically rubbish....we're all just bystanders watching it unfold. AMD need to get and keep big contracts in:

>OEM desktop where the majority of people wouldn't know or care what CPU they're buying. Just tell them the speed, how much RAM and screen size, and the OEM's only care about lowest price and guaranteed quantity. AMD's larger die area and poorer yield-both resulting in less usable CPU's per wafer-basically means they take a bath (red ink variety) if they try to undercut Intel's pricing

>Server. The big iron sector is ruled by performance-per-watt and performance-per-core (server software licence fee's are often based on per-core usage). This is the big question mark in AMD's future IMO. If BD can haul AMD's server marketshare up from it's present 5.5% to a respectable level then desktop CPU parts continue simply by dint of being a by-product of server CPU design. If not then the future is APU all the way.

As far as desktop goes, how many CPU's would the average computer user/upgrader/builder buy in one year? or two, or three ? The upshot is that you have to make Intel users shift to AMD, and FX for most people isn't a compelling choice over Sandy Bridge. The next iteration pits Piledriver against Ivy Bridge. AMD are on record as saying Piledriver will be 10% better than BD -with a 3-5% increase in IPC (still behind Sandy Bridge in a lot of metrics). Intels roadmap points to [link] which seems to tally with Coolaler's benchmarking on a clock-for-clock & cache-for-cache comparison.

AMD's saving grace is that Intel have no intention of seeing AMD go under...they just won't allow AMD to make any further progress than they already have in the markets that Intel holds sway. Another point to consider is that even if AMD had the ace products, it's highly dubious whether AMD's foundry partners would have the capacity to help them take advantage of the fact.

I suspect that if Intel really wanted to make AMD's eyes water, they could quite easily drop CPU pricing to that of AMD or below, and make every Intel motherboard chipset as fully featured as X79

LinkedKube LinkedKube, TechSpot Project Baby, said:

DBZ has become C. Crankies protege. Just not as mean and old apparently. Roflmao

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

Yup. Looking at a C+ average. Might have been higher but the lady of the house runs interference during the Russian Art Photography course. Going for extra credit with process tech this semester.

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.