AMD to release three 95W AMD FX Series processors in Q1

By on February 17, 2012, 9:15 AM

A leaked slide obtained by Turkish website DonanimHaber reveals AMD is planning the release three new Zambezi-based FX processors before the end of this quarter. The fastest of the bunch, the FX-8140, is a 4 module, 8 core part with a base frequency of 3.2GHz and Turbo Core up to 4.1GHz -- 100MHz more than the FX-8120. It has 16MB of cache and a power rating of 95W TDP. There's no mention of pricing, though it should sit somewhere in between the $200 AMD FX-8120 and the $245 FX-8150.

Next up is the AMD FX-6120, which will be a six-core processor clocked at 3.5 GHz base and 4.1 GHz Turbo, a 0.2 GHz boost over the FX-6100 ($150). It's also a 95W part but packs 14MB of cache.

The third new chip in AMD's roadmap is the FX-4150, a quad-core processor with a base frequency of 3.9GHz and Turbo Core up to 4.1GHz, which works out to be 300MHz faster than the FX-4100 ($110). Like the other chips being introduced, it has a 95W TDP and is compatible with AM3+ motherboards.

In addition, VR-Zone reports AMD will also release two new 125W processors in Q1 -- the FX-6200 and FX-4170. The second-generation A-Series 'Trinity' APU should follow sometime in Q2 for mainstream desktop and laptops, while the second-generation FX processors (codenamed 'Vishera') won't arrive until Q3.




User Comments: 4

Got something to say? Post a comment
ikesmasher said:

Hey, if it lowers the price of the Fx-4100 even more, that would be cool.

Guest said:

If the FX 4100 got down to $60, then it might be viable. Until then it's a moot point, especially with Intel's new Pentium line. Other than a Llano APU for a very select customer niche, there literally is zero reason to go AMD at this time. Up until recently, AMD at the very least had it's place as a good price/performance option at specific price points, but now that is gone.

princeton princeton said:

Guest said:

If the FX 4100 got down to $60, then it might be viable. Until then it's a moot point, especially with Intel's new Pentium line. Other than a Llano APU for a very select customer niche, there literally is zero reason to go AMD at this time. Up until recently, AMD at the very least had it's place as a good price/performance option at specific price points, but now that is gone.

AMD's position as a good option was gone before Bulldozer even launched, Bulldozer sucking just cemented the fact that Intel will be ahead for years to come, possibly forever. Reasons to buy AMD all died with the launch of Sandy Bridge last year. The i3's crushed the PII X4's, the i5s crushed everything else above that, and the i7 was for people who needed to go beyond the i5.

Guest said:

There is plenty of reason to go AMD they are great processors.I have used AMD for years I have three rigs running AMD right now.1 with A AMD fx-4100 and a FX-8120 the FX line works great for on everything i do and awesome multitasking.Most users don't care about benchmarks as long as they can do what they need them to do.The only ones that care about benchmarks are the power users which is a small portion of the market compared to all the people looking to just e-mail, twitter,facebook,play a little music ,a few small games, a movie or 2 FX is great at doing it all and then some all at the same time.AMD's APU's kick the crap out of intels HD graphics 3000.AMD is making smart decisions.They are going after the majority market not the smaller overclocking,benchmarkers and they have done it all being an honest company unlike Intel.I would never support a company like Intel and their shady business practices so they can have a monopoly on the market.F U Intel you got what you deserved 1.45 billion fine.HA HA.Long live AMD

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.