If geeks love it, we’re on it

AMD Athlon 64 4000+ Processor

AMD Athlon 64 4000+ Processor

Supplied by AMD


AMD Athlon Processor Comparison Guide

In November 2004, Short-Media ran a guide
that compared the various sockets and architectures available in the Athlon/Opteron
line with the promise we’d return as time passed to reevalute our predictions
and hammer out some new ones. We’re back to
evaluate our predictions and reassess the the situation in
the world of AMD. Like last time, we’ll go through each CPU that represents
a significant percentage of AMD’s volume shipments, and give you the rundown
on the CPU’s history in terms of its codename, die size, market names, silicon
revision, coure count, socket, frequencies, voltages and thermal dissipation.
Just like our 2004 edition, our editors and analysts have put on their prognostication
caps for the 2006 Athlon comparison to give you future-proofed purchasing
advice, as gleaned from dozens of articles and AMD roadmaps. While much has
changed between 2004 and today, AMD has put considerable effort into condensing
their offerings, and into providing a more stable environment for their product
lines to grow in.

The most drastic
changes are the elimination of the Athlon XP,
the quiet EOL for socket 754 architecture as we predicted, the sudden evaporation
of Socket 939’s stability as an upgrade path, and the introduction of up to
four different socket technologies when all platforms are considered. On a
positive spin, AMD was finally able to bring their production down to 90 nanometres
to combat heat and ramp up processor speeds. Perfecting the 90nm strained
silicon on insulator technology allowed AMD and IBM to realize native dual-core
CPUs with the Denmark, Toledo, Manchester and Taylor
cores for their respective market segments. On the horizon, we see a more
stable socket outlook than our 2004 analysis,
as well as a move to 65nm
in the near future, and lastly the introduction of quad-core products in the
form of Barcelona and Altair for the Opteron and Athlon
64/FX series of CPUs. So, let’s take a look at what AMD has done in the past,
and what they intend to do on through 2008.

 

AMD Opteron

Original Release Date: April
22, 2003

Current Sockets: 939 (Opteron 1xx only – DEPRECATED), AM2/AM2+
(Workstation), F/F+ (2P/8P Opterons)

Note: TDP and voltage ranges include the HE (Low Clockspeed/Low
Voltage/Low Dissipation) and SE (Higher Clockspeed/Higher Voltage/Higher Dissipation)
CPUs, which are exceptions to "Normal" qualities in a given range.

Core Revisions (Chronological – Oldest > Newest):

Codename
Market Name(s)
Core Rev.
Cores
Die Size (nm)
Socket
Frequencies
Voltages
TDP
Sledgehammer Opteron 142-150/240-250/840-850
B3/C0 /CG
1
130
940
1400-2400MHz 1.15v-1.55v 30-89w
Venus Opteron 144-154
E4
1
90
939
1800-2800MHz 1.35v/1.4v 67-104w
Troy(2P)/ Athens(8P) Opteron 242-256/Opteron 842-856
E4
1
90
940
1600-3000MHz 1.35/1.4v 55-92.6w
Denmark Opteron 165-185
E6
2
90
939
1800-2600MHz 1.30/1.35v 110w
Italy/Egypt Opteron 265-285/Opteron 865-885
E6
2
90
940
1600-2600MHz 1.15-1.35v 55-95w
Santa Ana Opteron 1210-1220SE
F2
2
90
AM2
1800-2800MHz 1.3/1.35/1.4v 103/125w
Santa Rosa (2P) Opteron 2210-2220SE
F2
2
90
F
1800-2800MHz 1.2-1.375v 68-120w
Santa Rosa (8P) Opteron 8212-8220SE
F2
2
90
F
2000-2800MHz 1.2-1.375v 68-120w
Opteron Brisbane? Opteron 1/2/8xxx? (Est. Release Date: 1H07)
G
2
65
AM2/2+ or F/F+
2100-2600MHz? ???? 65w (Est.)
Barcelona ("K8L") Opteron xxxx (Est. Release Date: 2H07)
H
4
65
AM2
2600-3000MHz? ???-???v 68-120w?
Budapest/ Opteron 13xx [K8L w/ HT3.0] (Est. Release Date: Q407)
H?
4
65
AM2+
????-????MHz ???-???v ???-???w
Shanghai Opteron 23xx/83xx [2P/4P Budapest w/ HT 3.0] (Est. Release Date: 1H08)
??
4
65
F+
????-????MHz ???-???v ???-???w
???????? Opteron ?????? (Est. Release Date: 2H08)
??
4
65
AM3
???-????MHz ???-???v ???-???w

The Opteron has a history that spans more than
three years, with at least another year of life left in the product
as a name. While it appears AMD is doing the socket shuffle over the next
twelve months, the outlook of the Opteron is a little more secure than the
roadmaps indicate. The first thing that needs to be understood is that the
AM2 socket will evolve into the AM2+ socket when AMD introduces revision 3
of its Hypertransport bus architecture; socket AM2+ is pin and processor-compatible
with any existing AM2 product, however to reap the benefits of HT3.0, the
CPU must also be HT3.0-compliant. The AM2/+ socket itself is poised to fulfill
the needs of workstations with Opteron CPUs, as AM2/+ motherboards are cheaper
to produce, certify and maintain than their SMP socket F brethren. From now
until the advent of AMD’s 45nm fabrication techniques in 2H08, socket AM2
Opterons can be taken to any system in the interim, unless AMD drastically
changes their plans. Therefore, to put it in its simplest form, anyone looking
to run an Opteron PC with two or four cores in a single CPU is wise to purchase
a socket AM2 motherboard if there is the intent to upgrade.

Socket F, on the other hand, is poised to fulfill the needs
of high-end workstations, but primarily servers requiring two and eight CPU
configurations. Socket F is a 1207 pin LGA design, and is utilised in the
Opteron 2xxx and 8xxx product lines. Starting with the 2P Santa Rosa
chips, Socket F is the standard that will be employed until atleast the autumn
of 2008. Socket F+, much like AM2+, is an evolution of its progenitor to include
support for HT3.0. According to AMD’s forecasts, purchasing a Socket F Opteron
2xxx or 8xxx CPU will leave you a consistent upgrade path all the way up to
the middle of 2008. Though it might seem like AMD is letting their Socket
F fall by the wayside with the sluggish introduction of the F+ socket, this
is simply not the case; instead, the lag time between the workstation release
of HT3.0-compliant silicon for the AM2+ platform and the Socket F-platform
has to do with SMP certification.

Administrators and rackmount manufacturers
like HP and Pogo must assure that their mounts are guaranteed to be stable,
displaying mission-critical stability, therefore any components designed for
2P and 8P applications must be stringently-tested, and this introduces a delay
of up to six months. If you are in the market for a SMP socket that will cater
to your upgrade demands for the next twelve months at the bare minimum, Socket
F is your choice, but you will need to purchase a new motherboard and CPU
if the benefits of HT3.0 outweigh the steep cost these boards and chips will
undoubtedly carry. Like the Athlon FX, AMD will surely be beavering away between
the winter of ’07 and ’08 to produce refreshed silicon within their 65nm lines
to keep pace with Intel’s rapid speed upgrades planned for the Xeon 5xxx line.
If there are unforseen hiccups in AMD’s master plan for AM2/+ and F/+ converging
with AM3 in the 2008 holiday season, we can be fairly certain that they will
follow the AM2 versus F stratification that AMD has employed to further segment
their stake in the multi-CPU market.

Final Verdict

A single-CPU machine with an Opteron CPU will
continue on the Socket AM2/AM2+ path for a while. The only confirmed 65nm
part is coming in the form of Brisbane for the Athlon 64, but we have to assume
that AMD will want to herald the benefits of colder, faster, cheaper Opteron
chips for the server and workstation space around the new year. Based on this
assumption, we advise you to wait and see how the Santa Ana compares
to the upcoming Brisbane For Opterons core stacks up, and buy the
victor of the two
. Couple this chip in Q1/Q207 with a Socket AM2 board, and
you could theoretically drop new CPUs in this board until 2008. But on the
flip-side, roadmaps for the Opteron from July indicate that the Santa
Ana/Santa Rosa
cores will be in the limelight until the K8L shows itself
in late 2007, and this may have to do with the SMP certification we spoke
of earlier. By the time AMD has proven the reliability of the Santa Ana
and Santa Rosa, it may be too late for them to economically
unveil a 65nm dual-core, instead giving AMD the chance to jump straight to
quad with the next product debut. If you’re interested in an Opteron
1xxx machine, stick to the Athlon 64 line.
The outlook for cheap,
fast and cold 65nm dual-cores on the Opteron platform is just too hazy.

A multi-CPU machine with an Opteron will continue on Socket
F/F+ well into 2008. Wait to see how the 2P/8P Brisbane for Opterons (If
they’ll ever exist) stack up against existing Santa Ana components,
and then purchase the victor with an appropriate Socket F motherboard. If
you are an enthusiast, however, we sternly recommend that you steer yourself
towards the Athlon 64 FX 4×4 platform for 2P/4C designs, as the Opterons will
carry a price premium even greater than that of 4×4-capable chips. Traditionally
speaking, 2P Opteron boards are feature-sparse for enthusiasts, and we are
assured that this will not be the case for the 4×4 platform.

 

AMD Athlon FX

Original Release Date: September
23, 2003

Current Sockets: 939 (DEPRECATED), AM2/AM2+ (Current), F/F+
(4×4 Platform Only), AM3 (Future – 2008 Release)

Note: Only the Socket F Windsor cores carrying the FX-70,
FX-72 and FX-74 monikers are compatible with the upcoming 4×4 platform. We
have also taken the libert of inserting Brisbane into the lineup
for AMD’s upcoming chips, because it is not certain whether ot not AMD will
be using Brisbane for both the Athlon 64 FX and the Athlon 64. We imagine
this is very likely, as having two seperate cores going down the production
line for chips that are functionally identical is a bit absurd.

Core Revisions (Chronological – Oldest > Newest):

Codename
Market Name(s)
Core Rev.
Cores
Die Size (nm)
Socket
Frequencies
Voltages
TDP
Sledgehammer Athlon 64 FX-51
C0/C6
1
130
940
2(200/400)MHz 1.5v 89w
Clawhammer Athlon 64 FX-53
CG
1
130
939
2(400/600)MHz 1.5v 89 & 104w
San Diego Athlon 64 FX-55 & FX-57
E4/E6
1
90
939
2(600/800)MHz 1.35/1.4v 104w
Toledo Athlon 64 FX-60
E6
2
90
939
2600MHz 1.35/1.4v 110w
Windsor Athlon 64 FX-62
F2
2
90
AM2
2800MHz 1.35/1.4v 125w
Windsor (4×4) Athlon 64 FX-70/72/74 (Est. Release Date: Q406)
F2
2
90
F (4×4)
2.6, 2.8, 3.0GHz 1.35/1.4v 125w
Brisbane? Athlon 64 FX-?? (Est. Release Date: 1Q07)
G
2
65
AM2/2+ or F/+ for 4×4
2100-2600MHz ???? 65w (Est.)
Altair FX ("K8L") Athlon 64 FX-?? (Est. Release Date: 2H07)
H
4
65
AM2+ or F+ for 4×4
2600-3000MHz? ??? 125w (Est)
???????? Athlon 64 FX-?? (Est. Release Date: 2H08)
??
4
45
AM3?
???-????MHz ???-???v ???-???w

AMD is aggressively adopting a complete changeover to the Socket
F/F+ for any system featuring two or more CPUs, and Socket AM2/AM2+ for any
system running one CPU regardless of core-count. The outlook for the Athlon
FX is very similar to the recommendations we provided for the Opteron platform:
If you intend to stick with a single-CPU system for a while, a Socket AM2
motherboard will support current AM2 CPUs and non-4×4 processors in both AM2
and AM2+ flavors. If you intend to splurge on AMD’s extravagant 4×4 platform,
you will need to wait until approximately December of this year, at which
time you’ll be on the lookout for a pair of Socket F Athlon FXs and a Socket
F board; this combo will carry you through the first half of 2008, as any
codenames not on the roadmap will surely adhere to the AM2 to AM2+ / F to
F+ evolution.

At the end of 2008’s summer time, the future of the Athlon FX’s
cores and sockets becomes a bit nebulous. We understand that AMD is fixing
to transition to a 45nm process as the leaves turn in the same year, and we
are certain that the AM3 socket is going to come with this die shrink, but
we simply just don’t know what, if anything, AMD has planned for their specific
segmentation within the Athlon FX line. We may see the introduction of FB-DIMMs,
DDR3, and a whole host of other technologies as early as AM2+, but definitely
in time with the AM3 release. In the mean time, as in the case of the Opteron,
AMD will almost surely be hitting the drawing board between 2H07 and 2H08
for core revisions of the Altair FX, not warranting new codenames.

One thing that perplexes us, however, is the lack of Rev. G
silicon on the roadmap between now and Q307 for the Athlon 64 FX series. As
you’ll see below, AMD has planned Revision G chips in the Brisbane
for the Athlon 64, which brings much lower temperatures with similar clockspeeds
thanks to the 65nm fabrication technique. However, when looking at the roadmaps
for the Athlon 64 FX, Brisbane is not mentioned in the progression
from 90nm to 65nm — in fact, it functionally skips from the 90nm 4×4 Windsor
to the 65nm quad-core Altair. We can, though, reasonably assume that
the Brisbane will be making an appearance with premium clockspeeds and/or
enabled ccHT links to warrant the price premium of the line, and to support
the 4×4 platform.

Final Verdict

If you’re sticking with one CPU, wait for
the new Athlon 64 5400+, 5600+ and 6000+ Windsors and see how they
compare to the Athlon 64 Brisbane in speed and overclockability.
When the dust settles, purchase a Socket AM2 motherboard and the winning processor
core
. If you’re interested in the 4×4 platform, wait to see how the FX-70,
FX-72 and FX-74 Windsors do against Brisbane. Sadly, though,
we’re not entirely sure if Brisbane is coming to the Socket F platform
— it is a reasonable assumption, so we recommend waiting for the dust to
settle. Buying any 4×4-ready Socket F motherboard will allow you a smooth
upgrade path into 2008 unless AMD throws a curveball.

 

AMD Athlon 64/64 X2/64 X4

Original Release
Date: September 23, 2003

Current Sockets: 939 (DEPRECATED), AM2/AM2+ (Current), AM3
(Future – 2008 Release)

Note: At this time, no Athlon 64 (X2/X4) CPUs are slated
to be compatible with the 4×4 platform – this privilege is restricted solely
to the Socket F Athlon 64 FX chips. The Orleans and Windsor-class TDP/Voltage
ratings also include the values given to the Small Form Fact/Energy Efficient
chips of the line which have very low, outlying thermal envelopes and voltage
requirements.

Core Revisions (Chronological – Oldest > Newest):

Codename
Market Name(s)
Core Rev.
Cores
Die Size (nm)
Socket
Frequencies
Voltages
TDP
Clawhammer Athlon 64 2800-4000+
CG
1
130
754/939
1800-2400MHz 1.5v 89w
Newcastle Athlon 64 2800-3800+
C0 & CG
1
130
754/939
1800-2400MHz 1.5v 89w
Winchester Athlon 64 3000-3500+
D0
1
90
939
1800-2200MHz 1.4v 67w
Venice Athlon 64 1500-3800+
E3 & E6
1
90
754/939
1000-2400MHz 1.35/1.4v 51-89w
Manchester Athlon 64 3200/3500+
E4 & E6
1
90
939
2(000/200)MHz 1.35v 67w
San Diego Athlon 64 3500/3700/4000+
E4 & E6
1
90
939
2200/2400MHz 1.35/1.4v 67/89w
Manchester (X2) Athlon 64 X2 3800/4200/4600+
E4
2
90
939
2(000/200/400)MHz 1.35/1.4v 89/110w
Toledo Athlon 64 X2 3800-4800+
E6
2
90
939
2000-2400MHz 1.3/1.35v 89w/110w
Orleans Athlon 64 3000-3800+
F2
1
90
AM2
1800-2400MHz 1.2/1.4v 35/62w
Windsor Athlon 64 X2 3800-6000+
F2
2
90
AM2
2000-2600MHz 1.2-1.35v 65/89w
Brisbane Athlon 64 X2 4000-5000+ (Est. Release Date: 1Q07)
G
2
65
AM2/2+
2100-2600MHz ???? 65w (Est.)
Altair ("K8L") Athlon 64 X4 ????-????+ (Est. Release Date: 2H07)
H
4
65
AM2+
????-?????MHz ???? 125w (Est.)
???????? Athlon 64 FX-?? (Est. Release Date: 2H08)
??
4
45
AM3
???-????MHz ???-???v ???-???w

Not since the Athlon 64 FX was on a Socket 940 interface has
the Athlon 64 been any different from its bigger brother, which has meant
performance without a premium for the rest of us; roughly speaking, since
the tenth of October in 2004, both the Athlon 64 FX and the Athlon 64 had
shared the 939 and AM2 sockets and the same silicon with San Diego, Toledo
and Windsor. History has demonstrated that, at every turn, the
Athlon 64 CPUs can achieve the same clockspeeds with the same voltages as
the Athlon 64 FX, supporting the belief that the FX CPUs were naught more
than premium speedbins of Athlon 64 silicon, even without knowing codenames
to prove this fact. This will continue, in part, with the Socket AM2/AM2+
Athlon 64 FX chips being nothing more than superior bins of the Socket AM2/AM2+
Athlon 64s with Windsor now and Brisbane in 1H07, but AMD
is finally preparing to give the Athlon 64 FX a purpose. With the introduction
of the 4×4 platform, which will require 1207 pin Athlon 64 FX chips, the Athlon
64 will no longer be able to match the Athlon 64 FX in speed and features,
as the Athlon 64s from today and beyond will not feature the necessary ccHT
links to enable SMP computing. To put it simply, if you’re interested in one
CPU with two or eventually four cores, the Athlon 64 will continue to shadow
the Athlon 64 FX’s development and deliver identical clockspeeds and voltages,
but if you’re looking to move into 2P/4C rigs, you must finally abandon the
Athlon 64 CPU.

Final Verdict

Our recommendation for the Athlon
64 parallels that given for the Athlon 64 FX: If you’re in the market for
one CPU, the Athlon 64 is the place to be, and we advise you to see what happens
with Windsor and Brisbane and then buy the best AM2 board
of the time. If you’re looking for two CPUs you must finally drop the cash
on an Athlon 64 FX or even an Opteron CPU if you want more than two.

The future of AMD is clear, but not necessarily bright. The
debut of the Intel Core2Duo series, with the new microarchitecture, has spelled
serious misfortune for AMD in recent months, and will probably continue to
do so. The refreshed face of the Xeon line, an already-established 65nm process,
and an engineering team that will beat AMD to 45nm and quad-core by more than
a year has spelled disaster for the chaps in green. Right now, AMD is in scramble-mode
to accelerate the production of 65nm and quad-core chips to get back in the
race for supremacy which Intel has firmly stolen for now. All told, however,
AMD has done an admirable job at solidifying their offerings in the upcoming
years; giving a true weight to the Opteron line in the last 16 months, and
granting the FX line a role other than the oft-overlooked big brother of the
Athlon 64 were necessary and welcomed steps. Finally, and most importantly,
AMD has outlined a clear socket path: AM2 to AM2+ with an Athlon 64 for people
who want one CPU, F to F+ with an Athlon 64 FX for people who want two CPUs,
and F to F+ with an Opteron for people who want more than two CPUs, with everything
converging on AM3 in 2008.

Despite AMD’s efforts to keep up with Intel, the 4×4 debut this
yule season will be a token gesture for people who have read this guide, and
are aware that impressive heat and cost-saving die shrinks are coming to the
Athlon FX line in the first half of 2007. No one would seriously consider
a Windsor Athlon 64 FX when the 65nm successors are expected to be
cheaper, run cooler, and run faster. With that in mind, we must bid
a temporary but sorrowful farewell to the age of AMD supremacy, and wait until
the first half of the new year for AMD to stabilize its cores and solidify
the 4×4 line. From that juncture, AMD must race to release the K8L and their
45nm technique just to stay in the game, which even then may not be enough.

Despite all the doom and gloom spread far and wide by pundits
and analysts, AMD will have one thing going for them, if only by necessity:
Price. AMD will have to undercut Intel if they hope to sway Core2Duo
and Core2Quadro ogglers back to the banner of green and white, which means
we may have only begun to see a revival of AMD’s CPUs going for the tidy sum
of change found beneath the sofa. Intel being no fool, has the profit margins
and capital to fight back, so keep your eyes peeled for a price war like we
have not seen since the Pentium 4-C and the Athlon XP.

by Robert Hallock

Highs

  • High desktop performance
  • Socket 939 provides upgrade path
  • cheaper than competition’s top of the line processor

Lows

  • The bleeding edge has a price

Comments

  1. MediaMan
    MediaMan The article displays "wonky". We'll get that fixed up asap. :)
  2. Thrax
    Thrax
    Enhance Virus Protection, beneficial on paper, is yet to become mainstream with the Windows operating system.

    "Has yet to become."
    The price concious may want to consider the AMD Athlon 64 3800+ as it provides very close peformance to the 4000+

    "The price conscious."

    Nice article. ;) :p

    AMD 4000+. mmmmm.
  3. Shorty
    Shorty Fixed the display :)

    Good article, Im tempted but dual Opteron calls me..
  4. Geeky1
    Geeky1 *slaps Shorty's hand away from the 4000*

    Be sensible man! We both have/had duallies. Just tough it out... only a few more months for that Iwill SLI/NF4/Dual S940 board...
    /me drools
  5. Thrax
    Thrax Dual opteron indeed.

    /me drools
  6. MediaMan
    MediaMan I've told you once...I've told you a thousand times...no slobber on the site please. I keep having to wipe off the inside of my monitor.
  7. Geeky1
    Geeky1 I'm not entirely sure that all of that is slobber... :wtf:
  8. Omega65
  9. GnomeWizardd
    GnomeWizardd Wouldn't mind seeing it against the Intel top dawg Just so we can see how badly Intel is falling behind
  10. MediaMan
    MediaMan
    Wouldn't mind seeing it against the Intel top dawg Just so we can see how badly Intel is falling behind


    You know...so would I Gnome...so would I. The good folks at INTEL USA have long since politely declined my requests. INTEL UK had made big promises but, in 4 months, been left unfulfilled.

    AMD have supported us 100% and have consistently encouraged their processors to be properly matched and compared to the competition. I've made offers to return INTEL product that is given for review purposes. A "free" INTEL processor is not what I want.

    What I want from INTEL is to answer questions like yours.
  11. primesuspect
    primesuspect Perhaps the good folks at Intel are worried about what their best would look like against AMD's best :D :thumbsup:
  12. Shivian
    Shivian
    Be sensible man! We both have/had duallies. Just tough it out... only a few more months for that Iwill SLI/NF4/Dual S940 board...
    /me drools
    Must... not... spend

Howdy, Stranger!

You found the friendliest gaming & tech geeks around. Say hello!