Why Twitter is bigger than 140 characters
Are you a Photoshop expert? We need volunteers
Gaming Keyboard Roundup: Logitech, OCZ, and Razer

AMD's Phenom X3 Processors

An in-depth look at AMD's new triple-core processors

by Mike D. published Apr 22, 2008

Filed under: AMD, systems, processors, overclocking, motherboards

Triple Troubles

When AMD sent me the triple core Phenom 8750, I was expecting to throw it in a Phenom compatible motherboard and be off to the races. Unfortunately, my experience was not quite that simple.

I had an AMD 770 series based motherboard handy in the lab that I was going to use for testing. Seeing as though this board was designed with Phenom in mind, I thought it should work without incident. I had no issues getting the board to post and it even recognized the CPU as “AMD Phenom X3 8750 Triple Core” during the boot process. To my frustration, however, the system consistently hung during the Windows Vista installation.

I was pleased to see that a new BIOS had just recently been published for this board—the timing seemed to coincide with the launch of the new 9x50 series Phenom X4 processors. After flashing to the latest revision, I was able to install Vista. Once I took a look at the task manager, however, I was greeted with a bit of a surprise.

Last I checked, this should have been a triple core CPU. As far as this system was concerned, there were only two CPU cores, not three. CPU-Z 1.44.2 correctly identified the Phenom X3, but indicated that there were only two cores also.

Coincidentally, AMD let all the X3 testers know about a recent Microsoft KB article outlining a problem in Vista and Server 2008 where a CPU may use fewer processors than expected if the number of cores on a socket is not a power of 2. It is listed as KB950182 for anyone interested in learning more. Well, three is not a power of two, so I was off to retrieve the hotfix, or so I thought. The hotfix was not released to the general public, so I had to open a support case with Microsoft to obtain the patch. After applying it, however, I had the exact same problem. This was not a Microsoft issue at all in my situation, but rather a lower level issue with the board. It looks like an additional BIOS update will be necessary to get a triple core Phenom working with this particular board. I discussed this hotfix with AMD and they indicated that the average consumer need not worry about this hotfix. It is likely a solution to a very one-off problem experienced.

I decided to give the X3 a shot in an older socket AM2 based board based on a nvidia chipset as well. It was flashed to the latest BIOS that enabled Phenom support. Despite my attempts, I could not get the system to post with the X3 installed.

These issues are really not AMD's fault, but buyers need to be aware that not all boards will support the Phenom X3 out of the box. Even newer boards based on AMD's 7 series chipsets may require a BIOS update.

AMD provided us with a list of suggested boards for X3 testing, but I did not have any of those particular models in the lab. Most of them were based on AMD's new 780G chipset. I ran out to a local PC shop and was thankfully able to pick up a Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H board in time to do some benchmarking. I updated the Gigabyte BIOS to revision F3 that is available at their website and had no issues getting all of the cores recognized. The KB950182 hotfix was not required.

Software Scaling Issues

Things seem to consistently double in the world of PCs. One gigabyte to two gigabytes to four gigabytes, and so on. The same seems to be holding true for CPU cores. One, two, four, eight and so on. It seems that many software developers have been assuming that CPU makers would be holding true to this pattern. As such, certain applications that do indeed take advantage of dual and quad core processors, do not always take advantage of triple-cores. Windows Media Encoder 9 for example, gladly takes advantage of 1, 2 or 4 cores, but does not seem to utilize a third. So a triple core scales like a dual core in this situation. AMD is currently working with Microsoft on this specific issue, but I'm sure some others will begin to surface as triple core CPUs enter the mainstream. Although this may prove to be a bit of an annoyance in the short term, reputable software companies will surely begin to patch their applications.

« Back1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14Next »

About the author

Mike D.

Mike D. is a lead hardware reviewer for Icrontic. Mike was recently married, and lives in Canada.

11 Comments

Register to comment (quick and free)

  1. Leonardo said Apr 24, 2008 3:03am (ET)

    Thanks for the review, Mike.

    Very interesting.

  2. GHoosdum said Apr 24, 2008 10:20am (ET)

    It was great that you went the extra mile and cleared the "bad" core issue up with AMD. Go Mike!

  3. FreeC8675 said Apr 24, 2008 10:42am (ET)

    These seem like a decent step up from the "X2" AMD processors. I'd personally like to see how they fold with an SMP client. Pretty encouraging for AMD, it's not beating intel soundly but the fab process definitely helps AMD to keep prices very competitive.

    Learned lots thanks Mike!

  4. primesuspect said Apr 24, 2008 10:45am (ET)

    Now I want one

  5. Buddy J said Apr 24, 2008 10:58am (ET)

    As do I.

  6. Straight_Man said Apr 30, 2008 8:48pm (ET)

    I'll have to wait and see-- can't afford such a machine in the next six months-- but will be interested to see how they spread and how popular they are. I am running a 2.66 GHz Intel processor now that was state of the art 4 years ago, due to the fact that I have no current applications that can use multiple cores in the versions I have.

  7. Leonardo said Apr 30, 2008 8:50pm (ET)

    but the fab process definitely helps AMD to keep prices very competitive

    No, AMD prices are de facto set by Intel. AMD has no choice in the matter.

  8. FreeC8675 said May 1, 2008 12:09am (ET)

    Leonardo saidNo, AMD prices are de facto set by Intel. AMD has no choice in the matter.


    Correct but the fab process helps take some pressure off of being forced to set that low price, as in it is more affordable for AMD than if they didn't have their fab process.

  9. Your Amish Daddy said May 1, 2008 5:18am (ET)

    Well. Three cores...I don't really know what to think of that... I remember when two cores meant two physical chips, back in the day of the Athlon MP's and dual P3 Slot rigs...MAN thsoe made powerful machines. But I wonder if XP will handle 3 cores...?

  10. Thrax said May 1, 2008 6:18am (ET)

    XP can handle however many cores CPU manufacturers can fit into two physical sockets.

  11. Buddy J said May 1, 2008 10:25am (ET)

    core-rect

Register to comment (quick and free)