AMD Athlon II X4 620 & 630: The First $99 Quad Core CPU
by Anand Lal Shimpi on September 16, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Final Words
Regardless of what it may seem like, this is not a repeat of AMD during the late K8 or during the Phenom days. AMD is relegated to competing in the sub-$200 space, it is actually very competitive in that space. These days, I'm sure that's not a bad position to be in. While I'm sure AMD would love to be able to demand more money for its processors, being able to demand any at all isn't a bad position to be in.
The Athlon II X4 620: Doing the Athlon Brand Justice
AMD effectively knocked 40% off the value of Intel's low end quad-core CPUs. The Athlon II X4 620 manages to, at $99, perform close enough to the Core 2 Quad Q8200 that the latter simply doesn't make any sense. Add another hundred dollars and you'll get a Core i5 750 (or less will get you into a Phenom II X4 945/955), but if you're on a strict budget you can't beat the 620.
The 630 I'm less excited about simply because it commands a 22% price premium. What the 620 has going for it is its sub-$100 entry price; start going much above that then you might as well be looking at a Phenom II X3.
In the Phenom generation AMD fought off Intel's dual cores with its own triple cores. This time AMD is fighting off Intel's dual cores with quad cores. It's clever positioning and aggressive pricing that AMD will have to employ in order to make it until Bulldozer and Fusion hit.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
150 Comments
View All Comments
Eeqmcsq - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
The L2 cache in the Athlon II X4s are the same as the Phenom II X4, 512KB per core, 2MB total. It is only on the Athlon II X2s that the cache was doubled to 1MB per core, 2MB total.TA152H - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
Oh, OK. I guess I should actually read the charts.Thanks.
Hmmmmm, I wonder why they overclock so poorly. It doesn't make much sense. You'd think it would use less power, and generate less heat. Strange.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
Two options: 1) New die, takes time to get the mix perfect for better yields/higher clock speeds, or 2) the chip isn't using super high frequency/high leakage transistors to maximize performance. It could be designed to hit lower frequencies.Take care,
Anand
Eeqmcsq - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
The skeptic in me says bad design problems, like the first Phenoms. That could also account for the multiple delays and pushbacks on the Athlon X4s. But in all seriousness, I have no idea.Eeqmcsq - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
Found this on another site. Perhaps you can check and confirm:"...the imprint "AADAC” identifies the CPU as a Propus."
Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
My 620 is an AADAC while my 630 is an AACYC. I will ask AMD to confirm :)Take care,
Anand
Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
Spoke with AMD this morning. The OPN does not indicate whether or not the chip has a disabled L3. It's just luck of the draw, there's no way to tell by looking at the chip itself.Take care,
Anand
Doormat - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
Please upgrade to a more modern x264 benchmark. I'd recommend a recent handbrake snapshot (http://handbrake.fr/snapshot.php)">http://handbrake.fr/snapshot.php). The nehalem optimizations should boost performance dramatically and are a better representation of what people would get with current encoders.Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
I agree completely, the question is more one of when we make the transition. There's a lot of historical data we need to compare to. You'll see a slow transition to new tests especially with the final version of Windows 7.Take care,
Anand
Lunyone - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
Finally we have quad cores at about $100!! Hope that this will spur on better pricing on all fronts! Go AMD, we need the competition to drive down better pricing. Now only if you would drop down the PhII x4 955/965 pricing to compete better with the i5 750!!