AMD Socket AM3 / AM3 + processors can be bought in Moscow at the lowest prices at the ENKO Computer Hardware Sales Center, where they are available in a wide range.
AMD Socket AM3 / AM3 + Processors
Modern AMD processors compete with their Intel counterparts and are widely represented in the range of our online store. The technical characteristics of AMD Socket AM3 + and Socket AM3 make them a worthy choice for creating personal computers of various performance on their basis, from budget office computers to sophisticated gaming computers. These processors are in rather high demand also because their cost is relatively low.
Main characteristics of AMD Socket AM3 and AM3 +
The line of processors designed for installation in Socket AM3 includes Sempron, Athlon II, many Phenom II models. They all use the Hypertransport 3.x bus and have 938 pins. Basically, it would be wrong to say that there are any significant differences between AMD Socket AM3 and AM3 +. In fact, AM + processors are simply a further logical development of AM processors. They differ only in certain features of their internal architecture, which are well known only to specialists. It should be noted that the compatibility of AMD Socket AM3 / AM3 + processors is incomplete: AM3 CPUs fully match the socket of the AM3 + motherboard, both mechanically and electrically. The AM3 + processors correspond to AM boards only mechanically - for their correct operation in this socket, the AM3 motherboard requires a BIOS flashing, while some processor functions will be limited, for example, power saving.
Socket AM3 + processors are known as the AMD FX series. The processor architecture is called Bulldozer and Piledriver. They correspond to kernels code-named Zambezi and Vishera. The latest core has AMD Turbo Core technology - dynamic overclocking of the processor frequency depending on the load. With regard to such an important parameter as performance, the eight-core top-end AMD FX Black processors
Editions with a Vishera core have excellent overclocking capabilities and compete with INTEL Core-i7 at a significantly lower price. The price of AMD Socket AM3 plus in Moscow is now quite acceptable, and therefore there are more and more gaming computers based on these processors.
Advantages of purchasing AMD Socket AM3 / AM3 + processors in our online store Both budget and high-performance AMD Socket AM3 AM3 + processors can be bought now in many companies, but it is best to do it in the ENKO Computer Hardware Sales Center. The fact is that they are presented here:
Get comprehensive advice before buying. ENKO computer equipment sales center has extensive practical experience in assembling computers. The AMD AM3 and AM3 + processors are ideal for creating low-cost office platforms, general-purpose home computers or powerful gaming machines. The price of such a solution is significantly lower than that of an INTEL CPU with a similar performance. The only drawback of such a budget employee is the higher heat dissipation of AMD processors, which is solved by selecting the appropriate cooler. Consult our managers - we will try to optimize your costs!
In our company, the price of AMD Socket AM3 + and AM3 is one of the lowest in the capital, which is well known to many regular customers. All these processors are provided with a full-fledged guarantee, which, however, as practice shows, you never have to use.
How to choose the right AMD processor to upgrade
When is a processor upgrade necessary?
Imagine a situation that you have replaced the video card with a more productive one, but there is no tangible increase in games - the frame rate has only slightly increased or has generally remained at the same level. Another option - they wanted to watch a video in FullHD (1080p) format, but it slows down noticeably. For what reason? The answer is, most likely, one: the overall performance "rested" on the insufficient power of the central processing unit (CPU). The lack of RAM may also affect, but within the framework of this article we will assume that its volume corresponds to the minimum required for a modern "desktop" computer (two to three gigabytes or more).
Replacing a single-core processor with a dual-core (three-, four -...) processor will not hurt at all to increase the "responsiveness" of the operating system and various programs. And if you use applications that actively use the computing power of the CPU (various graphics, audio and video editors, systems for creating and editing 3D graphics, programs for distributed computing, etc.), then it is no longer just desirable to increase the number of cores, but necessary.
The case deserves special mention when it is necessary to work with so-called virtual machines (QEMU, Oracle VM VirtualBox, Microsoft Virtual PC, VMware Fusion, etc.) designed to run different operating systems simultaneously on one computer in emulation mode. Such a need arises for programmers to develop cross-platform software, web designers for checking the appearance of sites in different browsers under different operating systems, and other IT specialists for a very diverse range of tasks. And it is easier for ordinary users to study and compare the functionality of new versions of operating systems in a virtual machine than to install them on real hardware. The more operating systems are planned to be launched and the more resource-intensive tasks will be performed in them, the more processor cores (at least four, better six, and in the near future even eight) are needed for comfortable work.
We decide on the processor model that is suitable for replacement
It's worth starting, perhaps, with the AMD Socket 939 platform, since it can still be somehow brought up to the modern Low-End level by installing a dual-core processor instead of a single-core one. We will not consider Socket 754 and all previously released platforms, since they do not allow such a possibility - an upgrade is possible only for a single-core processor with a higher frequency, but this will not radically affect the performance increase.
The vast majority of motherboards with Soket 939 support AMD Athlon 64 X2 dual-core processors (up to 4800+, 2400 MHz). The increase in speed will be not only due to the addition of a second core, but also due to the presence of SSE3 instructions in such processors, in contrast to the first Athlon 64, in which only SSE2 extensions were present. Some early motherboards require a BIOS update to keep these CPUs working. It can be found on the board manufacturer's website. There you can also find a program for the firmware, and sometimes instructions for its implementation.
It is best to flash the BIOS from under DOS (for example, by creating a bootable USB flash drive), or you can use the utility built into the BIOS itself, which starts when you press a certain key when you turn on the computer. If you decide to upgrade from under Windows, then you need to remove overclocking from all components, if such was used, and before directly uploading the firmware, close all applications and disable the antivirus. Some Windows flashers have one unpleasant feature: during the flashing process, you may get the impression that the updater is stuck. In this case, do not try to close it or end the process through the Windows Task Manager! This is due to the fact that some BIOS flash microcircuits have a low write speed, and the flasher stops giving signs of life, although it is just waiting for a signal to end the process. You need to wait a couple of minutes, and the program will most likely unfold without your participation.
At the moment, it is still possible to purchase a new dual-core processor for the Soket 939, but here you should pay attention to the cost. For the price of AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ for this connector, you can buy a simple motherboard with an AM2 + or AM3 connector and one of the junior Athlon II X2 processors. Of course, it will be necessary to replace the RAM (from DDR to DDR2 or DDR3), but its cost now does not bite at all, and the performance of such a system will be higher. So, the 939 platform upgrade makes sense only if you have a top-end motherboard, the wide functionality of which you would not want to lose, or if you can find the required processor in the secondary market at a more attractive price.
The next platform Socket AM2 is already much more relevant, its main difference from Socket 939 is support only for DDR2 RAM, which makes them incompatible. In addition to the "native" dual-core AMD Athlon 64 X2 and Athlon X2 processors with the HyperTransport 2.0 bus, such motherboards can be equipped with dual, triple, and quad-core Phenom and Athlon II processors, and with some luck, even up to six-core Phenom II, designed for more new connectors: AM2 + (HyperTransport 3.0) and AM3 (HyperTransport 3.1). In this case, the power-saving functions will not work and the processor bus will function in a slower mode, but this will not fatally affect performance.
Support is also determined by the presence of the required BIOS firmware (go to the manufacturer's website for it). But even if the necessary support is not available, and the motherboard was quite popular, then there is some possibility that it will be possible to find homemade BIOS files patched and posted by enthusiasts who did not want to put up with this state of affairs. An example is the very famous company Epox in its time. A few years ago, it went bankrupt and stopped supporting its products, but for some common models of motherboards with an AM2 socket on the Internet, it is quite possible to find artisanally modified firmware that ensures the performance of the latest multi-core CPUs. Naturally, all manipulations with such files are carried out at your own peril and risk.
Socket AM2 + differs from AM2 in native support for multi-core AMD Phenom II and Athlon II processors with HyperTransport 3.0 bus, as well as full compatibility with CPUs designed for Socket AM3, since they combine DDR2 and DDR3 RAM controllers. All processors for the previous socket AM2 will also work without problems in AM2 +.
At the moment, it makes sense to purchase a motherboard with such a connector for upgrading only if you have DDR2 memory sticks. If you upgrade a complete set of basic components (CPU + MP + RAM), you should pay attention to the Socket AM3 platform, since DDR3 memory is cheaper than DDR2, and at the same time faster. The appearance of the AM2 + socket itself is no different from AM2, there is no "+" in the inscription. You can distinguish them by the markings on the motherboard and / or box, or by looking at the instructions.
As already noted, Socket AM3 now has support for high-speed DDR3 RAM and HyperTransport 3.1 bus. The transition to a new type of memory eliminated the possibility of installing old processors for the AM2 and AM2 + platforms on motherboards with this connector, but the AM3 processors themselves are backward compatible with them (with the reservations described above).
Most Socket AM3 boards are expected to be able to run the next generation AMD Zambezi (Bulldozer) processors. Several motherboard manufacturers have already released corresponding BIOS updates, or at least announced that this is planned.
Socket AM3 + is the most promising platform for AMD processors today. By early autumn 2011, multi-core (up to eight cores) AMD Zambezi processors based on the new Bulldozer architecture will be released, which presumably will be able to compete with the top-end processors from Intel. Motherboards with this connector are already starting to appear on sale, and so far only processors for Socket AM3 can be installed on them. Compatibility with earlier sockets (AM2 and AM2 +) is even theoretically absent, since support for the DDR2 standard is excluded from the built-in memory controller. It is easiest to distinguish Socket AM3 + from other "relatives": it is black and has AM3b markings.
When choosing a processor for an upgrade, it is important to make sure that the motherboard is capable of delivering the required power to power it, which can be up to 140 watts. This is necessarily indicated in the instructions and on the manufacturer's website.
The following simple figure clearly shows the compatibility of processors with different sockets, it should help to understand the above intricacies (Socket 939 is not listed, since it is incompatible with all other platforms):
Nobody will give a 100% guarantee of the performance of all these combinations, the conditions described above must be met, but in most cases they will still work.
Removing and installing processor
The process is pretty straightforward. Let's consider an option using a complete (boxed) cooler. Most coolers from third-party manufacturers are removed and installed according to the same principle. To remove the processor, first of all, disconnect the cooler power connector from the motherboard, then pull up the locking lever, disconnect the metal mount from the plastic hooks and lift the cooler up:
Sometimes the base of the heatsink of the cooler literally sticks to the surface of the processor due to the drying out of the heat-conducting paste. If this happens, then you need to try to move the cooler in different directions parallel to the plane of the motherboard, and it will most likely disconnect. Otherwise, pull the heatsink straight up (it is absolutely impossible to do this at an angle - the contacts will bend) with some effort, but without fanaticism - and the processor will jump out of the fixed connector. But here there is a possibility that some of the contact legs will simply remain in the socket, and soldering them back to the processor is a very non-trivial task at home. It is better not to bring it to this and use a high-quality heat-conducting paste, which does not dry out over time.
The assembly is carried out in the reverse order. The processor should go into the socket without effort, literally fall into it. If you feel a noticeable resistance, then you should make sure that the keys are located correctly (special marks in the corner of the processor and socket, which must match), check if the contact legs are bent, and straighten them if necessary. Also, be sure to apply a thin layer of heat transfer paste to the processor.
Conclusion
As mentioned at the beginning of this article, CPU upgrades are often done to improve gaming performance. In this case, one should not rush to extremes and certainly install a six or eight core. Practice shows that at the moment a quad-core processor is more than enough for most games, and even it rarely has a 100% load. And more powerful multi-cores are better to use for more serious tasks.
Over the entire period of its active existence, the AMD AM3 motherboard has been represented by many manufacturers. Among them there are both successful options and absolutely failed ones. Some models of motherboards are still successful after 6-7 years.
Thus, MSI, Gigabyte, ASRock and ASUS became the leaders in the production of motherboards of this format. Each of these developers tried to create a better product and beat the competition. But not everyone succeeded.
MSI board
This company has been creating good components for a long time. In 2009, she released the MSI 790FX-GD70 AM3. Motherboards with this processor socket are just starting to hit the market. Therefore, this model became a novelty and immediately attracted the user's attention.
The package bundle is pretty common for this manufacturer. The box is painted in a fiery orange color. The front shows the main specification and some of the supported technologies. There is nothing superfluous inside the box: a couple of instructions, two disks with drivers, a bracket for the rear panel, 2 adapters, 4 SATA cables, a pair of cables and a plug.
The power system is built in five phases that use solid capacitors. In addition, this area is occupied by a group of transistors, next to which a massive radiator is placed.
The cooling system is generally not bad for the MSI 790FX-GD70 AM3. Motherboards weren't often found with such elaborate detail. The radiator is curved. One part of it starts at the south bridge, then the tube passes next to the video card slot and goes into a larger radiator. It cools not only the transistors, but also the north bridge.
The board has got top characteristics. It has excellent overclocking potential and is also a pretty strong competitor to the Gigabyte 880GA-UD3H. We will consider this model further. But the main drawback of this board is that the user cannot unlock the disabled cores of AMD Phenom II processors. Of course, for many, this problem will be decisive in choosing a motherboard. But we must not forget that the MSI 790FX-GD70 is a model that allows you to overclock the processor up to 4 GHz, so the choice of the chip should be appropriate.
MSI reviews
Users gave this board a good response. They praised the complete set, excellent overclocking potential, easy adjustment in BIOS, available technologies. The cooling system coped well with even the most demanding tasks. It is especially important that this board was relevant even after 3-4 years. The only thing that over time it began to lack is support for AM3 + chips. Motherboards with this socket began to appear later, at the same time the compatibility of both formats appeared.
Model from Gigabyte
This company differs from many of its competitors in reliability. Most often, when a user has a little money, but he wants to build a PC that would serve for a long time and show stable operation, he turns to Gigabyte components. When new-format processors appeared on the market, this manufacturer did not graze the back ones.
The motherboard Gigabyte AM3 880GA-UD3H was shipped with a weak package. The user had access to instructions, a CD with drivers and software, a panel cover, two SATA cables and only one ribbon cable. Although the company put more stickers in the box, this did not save it from criticism of packaging from buyers.
The design is pretty basic. All elements are arranged closely to each other. The board supports all available Socket AM3 processors. For memory, DDR3 slots are presented, which can be overclocked up to 1866 MHz.
The cooling system is inferior to the competitor from MSI. As usual, this manufacturer decided to give preference to the design over the cooler. He is quite modest here and in the process of loading requires additional help. In general, the overclocking process showed excellent results. The only thing was problems with lowering frequencies under heavy load. But this is again a stone in the direction of the cooling system.
Reviews on Gigabyte
The Gigabyte 880GA-UD3H motherboard received good reviews. Buyers praised the value for money, the ability to "open" kernels and cache, clear installation software, high-quality materials of the model. I was also pleased with the emergence of USB 3.0, which was then a novelty. The layout of all ports and slots was especially well received.
But the complaints, surprisingly enough, concerned the cooling system. With a powerful processor and video card, I had to install an expensive cooler to keep the north bridge warmer.
Competitor from ASRock
This company once released a whole series of motherboards. Some have become incredibly popular, others have failed. The ASRock AM3 880G Extreme3 motherboard was one of the triumphant models that captivated not only ordinary users, but also fastidious buyers.
The set of the model is practical. Again, there are not enough "buns", but later the buyer got used to this order of things. In addition to the instructions and the disk, a plug, a rear bracket with a SATA cable and two additional similar wires were placed here.
Outwardly, this novelty completely repeated the design of its previous brother and, in general, became almost a copy of it. There are four slots for RAM: two blue and two white. The type of memory supported is still the same - DDR3. At the same time, the manufacturer claims that it can be overclocked up to 1.8 GHz. The maximum amount of RAM is 16 GB.
The cooling system is mobile and is fastened to the board with clips. The northbridge "protects" the radiator, which has a groove. The heat sink tube ends inside it. The main difference from the 890GX is the lack of special technology and a slightly reduced value of the video core frequency, which, by the way, is integrated here.
Every time we buy an AMD-based computer, we ask ourselves which processor and socket to choose? Especially now that AMD changes them almost every year. Will there be a prospect of replacing the processor in the future and what is the old processor good for? It is also important to know when there is a bunch of old hardware with different performance. And you need to assemble a computer of tolerable performance out of all this. In this table, you can see that the range for creativity is decent. Especially overclockers and gamers have a lot of overclocking iron. And it makes sense to rummage in the mezzanine and collect, for example, a computer for the dacha, or for a younger brother / sister.
| Cpu | motherboards | ||||||
| AM2 | AM2 + | AM3 | AM3 + | FM1 | FM2 | + - Compatible; - Theoretically compatible, but compatibility in each specific case must be checked on the website of the motherboard manufacturer; - - Absolutely not compatible. |
|
| AM2 | + | + | — | — | — | — | |
| AM2 + | + | — | — | — | — | ||
| AM3 | + | + | — | — | |||
| AM3 + | — | — | — | + | — | — | |
| FM1 | — | — | — | — | + | — | |
| FM2 | — | — | — | — | — | + | |
It is clear from the table that, unfortunately, contrary to popular belief, sockets FM1 and FM2 are absolutely incompatible. Here you need to choose whether to buy a more expensive motherboard and a budget processor, or build a powerful PC, but on the previous socket. In my opinion, the solutions are equivalent. For example, you have purchased a powerful computer on an outgoing socket, it does not matter, you will be using it for several years. Although if you assemble a PC on a new socket, there is a prospect in a year to install a CPU more powerful and more economical.
Introduction Continuing the series of processor announcements based on the new 45nm Deneb core, AMD today is introducing several new models aimed at the mid-price segment. Thus, the previously considered "discoverers" of the Phenom II family, having processor numbers 940 and 920, remain the senior models in AMD products, but now the company's positions will be supported by several more processors, the production of which uses a more modern technological process. More specifically, today AMD presents five 45-nm processors: three quad-core - Phenom II X4 910, 810, and 805, as well as two tri-core - Phenom II X3 720 and 710. However, the main intrigue of this announcement is not the appearance on the market of another relatively inexpensive and fast processors. Much more interesting is the fact that the models put on the market today have a new design - Socket AM3.
Recall that the main goal of transferring AMD processors to the Socket AM3 platform is to support more modern and faster DDR3 SDRAM. At the same time, such Socket AM3 processors retain their compatibility with the existing Socket AM2 + infrastructure. It turns out that the new Phenom II models have a universal memory controller that can work with DDR2 or DDR3 SDRAM, depending on which motherboard it is installed in. However, this versatility is not surprising at all: we all remember how easily motherboard manufacturers once developed products that support DDR2 SDRAM, basing them on LGA775 X-series chipsets focused on working with DDR3 SDRAM. Mainstreaming continuity in changing memory standards provides logical compatibility between DDR2 and DDR3, which allows engineers to support both technologies at a minimum cost.
At the same time, with all its appearance, AMD makes us understand that we should not expect too much from the new processor socket and DDR3 memory. Yes, DDR3 SDRAM has higher frequencies, but at the same time it is characterized by increased latencies, which, as you know, also significantly affect the speed of platforms with AMD processors. Apparently, being guided by these very considerations, AMD has not yet started transferring older Phenom II models to Socket AM3, which remain available exclusively in Socket AM2 + versions. So so far, only mid-range models can boast of compatibility with Socket AM3, for which, frankly, the ability to work with high-speed and expensive memory is not so urgent.
The fact that the Phenom II X4 940 and 920 released just a month ago turned out to be incompatible with the new Socket AM3 platform, obviously, there are some more weighty reasons, apart from the lack of a noticeable performance boost. And these reasons are easy to see if you get acquainted with the characteristics of the models presented today in more detail. The fact is that, moving to a new processor socket, AMD decided to make its processors more economical: for all five of today's new products, the heat dissipation limit is set at 95 W, not 125 W, as for the older Phenom IIs. All four-core Intel processors belonging to the Core 2 Quad family have exactly the same rated heat dissipation. However, to all appearances, the parity in the maximum calculated thermal characteristics of the LGA775 and Socket AM3 platforms will not last long, since within the next couple of months AMD is going to present processors that are faster and less economical than the Phenom II X4 910 and 810.
From all that has been said, it follows that the compatibility of the processors presented today with the new Socket AM3 and with DDR3 memory does not solve much from the point of view of ordinary consumers. The presented models of the middle price range in the overwhelming majority of cases will be included in the Socket AM2 + infrastructure and will be used with the widespread and inexpensive DDR2 SDRAM. AMD does not offer high-performance modifications of Phenom II, which would really be interesting to use in Socket AM3 platforms. Nevertheless, this is not a reason for us to close our eyes to a new promising platform, to which we decided to devote a separate material. In this article, we will get acquainted with the features of the new processor socket, and along the way we will test one of the new Socket AM3 processors - Phenom II X4 810.
Phenom II family: variety of species
First of all, we decided to put together all the information about AMD processors manufactured in 45nm process technology and marketed under the Phenom II brand name. The need for a single reference table is due to the fact that this series, which currently includes seven processors, has turned out to be very controversial: it consists of models with different numbers of cores, with different purposes, compatibility with different platforms, and so on.According to earlier plans, AMD was going to present one more Socket AM3 processor - Phenom II X4 925, but at the moment its release has not taken place. A possible reason for this is the problem with fitting its heat dissipation into the 95-watt thermal pack. And considering that the next model, Phenom II X4 910, although formally announced, is actually available only for AMD OEM partners, the senior processor in Socket AM3, which can be purchased in stores in the near future, turns out to be Phenom II X4 810 This is what explains the participation of this model in our tests.
The expansion of the Phenom II lineup leads to the fact that the new nomenclature of processor ratings adopted by AMD becomes clear. Thus, a series of ratings characterize the main characteristics of processors. And if we add information about future models of processors with 45-nm cores to the available data, we get a completely harmonious and logical sequence:
900 series - 4-core processors with 6 MB L3 cache;
800 series - quad-core processors with 4 MB L3 cache;
700 series - triple-core processors with 6 MB L3 cache;
600 series - quad-core processors without L3 cache;
400 series - triple core processors without L3 cache;
200 series - dual-core processors.
Information on the 200, 400 and 600 series is preliminary. The release of such processors, judging by the available data, is scheduled for the second quarter of this year.
Socket AM3 platform
Introducing the new Socket AM3 platform, AMD first of all sets itself the goal of introducing support for modern DDR3 SDRAM memory in systems based on Phenom II processors. This support has been available in the competitor's platforms for more than a year and a half, but earlier AMD considered the transition to a new type of memory untimely due to its high cost. By now, the situation has changed a lot, prices for DDR3 modules have dropped significantly, and this has pushed AMD to enter the market and develop a new type of processor socket.However, unlike its main rival, AMD has recently rarely made drastic changes in the platform design. The company's engineers are making every effort to ensure a painless migration from one platform to another. This tactic is especially relevant in light of the prevailing realities, when AMD processors do not have so many advantages over Intel products. This is what makes the new platform interesting: AMD developers were able to propose such a scheme for upgrading the memory controller built into their own processors, in which neither old nor new adherents of Athlon and Phenom should be dissatisfied.
The fact that the Socket AM3 platform is in many ways similar to its predecessor can be understood from a quick glance at the new motherboards and processors. AMD not only did not begin to transfer its chips to LGA-packaging, but moreover, the processors even retained the same geometric dimensions, and the number of their contacts practically did not change. Due to the fact that AMD has put the idea of continuity and compatibility at the forefront, it is possible to distinguish a Socket AM3 processor from a Socket AM2 + processor only with a very careful examination.
Left - Socket AM2 + processor, right - Socket AM3 processor
Differences between Socket AM2 + and Socket AM3 processors are visible only from the side of the "belly". From the above photo you can see that the number of contacts in Socket AM3 has decreased by two, respectively, now there are 938 of them.
A similar picture can be seen if we compare the connectors on motherboards.
Left - Socket AM2 +, right - Socket AM3
As it is easy to see, mechanically Socket AM3 processors can be installed in Socket AM2 +, while the Socket AM2 + processor will simply not fit into the Socket AM3 motherboard because of the "extra" two pins. This mechanical compatibility also reflects logical compatibility. The new Socket AM3 processors have a universal memory controller that supports both DDR2 and DDR3 SDRAM. The specific type of memory used in each case is determined solely by the DIMM slots on the motherboard. In Socket AM2 + boards it is DDR2, in Socket AM3 - DDR3 SDRAM. Older Socket AM2 + processors do not have such versatility, they can work exclusively with DDR2 SDRAM, which is why they were deprived of mechanical compatibility with the new processor socket.
Socket AM2 + and Socket AM3 have retained continuity in many other aspects as well. By matching the size of the connectors and processors, AMD has been able to ensure that the same processor coolers can be used on both platforms. Even the scheme of their attachment was not transformed.
The same applies to the peculiarities of the microarchitecture: processors with Socket AM2 + and Socket AM3 differ only in the part of the memory controller. All other nodes, including the HyperTransport 3.0 bus, were kept unchanged. This, in turn, means that new chipsets are not required to support Socket AM3; such processors are perfectly compatible with the same chipsets as Socket AM2 + models. That is why the main developers of logic sets for the AMD platform do not offer any special solutions aimed at supporting new products.
Almost complete mechanical and logical compatibility between the types of processor sockets in some cases even allows one to deviate from the initial scheme of one-to-one correspondence: Socket AM2 + - DDR2 SDRAM, Socket AM3 - DDR3 SDRAM. Some motherboard manufacturers, for example, Jetway, are preparing universal Socket AM2 + motherboards with slots for DDR2 and DDR3, into which either one or the other memory can be installed using a Socket AM3 processor.
Socket AM3 processors officially support DDR2 memory up to 1067 MHz and DDR3 up to 1333 MHz. At the same time, reliable performance of DDR3-1333 in Socket AM3 systems is guaranteed only if no more than one module is used per channel. However, in practice it turns out that new processors can work with DDR3-1600 SDRAM: the corresponding multiplier for the memory frequency is supported by the built-in controller. In practice, it looks like when a Socket AM3 processor is installed in a Socket AM2 + board, it is possible to choose between the DDR2-667 / 800/1067 memory frequencies that are standard for any Phenom, and when it is used in Socket AM3 boards, a different set of multipliers opens up, allowing the memory to be clocked. in DDR3-1067 / 1333/1600 modes.
It remains only to add that to achieve full compatibility of Socket AM2 + motherboards on the market with new Socket AM3 processors, just a simple BIOS update is enough. Moreover, support in the BIOS of a motherboard for Phenom II processors even in Socket AM2 + version automatically entails that Socket AM3 processors will work without problems in such a motherboard. And this, in turn, means that no special difficulties are expected in adapting the existing motherboard park for new processors.
Phenom II X4 810 processor
After a detailed story about what Socket AM3 brings by itself, it seems that there is nothing to surprise us with a processor in this design. However, this is not quite true. Although in general the new Phenom II differs little from the Phenom II presented by AMD a month ago, the Phenom II X4 810 sent to us for testing showed some unexpected characteristics.
First of all, it should be noted that Phenom II X4 810 received a processor number from the eighth decade for a reason. AMD designates such reduced numbers for quad-core processors with reduced specifications. In our case, part of the L3 cache memory went under the knife, its size for the Phenom II X4 810 is 4 MB versus 6 MB for the "full-fledged" Phenom II.
In general, the appearance of Phenom II processors with reduced L3 cache memory, as well as with disabled cores, is quite a natural event. The monolithic crystal of Deneb processors, although produced using a 45-nm technological process, has a fairly large area: 258 sq. mm. For comparison, this is only slightly less than the die area of the Intel Core i7, which indicates about the same production costs for these processors. Comparison of the retail price of Core i7 and Phenom II turns out to be clearly not in favor of the latter: obviously, the release of the Phenom II is a much less profitable enterprise than the production of the Core i7. And considering that AMD does not yet have crystals comparable in performance to the best Intel products, it becomes clear that the company is forced to squeeze the maximum profit out of available resources. Selling processors based on partially defective crystals, which for some reason could not get into the Phenom II 900 series, is one such method.
Actually, the appearance of the Phenom II X4 810 is a typical illustration of this tactic. At the heart of this processor is exactly the same Deneb semiconductor crystal as in the Phenom II 900 series processors, but one third of the L3 cache is disabled in it. Thanks to this trick, AMD implements crystals in which a defect arose during production in the part where the L3 cache is located. If the marriage occurs in the region of the crystal in which the computing cores are located, then such crystals are used in the production of the 700 series Phenom II three-core processors, which are also presented to the public today.
The characteristics of the L3 cache of the Phenom II X4 810 processor look quite strange.
If you believe the readings of the diagnostic utility, the L3 cache of this processor has 64 associativity regions, while the L3 cache of the full-fledged Phenom II X4 900 with 6 MB L3 cache had only 48 associativity regions. The most logical explanation for this phenomenon seems to be an error in the CPU-Z readings, and the L3 cache of the Phenom II X4 810 has a degree of associativity of 32. Otherwise, the cache in the 800 series should have a higher latency than in older processor models, which in practice is not observed.
However, the L3 cache of Phenom II processors in Socket AM3 turns out to be faster than that of their Socket AM2 + counterparts. However, the reasons for this do not lie in the depths of the microarchitecture - they lie on the surface. The fact is that for its Socket AM3 models AMD has set a higher frequency of the integrated north bridge, which is also used to clock the L3 cache. The L3 cache in the Phenom II X4 810, like in other processors for the new platform, runs at 2.0 GHz, while the L3 cache of its predecessors was 200 MHz lower.
As follows from the screenshot above, the same is true when installing a Socket AM3 processor into a Socket AM2 + motherboard.
But despite all the differences between the Phenom II Socket AM3 we are considering from their Socket AM2 + counterparts, with whom we had the opportunity to get acquainted a month ago, it is rather difficult to hide the consanguinity between them. For example, the Phenom II X4 810 uses the same C2 core stepping that we saw in the Phenom II X4 940 and 920 processors earlier. This means that the semiconductor crystals underlying the Socket AM2 + and Socket AM3 Phenom II variants do not differ at all, and the memory types supported by one or another processor modification are determined only at the stage of packing it into a case.
Impact of L3 Cache Size on Performance
The first question that arises when examining the characteristics of the Phenom II X4 810 processor concerns how much the reduction in the L3 cache size is harmful to the performance. To unambiguously answer this question, we decided to compare the performance of the Phenom II X4 810 and Phenom II X4 910 processors. Both of these models are based on the 45nm Deneb core, have the same 2.6 GHz clock speed and differ only in the amount of cache memory, which in both cases operates at the same 2.0 GHz frequency.
The tests carried out show that cutting the L3 cache from 6 to 4 MB does not lead to any significant drop in the performance of the Phenom II X4 processors. The loss of Phenom II X4 810 to its "full-fledged" brother not only averaged only 2%, but in the most unfavorable situations did not exceed 5%.
Thus, it is quite reasonable that the Phenom II X4 810 costs only $ 20 less than the Phenom II X4 920. Obviously, there is no glaring difference in the practical performance of these processors, and the main drawback of the younger model is not the cut L3 cache. but at a lower clock speed.
By the way, one should not forget that the L3 cache of the Phenom II X4 810 processor operates at a higher frequency than the L3 cache of the older Phenom II X4 940 and 920 models. And this can be considered as an additional compensation for its smaller size. , because as we found out earlier, a 200 MHz increase in the frequency of the north bridge built into the processor entails an approximately one and a half percent increase in performance.
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-MA790FXT-UD5P
Frankly speaking, we got the impression that today's announcement of the Socket AM3 platform is not well prepared. The obvious problems that we also had to face can be seen in the unavailability of the new infrastructure: it turned out to be quite difficult to choose a platform for testing new Socket AM3 processors. Motherboard manufacturers clearly did not expect that AMD would present Socket AM3 in a month after the release of the first Socket AM2 + Phenom II, and therefore did not have time to bring the development and production of the corresponding products to the final stage. As a result, even AMD representatives recommended that we test the Phenom II X4 810 on a Socket AM2 + motherboard with DDR2 memory.Nevertheless, we still managed to get a motherboard for testing Socket AM3. The situation was saved by Gigabyte, which literally at the last moment provided its fresh Socket AM3 board GA-MA790FXT-UD5P. This board will be the new flagship product in the line of Gigabyte offerings for AMD processors owners, and therefore it deserves a separate review.
Gigabyte GA-MA790FXT-UD5P continues the company's series of products focused on supporting AMD processors, therefore this motherboard has many features in common with its predecessors equipped with a Socket AM2 + processor socket. However, this is not surprising at all, considering that the GA-MA790FXT-UD5P is based on the usual set of logic, consisting of the AMD 790FX Northbridge and SB750 Southbridge. In fact, the main features of the board are concentrated in the vicinity of Socket AM3, since there are four slots for DDR3 SDRAM, which was not supported by systems with AMD processors earlier.
Since the motherboard in question is intended for creating high-performance systems, it has two PCI Express x16 2.0 slots, which can work with a pair of graphics cards united by CrossFireX technology in full speed mode.
The positioning of the board also determined its belonging to the Ultra Durable 3 class, to which Gigabyte classifies all its most interesting products. First of all, this means that high-quality electronic components are widely used in the manufacture of the board: capacitors with solid electrolyte of Japanese origin, field-effect transistors with a low channel resistance in the open state and inductors made on armored ferrite cores. Second, the GA-MA790FXT-UD5P uses a PCB with thicker copper ground and power layers than usual. This improvement allows Gigabyte to talk about improving the quality of signals and reducing interference, as well as improving the thermal mode of the board - the conductors at the same time play the role of a heat sink.
The processor power converter on the board is made according to a four-channel scheme, and its power is such that Gigabyte guarantees stable operation of the board with processors that consume up to 140 watts. The transistors included in the power converter are covered with a massive radiator (the largest on the board) connected by heat pipes to radiators installed on the north and south bridges of the chipset. It should be emphasized that these heatsinks have a small height and are moved away from the processor socket at a distance sufficient for comfortable installation of massive coolers. However, obstacles when installing a processor cooling system can still arise from the DIMM slots, which are located so close to the processor socket that, due to the cooler, you can lose the ability to install DDR3 memory modules in the slots closest to the processor.
For ease of use, Gigabyte engineers have placed Power, Reset and Clear CMOS buttons on the board. Unfortunately, the added convenience is compensated by their rather unfortunate location: the first two buttons are locked between the connectors, and the “Clear CMOS” button can be blocked by a lengthy video card. But Gigabyte engineers did not forget a device to protect the reset button from accidental pressing: it is closed with a transparent plastic cap.
The presence on the GA-MA790FXT-UD5P of ten Serial ATA-300 ports deployed parallel to the board draws attention. At the same time, six ports are implemented in a standard way through the SB750 south bridge, and additional JMicron controllers are responsible for the remaining four. The ports connected to the south bridge support RAID 0, 1, 0 + 1 and 5, while the additional ports can only support RAID 0 or 1.
The rear panel of the board contains eight USB 2.0 ports, two Gigabit network ports, two Firewire ports, PS / 2 ports for a mouse and keyboard, as well as analog and SPDIF audio inputs and outputs. Note that the eight-channel Realtek ALC889A codec is responsible for the implementation of sound on this board, which has a certified signal-to-noise ratio of 106 dB. In addition to the ports on the rear panel, the GA-MA790FXT-UD5P is equipped with several pin connectors, which allow you to connect four more USB 2.0 and one IEEE1394.
The BIOS Setup of the motherboard in question is clearly aimed at enthusiasts, therefore, in addition to the standard settings, it contains a whole section "MB Intelligent Tweaker" intended for overclocking. In addition to the standard multiplier and base frequency options, it offers flexible voltage control options.
The voltage increase limit for DDR3 memory is 2.35 V, and the processor voltage can be increased to a value exceeding the standard value by 0.6 V. Additionally, you can control the voltage of the north bridge built into the processor and the power supply of the chipset microcircuits.
Also, the board offers expanded settings for memory parameters.
On the whole, the Gigabyte GA-MA790FXT-UD5P motherboard made a rather favorable impression on us. Of course, BIOS version number F4D, with which we tested this board, cannot yet be called problem-free and absolutely stable, but, nevertheless, we were able not only to run the full set of tests in the regular mode, but also to experiment with overclocking the processor.
How we tested
We divided today's testing into two stages. First of all, we will find out how the speed of the Phenom II X4 processors is affected by their transfer to a new platform that supports DDR3 SDRAM. To do this, we will compare the performance of the new Phenom II X4 810 when it works in a Socket AM2 + motherboard with DDR2-800 and DDR2-1067 memory with its performance when installed in a Socket AM3 motherboard in which we will use DDR3-1333 and DDR3-1600 SDRAM ...The second round of our tests will be devoted to finding out the performance of new quad-core processors from AMD in comparison with competing offerings. Here, obviously, the main interest will be drawn to comparing the performance of the Phenom II X4 810 and Core 2 Quad Q8200, since these processors have approximately the same retail price.
As a result, the following set of components was used in the tests:
Processors:
AMD Phenom II X4 920 (Deneb, 2.8 GHz, 6 MB L3);
AMD Phenom II X4 910 (Deneb, 2.6 GHz, 6 MB L3);
AMD Phenom II X4 810 (Deneb, 2.6 GHz, 4 MB L3);
AMD Phenom II X4 805 (Deneb, 2.5 GHz, 4 MB L3);
AMD Phenom X4 9950 (Agena, 2.6 GHz, 2 MB L3);
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300 (Yorkfield, 2.5 GHz, 333 MHz FSB, 2 x 2 MB L2);
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 (Yorkfield, 2.33 GHz, 333 MHz FSB, 2 x 2 MB L2).
Motherboards:
ASUS P5Q Pro (LGA775, Intel P45 Express, DDR2 SDRAM);
Gigabyte MA790GP-DS4H (Socket AM2 +, AMD 790GX + SB750, DDR2 SDRAM);
Gigabyte MA790FXT-UD5P (Socket AM3, AMD 790FX + SB750, DDR3 SDRAM).
RAM:
GEIL GX24GB8500C5UDC (2 x 2 GB, DDR2-1067 SDRAM, 5-5-5-15);
Mushkin 996601 4GB XP3-12800 (2 x 2GB, DDR3-1600 SDRAM, 7-7-7-20).
Graphic card: ATI RADEON HD 4870.
HDD: Western Digital WD1500AHFD.
Operating system: Microsoft Windows Vista x64 SP1.
Drivers:
Intel Chipset Software Installation Utility 9.1.0.1007;
ATI Catalyst 9.1 Display Driver.
Performance: DDR3 vs DDR2
In this part of our article, we will compare the performance of the Phenom II X4 810 when installed in motherboards with different types of processor sockets: Gigabyte MA790GP-DS4H and Gigabyte MA790FXT-UD5P. In both cases, we used a couple of different widely used memory configurations.So, the Socket AM2 + system used DDR2-800 with 5-5-5-15 timings and 1T Command Rate and DDR2-1067 with 5-5-5-15 timings and 2T Command Rate. Note that the use of 2T Command Rate in the second case is a forced measure, since the Phenom II memory controller does not allow reducing this delay when using 2GB DDR2-1067 SDRAM modules.
The Socket AM3 system used configurations including DDR3-1333 and DDR3-1600, both with 7-7-7-20 delays. The Command Rate parameter in both cases was set to 1T - fortunately, with high-speed DDR3 memory, this choice turns out to be acceptable.
Synthetic tests
First of all, it was decided to evaluate the practical parameters of memory subsystems on various platforms using synthetic tests.
As expected, synthetic tests unanimously demonstrate the superiority in bandwidth and latency of the Socket AM3 platform. In other words, from the new platform, which allows using DDR3-1333 and DDR3-1600, we can only expect performance gains.
To the above, it should be added that, as an additional check showed, the performance of the Socket AM3 processor memory controller installed in the Socket AM2 + system with DDR2 memory is identical to the performance of the memory controller of the “native” Socket AM2 + processors (provided that the bridge). In other words, the versatility of the Socket AM3 memory controller does not lead to a decrease in its performance when working with DDR2 SDRAM.
Overall performance
The results obtained in SYSMark 2007, showing weighted average performance in real applications, confirm the advantages of the new platform. However, they do not give reason for excessive optimism. As you can see, the transition to the use of DDR3 SDRAM increases the speed of the system based on the Phenom II X4 810 processor quite symbolically. Thus, the superiority of a Socket AM3 system equipped with DDR3-1600 SDRAM over a system with a Socket AM2 + processor and DDR2-1067 memory is only 3-4%.
Gaming performance
While games usually show good sensitivity to changes in memory subsystem characteristics, the move to DDR3 does not bring any significant gain. However, it must be emphasized that this does not at all mean the acceptability of a completely devil-may-care approach when choosing a memory. For example, betting on DDR3-1600 SDRAM instead of DDR2-800 can increase platform performance by up to 10%. Therefore, the appearance of the Socket AM3 platform and processors with a universal memory controller cannot be called a useless step. By now, DDR3 memory has received sufficient development so that there is no doubt about its advantages over DDR2. And this means that AMD was waiting for the launch of its new platform clearly not in vain.
Although encoding video content is primarily a computational task, fast DDR3 memory provides a slight performance boost in this case as well.
Tellingly, the advantage of Socket AM3 over Socket AM2 + is manifested even in the final rendering, which is almost completely indifferent to the choice of memory.
Other applications
When editing images in a popular graphics editor, the type of memory has a very noticeable effect. Even with the most common DDR3-1333 memory, we were able to get a higher speed than the Socket AM2 + system with DDR2-1067 SDRAM demonstrated.
With the transition to a new platform, the speed of solving computational problems in Excel and Mathematica also slightly increased. The superiority of Socket AM3 systems with DDR3-1600 memory over the configuration using Socket AM2 + and DDR2-1067 SDRAM is almost 3%.
The speed of the archiver is increasing on approximately the same scale.
Summing up, we can say that the Socket AM3 platform allows Phenom II X4 processors to speed up typical tasks by an average of 2-3%. Today, given the difference in prices between DDR2 and DDR3 modules, this increase seems ridiculous. However, in light of the tendency for a further fall in the cost of DDR3 SDRAM, the Socket AM3 platform has quite bright prospects.
AMD Phenom II X4 810 performance
Despite the fact that the new AMD Phenom II X4 810 processor has a Socket AM3 design, we decided to test its performance, as well as the performance of other today's new products, in a Socket AM2 + system equipped with DDR2 memory. This is due to the fact that in the existing realities, these processors belonging to the middle price range are likely to be used in such systems: this is the most logical option from the point of view of economic feasibility. Besides, DDR2 memory was used in all the other systems we tested, so the choice of the Socket AM2 + platform for the Phenom II X4 810 tests seems to be quite correct.Overall performance
Competent pricing is something that AMD has become especially adept at lately. Therefore, it would be strange to see if any of the new processors looked inadequate among competitors of the same price category. So the slight superiority of the Phenom II X4 810 over the Core 2 Quad Q8200 is by no means surprising, but the more expensive Intel processor, the Core 2 Quad Q8300, is already too tough for today's main novelty.
Gaming performance
Although the Phenom II processors began to demonstrate much better performance in games than their predecessors, produced using 65nm technology, we cannot yet speak of a confident victory of the Phenom II X4 810 over the Core 2 Quad in the same price category. In order for the Phenom II X4 810 to receive our unequivocal recommendations as a gaming solution, it clearly lacks the clock speed. However, the situation for the AMD processor is by no means catastrophic, and in a number of gaming applications its performance turns out to be quite acceptable.
Video encoding performance
But when encoding video, the Phenom II X4 810 shows itself exclusively from the positive side. For example, when using the x264 codec, it can even compete on an equal footing with the more expensive Core 2 Quad Q8300. This is obviously explained by the high efficiency of the FPU / SSE processor block with Stars microarchitecture (K10).
Rendering performance
The general verdict with this type of load is quite difficult to endure. As you can clearly see from the graphs, everything strongly depends on the application that is used for rendering. Nevertheless, the Phenom II X4 810 does not hit its face at all, demonstrating decent results even in 3ds max 2009, where Intel processors are traditionally strong.
Other applications
Adobe Photoshop and Microsoft Excel are two popular applications where the Phenom II processors do a very poor job of doing their job. This also applies to the Phenom II X4 810, which loses out to the Core 2 Quad Q8200 in the execution time of our test tasks by 9 and 17 percent, respectively.
In Wolfram Mathematica 7, the results of the Phenom II X4 810 can be called acceptable, although they turn out to be slightly lower than that of the youngest processor of the Core 2 Quad series.
On the other hand, when archiving in WinRAR, the new AMD processor manages to demonstrate significantly higher relative performance than in previous cases.
Computational tasks, where integer arithmetic is actively used, is not the most favorable environment for processors with Stars microarchitecture (K10). The two diagrams above serve as a vivid illustration of this long-known thesis.
Overclocking
With the release of the Phenom II family, the topic of overclocking AMD processors has gained relevance again. These processors, which are based on 45nm cores, have, among other things, received good overclocking potential: as our earlier tests, these models, when using air cooling, are capable of operating at frequencies reaching 3.7-3.8 GHz. However, our conclusions were made for the 900-series processors using full-fledged Deneb cores. Now we have in our hands the Phenom II X4 810 processor, which has a cut L3 cache and, moreover, Socket AM3 execution.To study the overclocking potential of the new processor, we used the new Socket AM3 motherboard from Gigabyte MA790FXT-UD5P. The use of this board will allow us, among other things, to draw conclusions about the overclocking suitability of Socket AM3 platforms as a whole. The processor was cooled during the tests with a Scythe Mugen cooler with a Noctua NF-P12 fan installed on it.
We managed to get the best result when the processor voltage was increased from the standard 1.3 to 1.525 V. In this state, the processor overclocked to 3.64 GHz, which is quite comparable with the overclocking results of other Phenom IIs we obtained earlier.
Note that since the Phenom II X4 810 processor does not belong to the Black Edition class and does not have a free multiplier, it was overclocked by increasing the frequency of the base clock generator. In particular, in order to obtain a processor frequency of 3.64 GHz, we had to increase the clock generator frequency to 280 MHz, with which the Socket AM3 motherboard we used coped without any problems. In other words, overclocking processors in Socket AM3 systems is absolutely similar to overclocking in systems with Socket AM2 + and can be performed in full accordance with our manual.
As far as the Phenom II X4 810 itself is concerned, its 40% overclocking achieved by us may become an additional argument in favor of the AMD platform. Moreover, comparable in cost Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 processors can often be overclocked only up to 3.4 GHz. In this regard, the system based on the Phenom II X4 810 can be quite attractive for overclockers.
conclusions
Frankly speaking, AMD chose a somewhat strange moment to launch its new Socket AM3 platform, designed for processors with DDR3 memory support. For some reason, this platform appeared not a month ago, along with a new line of Phenom II processors, but only now. As a result, since the older Phenom II modifications are already offered in Socket AM2 + variations, models from the middle price range are forced to accompany the announcement of Socket AM3. However, these processors seem to be very poor candidates for installing motherboards in Socket AM3: the DDR3 memory required for such systems is about one and a half to two times more expensive than the widespread DDR2 SDRAM, which makes it a dubious investment compared to choosing a more expensive processor.However, the main advantage of Socket AM3 processors is that they are equipped with a flexible memory controller that can work with both DDR3 and DDR2 memory. Therefore, nobody forces to use the mid-price Phenom II processors presented today in Socket AM3 systems in Socket AM3 systems. They also work perfectly in the existing, time-tested Socket AM2 + or even Socket AM2 infrastructure.
Nevertheless, thanks to testing the new processor in a Socket AM3 motherboard, we were able to make sure that this platform is also viable. The use of DDR3 SDRAM with Phenom II processors gives a quite tangible effect, which consists in an approximately 3% increase in performance even in comparison with DDR2-1067 SDRAM.
Fortunately, the absence of high-performance processors for the Socket AM3 platform is a temporary situation. Over the coming months, AMD will obviously adjust its offerings, and the new platform will receive decent high-speed processors. This period of time is given to motherboard manufacturers who clearly need it, so that they still bring their Socket AM3 products to their senses.
As for the Phenom II X4 810 processor reviewed in this article, it should be seen as another embodiment of AMD's strategy of offering higher performance for less money. Testing has shown that in terms of performance it is comparable to the Core 2 Quad Q8200, but at the same time it costs a little less. As a result, AMD has an acceptable alternative to all cheap quad-core Intel processors up to the Core 2 Quad Q9400. In other words, AMD was able to take an important step - to offer a competitive line of processors that can be recommended for purchase.
To what has been said in this article, it remains only to add that we are not finishing our acquaintance with Phenom II yet, and in the near future we will have one more material about new tri-core processors based on the Heka core, produced using a 45-nm technological process.
Check availability and cost of AMD Phenom II processors
Other materials on this topic
Overclocking the Phenom II X4 920: the fall of the Core 2 Quad cult
Sometimes they come back: AMD unveils Phenom II X4
AMD Releases "Phenom X2": AMD Athlon X2 7750 Black Edition Review
