Phenom 9700, AMD's 1st Quad Core CPU

kr9091 · 2007-11-19T02:47:50Z

After delays of more than a year, the company can finally present its new, highly anticipated processor - and not a moment too soon. AMD needs a fresh product. While this CPU was originally meant as a competitor to Intel's Core 2 CPUs, the balance of power in the CPU arena has shifted over the past 18 months. The new processor, dubbed Phenom by AMD, is the first quad-core CPU by AMD and, as the company likes to remind us, the first native quad-core design. Just as a little spoiler....Intel's Q6600 quad core performs 15.5% better than the Phenom :]

- Comments (12)

Expand all

Charlie26886633d ago

And AMD/ATI continues to lag behind Intel and NVIDIA, I think someone should tell AMD that playing catch up with Intel and NVIDIA is not really bringing any results cuz when AMD is trying to catch up with Intels or NVIDIAs last step both of them are 2 steps ahead of AMD already

and to think AMD and ATI were once kings >.>

Reply Agree 2 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

DarkArcani6633d ago

AMD was never a king to begin with. They just became a major contender.
It was the first true 64 bit cpu, and now it's the first true quad core.
Also, they have always been better in laptops because they run on less power but still maintain great performance.

It will take a while for any company to beat Intel.

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 3

SPAM Inappropriate

Charlie26886633d ago

Dude when they released the AMD 64 they were kings EVERY single gamer and tech expert told you to get it over ANY Intel offering, AMD 64 was synonym of excellent performance in PC gaming and the AMD 64 FX were the expensive dreams of PC gamers...but Intel brought the Core Duo and AMDs kingdom (lol) fell

why do you think it was a brutal shock for EVERY ONE in the PC world to find out that AMD that was SO high in the pedestal fell to Intel and yes I remember the days when people didn't believe Intel had brought a better processor than AMD..the denial...the anger...the rants...and now is the other way around NO one is gonna recommend you a AMD processor over a Intel one...specially for gaming >.>

Reply Agree 1 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

Genki6633d ago

AMD isn't trying to play catch up with anyone. They offer the cheapest, but a competently performing quad-core on the market with the release of this processor, and you should have no issues with it if you OC.

Apparently, it's compatible with older and newer mobos as well, in opposition to Intel's paradigm of frequently releasing new chipsets.

Sure, I guess it's not OMG teh greatezt thing ever, but hey, it's certainly not bad.

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

DarkArcani6633d ago

I also like the 3x core cpu idea they might implement in computers. It is also a TRUE quad core, and not a 2x dual core.
Nice Job AMD.

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

Charlie26886633d ago (Edited 6633d ago )

They are pretty much force to catch up lately and believe me if they are the ones that put themselves in that position just look at the history of this stuff

NVIDIA releases the 8800GTX, ATI tries to match it with the HD 2900XT...but fails, ATI plans the next card to beat the GTX, NVIDIA brings the 8800GT and ATI is forced to catch up with the HD 3800 but performance test point out that again they fail, and NVIDIA 1 step ahead is coming with the new 8800GTS that are very cheap leaving ATI in the dust trying to catch up AGAIN

Intel brings the Core Duo, AMD tries to match it with the 64 X2 but fails, AMD to remain competitive makes the 64 X2 cheaper and the 64 FX more accessible to the public, Intel brings the Core 2 Duo leaving AMD in the dust, AMD plans for the future with Barcelona and Phenom...while AMD dreams with a better tomorrow Intel cuts prices to all Core 2 Duo and introduces the Quad Core...AMD starts bringing the Phenom to match Intel Core 2 Duo/Quad Core duo but Intel is already bringing the second generation of Quad Core and most likely cutting prices to the Core 2 Duo and old Quad Core...AMD returns to the catching up game yet AGAIN

the ONLY thing that has kept AMD competitive is the fact that they have been forced to lower their prices INCREDIBLY and appeal to the low budget buyer...a market that Intel and NVIDIA are also going into

what I find odd is that AMD/ATI doesnt not see into the future aka release something much better than the current offering of Intel and NVIDIA but the only thing they so is try to release something similar that until now falls short and they play the only card they can...make it cheap

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

Genki6633d ago

you speak of when AMD was top of the line. The weren't doing squat while AMD was on top, simply gluing P4s together in a half-assed manner while AMD was really putting it to 'em with their 64 and X2 offerings. Intel didn't reclaim the throne overnight...they were complacent for a very long time, and it showed, but I don't think AMD is out of the running just yet.

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

Charlie26886633d ago

I don't think it either but I think they (AMD) must be a LOT more aggressive and even MORE visionary to beat Intel and NVIDIA but they are going in a VERY dangerously slow path and AMD and NVIDIA seem to be on crack

AMD needs to step up and realize that Intel and NVIDIA are changing the playing rules and AMD needs to adjust and be even more ambitious and not only play the cheap card forever

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

Skerj6633d ago

I <3 AMD but I really wish the acquired Nvidia instead of ATI.

Reply Agree 1 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

skagrerrrr6633d ago

the nick of time.

I hope this will be competitive and drive prices lower

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

Genki6633d ago

the swift kick in the ass that made them completely flip their processing development paradigm on their backs.

Before it was all about maxing out that filthy clockspeed for Intel. After AMD smashed the hell out of them with the 64 AND THEN the X2's, they started to wise up a bit. I won't go the route of some fanfreaks and say they copied this or that...it's business...you make whatever moves have the greatest chance for success and productivity...and that's what Intel did.

We say this sort of thing about a lot of corporations and their competitors, but I think it especially fits the bill here:

Intel would be nowhere near where they are now were it not for AMD 2-3 years ago. NOWHERE NEAR.

Of course, that IS irrelevant when you look at things now, but all I'm suggesting is that the almighty giant can be knocked to his knees...it just takes some time. AMD has only been behind for barely 1 1/2 years by now, so give it time, maybe they'll surprise. This is, after all, a true QC architecture, perhaps it's laying down the groundwork for something greater.

I do hope that they bring the heat sometime again though, because I certainly don't wanna see Intel rest on their laurels once again. The P4 completely OVERSTAYED it's welcome, and I would fully expect Intel to continue such a horrific trend if they see no forthcoming threat from AMD. All I'm saying is give it time, we may be surprised.

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

DeadlyFire6633d ago

I believe it is only a matter of time for AMD and ATI to get their act together and trample Intel and NVIDIA. I believe their next new platform should perform much better the 4x4/Quad-FX platform. Likely they will have a few better performing CPUs as well by time of release of that platform. They just need to gather steam. I am a little surprised that these first quad cores are slower than the AMD 6400.

Reply Agree 0 Disagree 0

SPAM Inappropriate

Show all comments (12)