AMD Phenom FX-80 {4.0Ghz} and FX-82 {4.4Ghz}


Recommended Posts

Can't beat them for price though X2 cheap as chips and still powerful compared to intel. For price of Core 2 quad Q9300 or Q6600 locally i got a 5600+ 2.8GHz dual core + 3870 graphics card for less then the intel cpu alone. most people are paying premium for "power" which probably generally speaking goes unused or isn't needed

But you're comparing a Dual Core (X2) to a Quad Core (Qxxx). It's not too surprising that it was cheaper. :rolleyes:

Edited by CrashGordon
Come on the P4 (Prescott and some northwoods) were notorious for producing tons of heat... That was then.
Also, slight pet peeve..but the fan is quiet. Processors don't really make noise..
processors don't make noise. It might be a shoddy fan or something.

How's this such a difficult concept? My P4 3.0C @ 3.6 on XP-90 + Panaflo probably sounds the same as your rig.

Here is a good question for someone more or less question on what they think

AMD has what they call true-quad core design with each core having its own pipeline rather then sharing a single pipeline between 2 cores Now intels quad is a dual 2 core in 1 housing rather then 4 distinctly separated cores with separate pipelines so instead each dual core in intels quad design shares a single pipeline so do you think AMDs phenom design would be better in the long run with less of a bottleneck for those who might stress the chip hard.

Nehalem's design isn't like that though, which changes the whole thing for me. Multithreaded applications today run faster on Intel's chips still and as software is improved to the point where this design is stressed, Nehalem will be mainstream (I doubt we're going to have some kind of software revolution in the next few months where multithreaded programming becomes much more common).

Here is a good question for someone more or less question on what they think

AMD has what they call true-quad core design with each core having its own pipeline rather then sharing a single pipeline between 2 cores Now intels quad is a dual 2 core in 1 housing rather then 4 distinctly separated cores with separate pipelines so instead each dual core in intels quad design shares a single pipeline so do you think AMDs phenom design would be better in the long run with less of a bottleneck for those who might stress the chip hard.

Is Penryn still the dual dual core design?

If AMDs broken the 4GHz mark (at stock level) intel should have some competition. I wouldnt rule AMD out yet

Yeah 4Ghz stock is quite impressive. I wonder what people are going to OC those to?!

Probably not much further, physical limitations should still be a factor.

First off we know that the pipeline of Deneb isn't going to change drastically, think Netburst here. Next, AMD's 45nm isn't as mature as Intel's..and I'm sure there are some other things. Anyway, just based on what little I know about this, it doesn't seem like the MHz are just going to roll in for AMD.

wow i am suprised ! at least some moves from AMD sides since core 2 release amd is like errrm cursed performnace wise lol

but still doesnt make sense comparing unreleased Quadcore cpu with 2 year old quadcore

oh comn ! it should be at least compared to some penryn chips which at least the last chips released .... by intel

anyway after a month kentsfield would be as extinct/obsolete as the dodo bird !

ahh yes ! the yet unreleased Core i7 ! that would be coming

i would expect phenom FX to arrive around January next year which give ....

and i dont care who the chip is made slaped dies or whatever which matter me * higher performance*

which core 2 Quads destroyed everything in there path

and i dont care if amd slaped four cpu dies in one package !! as i said ....

for a reminder AMD is planning slapped (six core die )12 core slapped cpu next year ....... so lol at amd fans

Anything that gives AMD some more funding/time to sort its **** out is good news to me. Dont get me wrong I'm running a Intel E8400... but I'm still an AMD fan :wub:. Its crazy that there is really only one brand choice for people who are looking at a gaming rig.

Anything that gives AMD some more funding/time to sort its **** out is good news to me. Dont get me wrong I'm running a Intel E8400... but I'm still an AMD fan :wub:. Its crazy that there is really only one brand choice for people who are looking at a gaming rig.

Ditto. Even if I'm not an AMD fan for their processors, I'm still an AMD fan for their efforts to pull down the Intel processor prices drastically ;)

Sorry, guys, but the images the linked site provided are fakes. they were initially used elsewhere to show a 2.2Ghz deneb overclocked to 4Ghz. However the faker forgot to adjust the voltage from stock voltage.

The only valid overclock on engineering samples is 2.2Ghz to 3.44ghz, and 2.4Ghz to 3.6Ghz.

Stock voltages are below 1.2v, overclock to 3.4 and 3.6 required a bump to 1.475. Knowing that, its not likely that 4Ghz stock would be @ 1.168v.

Atom? Read up on Athlon64 2000+ for power consumption.

Sheesh, that's a nice set of numbers. But my Atom N270 system is using just under 10W at the moment (At most I use ~17W, that's playing a 3d Java game, music, aMSN, and a couple of other tabs open. Still, despite being a subnotebook, it's Atom powered)

I think AMD made a mistake buying ATI at the time. They split their resources too much and there were old whispers of a new Intel proc with 1 or 2 cores (The Core Solo and Duo) for a few years before that. If they had focussed on making something that would match/better the Intel proc (Intel has a better name so can get away with more), then maybe they could have gone into ATI. (Though, would AMD have had enough to buy ATI once Dx10 was released?)

I remember the good old K8 vs. Prescott days, ahh, the memories.

Edit:Weird bug thar

Edited by wst50
But you're comparing a Dual Core (X2) to a Quad Core (Qxxx). It's not too surprising that it was cheaper. :rolleyes:

i was comparing a dual core processor and graphics card to the price of a single quad core.

yeah....tsupersonic, and mnmesisca - my post was soo-ooo off base.... apparently the Board of Directors for AMD dont think so - since they ousted the CEO, and the CTO is on his way out.... I mean sheesh -- what was I thinking saying they havent had crap for years.....

My knowledge of CPUs ?? well I may not know as much as Gwai Lo, or some of the others - but I DO know you are gonna be hard pressed to find someone in the industry who wont say AMD is in a huge amount of trouble and dont see any light at the end of the tunnel - seen their losses last Q ?

Yeah.... I am clueless :rolleyes:

I might have exaggerated things a little to prove a point - but my point cant be argued

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!