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
Power Consumption
Without power gating the Athlon II X4 draws as little power as possible, noticeably less than any of AMD's other multi-core CPUs. Our X4 620 sample was a bit more power hungry than our 630.
Even under load the power consumption story is a good one. Given the position of our Q8400 sample here we'd say that the Q8200 would probably use a bit less power, but the price differential should more than make up for it.
Overclocking
As I mentioned at the start of this article I managed to hit 3.25GHz on the Athlon II X4 620 without any additional voltage using the retail AMD cooler:
I could hit 260MHz x 13.0 for 3.38GHz by upping the voltage, but the gain wasn't worth the additional power usage. Anything higher wasn't possible without more exotic cooling or much more voltage. The performance improved handily at 3.25GHz:
| Processor | Adobe Photoshop CS4 | x264 2nd pass | Left 4 Dead |
| AMD Athlon II X4 620 (2.6GHz) | 27.5 seconds | 15.4 fps | 93.2 fps |
| AMD Athlon II X4 620 @ 3.25GHz | 23.2 seconds | 18.9 fps | 102.9 fps |
| AMD Phenom II X4 955 (3.2GHz) | 22.3 seconds | 19.1 fps | 121.4 fps |
| Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400 | 21.8 seconds | 17.9 fps | 105.6 fps |
At 3.25GHz the Athlon II X4 ends up faster than the even more expensive Q8400in some cases, and gets much closer in others. In applications where the large L3 cache isn't missed, the overclocked Athlon II can end up being a poor man's Phenom II X4 955. But looking at the Left 4 Dead performance, there's no such thing as a free lunch - the overclocked Athlon II isn't quite that good.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
150 Comments
View All Comments
blyndy - Friday, September 18, 2009 - link
I don't know if they intentionally cripple fully functioning denebs. I imagined that amd would rather sell a Phx4 for ~$200 than an A2x4 for ~$100, but I might have read somewhere that both intel and amd do intentionally cripple fully functioning chips.strikeback03 - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
That statement makes sense for harvested Denebs, but doesn't Propus not have any L3 at all, so it can't be turned into a PhenomII?blyndy - Friday, September 18, 2009 - link
Yes that's why I thought the quote didn't make sense -- If propus is exclusively A2x2 then the highest clocking propus' will still be A2x2's, therefore A2x2 overclocking wouldn't suffer.MrPIppy - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
How is the motherboard compatibility situation looking? Will boards need a BIOS update, or just work out of the box right now?Also, does it support AMD virtualization instructions?
Last, any idea about compatibility with ECC RAM? The BIOS often plays a role in this too, but just wanted to make sure AMD didn't remove ECC support from the IMC or something similar
TA152H - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
This is a GREAT product from AMD.Make it smaller, make it cheaper, and put it with a platform much better than one Intel can have.
AMD can not make a processor worth a damn. Let's face it, they suck. If they try to compete head on with Intel, they lose, period.
By making a quad core that is more than fast enough for most people, while at the same time reducing the size so they can make it cheaper, they created something in a segment where Intel just isn't.
Couple this with a 790GX, or the 785, and you've got a great platform for a lot of people. If you need the best, or near it, the Bloomfield can't be touched. Why even try? Most people don't need it.
Finally, AMD seems to get it.
khaakon - Thursday, September 17, 2009 - link
I kinda agree with you here. But I cannot understand your need to paint the world in only black and white.khaakon - Thursday, September 17, 2009 - link
* edit;"your need" meaning TA152H
Eeqmcsq - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
"Finally, AMD seems to get it."Yes, but will they make money out of it? Only time will tell.
Chlorus - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
Where's that dipshit snakeoil to complain about nonexistent bias?Eeqmcsq - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - link
He's in disguise under a new screen name. See if you can spot him in the comments so far.