http://www.buy.com/prod/phenom-qua [...] 90035.html

Ew 140W? At least it has more cache than the 9850? Yeah I'll wait for 45nm thanks.

EDIT: 65nm phenom = the new prescott

140W?

Holy cow! I'm with doomturkey on this one...

any reviews on it? i'm kinda curious to see if there's any benefit to the added cache on this architecture.

It looks like they just added the L2 and L3 cache together to get the 4MB ((512KB X 4) + 2MB).

AMD really should have waited for 45nm before they increased the clock speed any more. Unless they want to change their Phenom slogan to "All in one processor and spaceheater!"

At the price it doesn't sound like a very good deal to me o.O

Makes sense to me.

I love AMD but the 65nm phenoms just suck... in terms of power consumption/overclockability. Otherwise, they are clock for clock the same as the core 2 quads, give or take 5%. Gotta love the native quad core though, great for servers! I contemplated getting a phenom 9850 for my build this summer, but seeing the poor power consumption and overclockability is making me lean towards getting an X2 5000 BE (OCing as high as it will go), and using that until 45nm is out. That is, assuming the 45nm are any good. Hopefully they will be with extra cache, less power consumption, perhaps more stability beyond speeds of 3ghz? Whats lame is nehalem is due out when 45nm is due...

AMD get your **** together. The 48xx gfx cards effing pwn, now crank out something equally as spectacular in the CPU arena! For the sake of competition.

they should just seriously take the hd4870 core, pack it in a dual core version, and then code it in x86

I posted that just as a FYI type thing. Honestly, I am going to go with an AMD build this Summer when the new 790FX boards come out with the SB750. I was able to get a 95watt TDP Phenom 9750 and I'm going with that for now. I'm more interested in the AMD platforms future upgradability with the 45nm AM3 processors that will come out later next year. I think that buying Intel will mean you have to get a new board with the nehalem.

140 watt TDP is pretty crazy especially for a Black Edition CPU which is meant to be overclocked. I know some of the Intel Extreme Editions QX9770 cpu have 136 TDP, but this might be a record for X86 CPU's.

The problem is when Someone buys a mainstream CPU they'll probably also want a mainstream Motherboard. When it came down my decision between a 9850 and Q6600, all P35 motherboards I checked supported the Q6600. As the Phenom 9850 likes to suck power, some Budget motherboards don't support it. I calculator that a Phenom system would of been more expensive because of a more pricey motherboard.

You are correct that there are fewer boards that support 140 TDP, but 125 watts support is pretty common. There are lots of $100 boards that support the 125w TDP Phenoms and the 125w TDP Athlon X2. Those boards will also support future AM3 processors.

If you want to compare apples to apples: a 780i board is about $250 and a 780a board is about $250.

The P35 boards will not support the next generation Intel platform. So, in 6 months, it will be time to pony up for a new LGA1366 board.

Instead of the "real" quad core, AMD should've just stringed together two x2 duals for better performance per ghz.

I think this is the 'preemptive' shot before the 790gx rolls out in July.

If the rumahs on the internets are true the 9950BE will become a 3GHz quad core at stock cpu 200MHz clock with the 790gx and sb750.

If that is the case I would guess the price would go up from $300 (regardless of the 140w) because performance will be in the Q9450-Q9550 range.

I doubt that it will match a 9550, even at 3GHz. 9450, maybe. I hope it surprises me though, as more competition is always a good thing.

Hard to swallow at 300.

I think it depends on 2 things: 1) Memory divisor allows (close to) 1066MHz speed; and 2) HT speed runs spec 3,600 M/Ts (or higher).

Okay, three things ... the rumahs have to be true

IF the rumahs are true .... with a clock speed 30% faster than the Phenom 9600 (I understand a 100% linear scaling is unlikely) ...

3D Studio Max 9
Dragon_Character_rig (Rendering 1920x1080 Single)

QX9650 = 35 sec
9950BE = 38 sec
QX6800 = 39 sec
Phenom 9600 = 54 sec

Mainconcept H.264 Encoder
24 sec HDTV 1920x1080 mpeg2 (mpeg2 to H.264)

9950BE = 46 sec
QX9650 = 51 sec
QX6800 = 58 sec
Phenom 9600 = 65 sec

Premiere Pro 2.0
MPEG2 (24 Sec. HDTV 1920 x 1080) to (WMV9 (1920 x 1080))

9950BE = 115 sec
QX9650 = 128 sec
QX6800 = 135 sec
Phenom 9600 = 164 sec


That would be impressive.

Tom's cpu charts only had the ram speed at 766MHz - increasing memory speed 33%, clock speed 30% and HT ??% - might be a little competition if it all comes together

Funny thing is that the 136TDP for the QX9770 is the max where as the 140wTDP for the Phenom is really the average. AMD decided that a ADP was a better judgement. And the QX9650 gets nowhere near its 130W TDP untill its OC'ed to 3.8-4GHz.

Yes you are right that buying Intel now means for Nehalem you will need a new mobo. But I am the kind of person who would rather buy a new mobo in 2 years to enjoy all the new stuff it can do such as SATA3 and any other new enhancements that come.

As for the price. $300 bucks when a Q6600 is $200 now and can be OCed on any P35 mobo with no special SB or high end mobo needed. That extra $100 bucks could gelp you get 24850s instead of just one and have a better high res gaming platform.

Well, a q6600 running at the typical 3.6ghz outperform the 9950 easily enough, and at $189.99, it's certainly better bang for the buck. The claim that 9950 can oc to 3.6ghz is highly questionable. And even if counting in that oc, you can always push q6600 to 4ghz like many do.

I'm sorry but 140w sound like a rushed job on yanking there next phenom out the door , we all no that heat is the killer and I think its the wrong way to go for AMD , even if it ran at 3.0MHz 140w's is the wrong direction , BIG mistake for AMD on this one !!!