AMD Phenom X4 9350e - 65W quad-core - bit-tech.net Forums

Tim S · 24th Jul 2008, 09:09

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/200...nom-x4-9350e/1

If you're a prolific multi-tasker but you want something that runs cool, there's very little on offer. That was until AMD recently launched its latest quad-core processor - the Phenom X4 9350e, which sports a maximum TDP of just 65W.

DougEdey · 24th Jul 2008, 09:32

Odd question: How would this cope in a laptop/notebook setup? Would it be a huge drain on battery life, too much to make it worthwhile, or would it not significantly increase the power assumption but give rise to a good quad core portable?

Bindibadgi · 24th Jul 2008, 09:50

65W is too much for a notebook imo.

DougEdey · 24th Jul 2008, 10:18

The mobile P4s hit 68.1W
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...bile_Pentium_4

Even up to 88W! So maybe the laptop would be a wee bit thicket, but coupled with a WUXGA and a mobile 4850, it could make a nice high end laptop.

Bindibadgi · 24th Jul 2008, 10:25

Yea, P4s!! My mate had one and his notebook was an inch thick with a 30 minute battery life.

DougEdey · 24th Jul 2008, 10:27

Remember though, batteries have improved a lot since then, and this one is 75% lower TDP, so theoretically, you'd get 40 minutes!

mrb_no1 · 24th Jul 2008, 10:31

damn amd, seems like another waste of time....

Mo_ · 24th Jul 2008, 11:14

Another flop from AMD - they are the flopmasters

M4RTIN · 24th Jul 2008, 11:26

who needs a quad core home theatre? never had to do any serious number crunching while watching a dvd before...

this looks like your choice is, do four things really slowly or you can do two things really quickly with a much cheaper athlon64 .. maybe it averages out in the end..

btw when are the 45nm phenom's out

Bindibadgi · 24th Jul 2008, 11:30

It's not DVD playback - you can do that on a VIA EPIA! The IGPs on those have MPEG-2 acceleration.

If you're playing 1080p h.264 rips and you aren't using something like a 780G/8200 IGP, then a 9350e + CoreAVC codec = win! Unfortunately I don't have a 5400+ 2.8GHz 65W dual core to test either, but a 2.5GHz dual core wouldn't do it and we loaded all four cores 30-40% on the 9350e.

This CPU is a niche product for a specific application, that's all.

azrael- · 24th Jul 2008, 11:37

Not to belittle AMD, but tests over at Anandtech show that a Phenom 9550 will behave more or less exactly as a Phenom 9350e if clocked at the same speed (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=3344&p=6). The major difference is that the 9550(!) is cheaper.

Bindibadgi · 24th Jul 2008, 11:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by azrael-

Not to belittle AMD, but tests over at Anandtech show that a Phenom 9550 will behave more or less exactly as a Phenom 9350e if clocked at the same speed (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=3344&p=6). The major difference is that the 9550(!) is cheaper.

Yup, just what we though, except we don't have a 9550 to test

azrael- · 24th Jul 2008, 12:46

Are those comparative Phenom 9550 scores in the article from an earlier test scenario?

Still, the 9350e is a nice enough processor for what its meant for. AMD just shouldn't sell it at a price premium compared to the otherwise identical 9550.

I'm more worried about those other findings at Anandtech. Namely that the Phenom seems to have problems getting out of Cool'n'Quiet mode properly. I hope this is fixable via a microcode update.

Bindibadgi · 24th Jul 2008, 22:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by azrael-

Are those comparative Phenom 9550 scores in the article from an earlier test scenario?

I'm more worried about those other findings at Anandtech. Namely that the Phenom seems to have problems getting out of Cool'n'Quiet mode properly. I hope this is fixable via a microcode update.

The 9550 results were a clocked down 9850. I'd only want to test a true retail sample to do a more sensitive comparison though.

We found the same as Anand - CnQ basically sometimes doesn't come out of it (Sony Vegas, or Prime95) even when the CPU is loaded. I think it's a driver issue although others blame Vista thread handling and power management.

eek · 24th Jul 2008, 23:03

The front page mentions "9530e" a couple of times, should it not be 9350e?

Burnout21 · 26th Jul 2008, 19:48

i must say, when the next generation of laptops comes along with Quad cores, then i shall upgrade my now aging laptop which was purchased in either 2005 or 2006 and has recieved a few upgrades since then. the Dothan is still a powerful CPU, wish it was a Yothan.

still looking at sub-notebooks, but my work is graphic intensive...

I really want AMD to knock out a decent CPU, iv been a fanboy for along time, cough K6-II. But intels price and performance was just a common sense purchase no matter how much i love AMD.

Amon · 26th Jul 2008, 22:30

Bit-tech still hasn't fixed the colour key to their PCMark Vantage charts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DougEdey

The mobile P4s hit 68.1W
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...bile_Pentium_4

Even up to 88W! So maybe the laptop would be a wee bit thicket, but coupled with a WUXGA and a mobile 4850, it could make a nice high end laptop.

Those notebooks were accompanied by up to 105-watt external power bricks. The reality is that 95% or more of all notebooks worldwide are available with a 65-watt brick, only.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burnout21

I really want AMD to knock out a decent CPU

Give AMD some good, hardcore German porno and you can be sure they'll knock more than one out.

Bindibadgi · 26th Jul 2008, 23:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by eek

The front page mentions "9530e" a couple of times, should it not be 9350e?

Fixed, twas me typoing

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amon

Bit-tech still hasn't fixed the colour key to their PCMark Vantage charts.

True, next time I'll redo the whole lot separately.

dk-melgaard · 1st Aug 2008, 20:48

should be perfect for media centers:P but again.. wich media center needs a quad core xD

punisher0276 · 4th Aug 2008, 19:33

The board used for the Phenom is a piece of crap. The sb is 1000 and fails to give a true test of the fsb. The full fsb is 2600 and ht is 6200 on good amd boards with either chipset. I personally use a 750a MSI with 8800 gt sli and get close to 50 fps with a 9950. I use OCZ 1066 ram 4gb as well. If you test with crap you get crap. I have 2 systems with wolfdales and they are fast but the 8800 ultra is outdated. You think they would have used a GTX 260 or 280 by now or even a 9800 GX2. The quad cores listed mostly get the same or worse frame rates unless you go to a 9450 or core extreme you can forget it. In fact unless you are at 2.6 ghz you can forget it period. Crysis is a rough hardware game period. I switched from a 9600 phenom to a 9950 and added over 20 fps with the same board and ram. Clockspeed is everything in sli. My choice of the 2.6 phenom with a decent board was great and now I am getting a GTX 260 for hybrid sli. My sons enjoy their wolfdales and for the price they make the q6600 a waste of time. In fact I wouldn't go lower than a q6700 in an Intel quad for this game after multiple systems and testing on my own.

24th Jul 2008, 09:09	#1
Tim S Pewlius Caesar bit-tech Staff Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Ascot, Berks Posts: 18,021	AMD Phenom X4 9350e - 65W quad-core http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/200...nom-x4-9350e/1 If you're a prolific multi-tasker but you want something that runs cool, there's very little on offer. That was until AMD recently launched its latest quad-core processor - the Phenom X4 9350e, which sports a maximum TDP of just 65W. __________________ Tim on Twitter \| Tim's Blog \| Tim's Flickr The bit-tech Blog \| bit-tech on Twitter \| Join the bit-tech & Custom PC folding team (#35947)

24th Jul 2008, 09:32	#2
DougEdey I pwn all your storage Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Southampton Posts: 13,933	Odd question: How would this cope in a laptop/notebook setup? Would it be a huge drain on battery life, too much to make it worthwhile, or would it not significantly increase the power assumption but give rise to a good quad core portable? __________________ Burnout: Paradise Stats!XBL: DougEdey Bindi PSN ID: DougEdey Twitter

24th Jul 2008, 09:50	#3
Bindibadgi Richard Swinburne bit-tech Staff Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Omnipwntent Posts: 28,259	65W is too much for a notebook imo. __________________ Made you look, made you stare, made you clicked this in your underwear! Den of Geek!

24th Jul 2008, 10:18	#4
DougEdey I pwn all your storage Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Southampton Posts: 13,933	The mobile P4s hit 68.1W http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...bile_Pentium_4 Even up to 88W! So maybe the laptop would be a wee bit thicket, but coupled with a WUXGA and a mobile 4850, it could make a nice high end laptop. __________________ Burnout: Paradise Stats!XBL: DougEdey Bindi PSN ID: DougEdey Twitter

24th Jul 2008, 10:25	#5
Bindibadgi Richard Swinburne bit-tech Staff Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Omnipwntent Posts: 28,259	Yea, P4s!! My mate had one and his notebook was an inch thick with a 30 minute battery life. __________________ Made you look, made you stare, made you clicked this in your underwear! Den of Geek!

24th Jul 2008, 10:27	#6
DougEdey I pwn all your storage Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Southampton Posts: 13,933	Remember though, batteries have improved a lot since then, and this one is 75% lower TDP, so theoretically, you'd get 40 minutes! __________________ Burnout: Paradise Stats!XBL: DougEdey Bindi PSN ID: DougEdey Twitter

24th Jul 2008, 10:31	#7
mrb_no1 Pie Eater Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Pyrford, England Posts: 365	damn amd, seems like another waste of time.... __________________ Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 3600Mhz ¦ Asus Maximus II Formula ¦ ATI Radeon 4890 (1000Mhz Core + 1200Mhz Mem OC) ¦ 2x2G Corsair Dom. PC 8500 @ 1080Mhz ¦ Aquacomputer WC ¦ Creative X-Fi Fatal1ty ¦ 150G Raptor, 2x1500 + 1x750 + 2x500 Seagate (SATA2) ¦ Pioneer DVD burner ¦ Lian Li - PC 73SL Aluminium Silent Server Case ¦ Dell 2007WFP 20" Widescreen ¦ Logitech Z-5500 5.1 Speakers ¦ Sennheiser HD270

24th Jul 2008, 11:14	#8
Mo_ Did this world come by chance? Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Bedford Posts: 75	Another flop from AMD - they are the flopmasters

24th Jul 2008, 11:26	#9
M4RTIN Ultramodder Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Birmingham, UK Posts: 1,257	who needs a quad core home theatre? never had to do any serious number crunching while watching a dvd before... this looks like your choice is, do four things really slowly or you can do two things really quickly with a much cheaper athlon64 .. maybe it averages out in the end.. btw when are the 45nm phenom's out

24th Jul 2008, 11:30	#10
Bindibadgi Richard Swinburne bit-tech Staff Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Omnipwntent Posts: 28,259	It's not DVD playback - you can do that on a VIA EPIA! The IGPs on those have MPEG-2 acceleration. If you're playing 1080p h.264 rips and you aren't using something like a 780G/8200 IGP, then a 9350e + CoreAVC codec = win! Unfortunately I don't have a 5400+ 2.8GHz 65W dual core to test either, but a 2.5GHz dual core wouldn't do it and we loaded all four cores 30-40% on the 9350e. This CPU is a niche product for a specific application, that's all. __________________ Made you look, made you stare, made you clicked this in your underwear! Den of Geek!

24th Jul 2008, 11:37	#11
azrael- Ex nihilo nihil fit Join Date: May 2008 Location: Aarhus, Denmark Posts: 1,172	Not to belittle AMD, but tests over at Anandtech show that a Phenom 9550 will behave more or less exactly as a Phenom 9350e if clocked at the same speed (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=3344&p=6). The major difference is that the 9550(!) is cheaper. __________________ ''Trying is the first step towards failure.'' - Homer Simpson

24th Jul 2008, 12:46	#13
azrael- Ex nihilo nihil fit Join Date: May 2008 Location: Aarhus, Denmark Posts: 1,172	Are those comparative Phenom 9550 scores in the article from an earlier test scenario? Still, the 9350e is a nice enough processor for what its meant for. AMD just shouldn't sell it at a price premium compared to the otherwise identical 9550. I'm more worried about those other findings at Anandtech. Namely that the Phenom seems to have problems getting out of Cool'n'Quiet mode properly. I hope this is fixable via a microcode update. __________________ ''Trying is the first step towards failure.'' - Homer Simpson

24th Jul 2008, 23:03	#15
eek CAMRA ***. Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: in meh own little world Posts: 1,511	The front page mentions "9530e" a couple of times, should it not be 9350e?

26th Jul 2008, 19:48	#16
Burnout21 is true bit-techer! Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Nott's Posts: 4,855	i must say, when the next generation of laptops comes along with Quad cores, then i shall upgrade my now aging laptop which was purchased in either 2005 or 2006 and has recieved a few upgrades since then. the Dothan is still a powerful CPU, wish it was a Yothan. still looking at sub-notebooks, but my work is graphic intensive... I really want AMD to knock out a decent CPU, iv been a fanboy for along time, cough K6-II. But intels price and performance was just a common sense purchase no matter how much i love AMD. __________________ DFI P45-T2RS Plus, Q6600, 4GB Reaper HPC, GTX280 & FX3450, X-Fi Xtreme Music, 1570GB Storage

1st Aug 2008, 20:48	#19
dk-melgaard What's a Dremel? Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 14	should be perfect for media centers:P but again.. wich media center needs a quad core xD

4th Aug 2008, 19:33	#20
punisher0276 What's a Dremel? Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 1	The board used for the Phenom is a piece of crap. The sb is 1000 and fails to give a true test of the fsb. The full fsb is 2600 and ht is 6200 on good amd boards with either chipset. I personally use a 750a MSI with 8800 gt sli and get close to 50 fps with a 9950. I use OCZ 1066 ram 4gb as well. If you test with crap you get crap. I have 2 systems with wolfdales and they are fast but the 8800 ultra is outdated. You think they would have used a GTX 260 or 280 by now or even a 9800 GX2. The quad cores listed mostly get the same or worse frame rates unless you go to a 9450 or core extreme you can forget it. In fact unless you are at 2.6 ghz you can forget it period. Crysis is a rough hardware game period. I switched from a 9600 phenom to a 9950 and added over 20 fps with the same board and ram. Clockspeed is everything in sli. My choice of the 2.6 phenom with a decent board was great and now I am getting a GTX 260 for hybrid sli. My sons enjoy their wolfdales and for the price they make the q6600 a waste of time. In fact I wouldn't go lower than a q6700 in an Intel quad for this game after multiple systems and testing on my own.