Where are AMD's "e" processors?!
Lots of great things have been said about the Athlon 64 X2 4850e and 5050e, but they're not around. The Athlon II X2 240e looks like the even newer, better replacement, but I can't find that anywhere either, except in some pre-built systems from HP, which I don't want.
I s'pose I can get a non-"e" and be happy (maybe even undervolt/underclock it?) but geez, they make what I want so I wish they'd just sell it. Anyone got a US source for the 240e?
I dunno about the usa but here in germany they are available at many online-shops.
Not US -- canada. They'll probably ship to US.
Just keep it in your mind that these chips were only introduced a month ago, so naturally, most of them will first go to big OEMs, later they'll be more readily available by themselves.
A question though... WHY THAT chip? Seems like a really low end chip for $90CDN. For just a few $ more, you can get a 4-core.
Yeah, I have an 45 Watt X2 4850e on a 780G board, great combination. Whole computer idles at 50 Watt (previous one with XP 2500+ idled at 130 Watt)
But if I were to buy one today I would probably go for an X4 605e. Apparently AMD will be releasing 25 Watt X2's in Q1 2010.
45 Watt TDP (and idles much lower) with pretty good bang per Watt. It looks perfect for a mostly idle box that's on 24x7 but occasionally needs to get some work (e.g. mythtv transcoding or commflagging) done.
Originally Posted by droidhacker
I was interested in the Athlon II X2 240e as well.
But, surprise, surprise, it's listed as out of stock at any vendor.
More tricks from AMD, it looks like. Although, I'm sure Intel does the same thing. They make sure these energy-saving processors have low availability in the hope that consumers will then buy the older, higher wattage parts and then when they finally become available, you have to pay a premium to get that energy saving.
How is that even allowed when these governments of ours are always preaching 'environment' all the time? What a sham.
I'm not sure what AMD are doing here, but if they're testing each chip they build and the ones that will run reliably at lower power get sold as 'e' models, then they can only sell as many as they happen to produce.
I was considering buying one, but as people have said, they're hard to get and expensive, which rather eliminates any benefit from buying one. I'm aiming more towards low idle power and underclocking instad.
I know this is a rather old thread, but I want to say: don't let the TDP values fool you. It doesn't say anything about idle power consumption.
You can get a Phenom II X2 Black Edition processor and configure it so that it consumes as much power as a 4850e at idle. Simply by setting the HT speed (and NB speed) to 1000 MHz.
I've got a Phenom II 965 BE running that consumes idle 3 watts more than my previous 4850e... just by putting the HT speed to 400 MHz, leaving the NB speed at 2000 and a bit of undervolting with k10ctl.
What's the maximum power consumption you're seeing? I'm getting tired of waiting for my Atom MythTV backend to transcode video so I'm thinking of upgrading it.
Originally Posted by user888
Difficult to say, because I have a RAID5 with 6 drives. I also have a switch connected to the UPS where I read the power consumption on. But if I do some calculations: idle with one drive around 50 watts (that's with HT speed @ 400 MHz, NB speed @ 2000, no undervolting). Maximum power consumption (on 4 GHz @ 1.55V ;-)) I saw was around 150 watt. 3.4 GHz @ 1.275V will do like 105 watts.
Originally Posted by movieman
But again: those are not exact numbers. Btw, have you played around with cpufreq-set ? Try to use the performance governor (cpu-set -c 0 -g performance) to see if it improves on your setup.