We all know that AMD numbered the 2.2GHz version as Phenom 9500, then 2.3GHz as Phenom 9600, while the failed to hit 2.4GHz was meant to be called 9700

so

2.2 = 9500
2.3 = 9600
2.4 = 9700
2.5 = 9800
2.6 = 9900

then we are sure their will be 2.7, 2.8 and even 3.0 and 3.2

I hope they don't name it 10000, or what ever that make them more than 4 chars !!

i believe they will just add 50 to the end ie 9550,9650

-------------------------
a8n32 sli deluxe,opty 170@2.9,2 gig xms pro4400,x1950 pro
new rig to come x2 6400@3.52 (untill a decent phenom revision comes out),4 gig black dragon,asus m2n32-sli,8800gt

Ummm, I thought those would be the FX models...but maybe they changed their release outline again...

-------------------------
Multi-Core Upgrade Guide

Do you want a world ranking? Join Team Fusion in Forum Warz 2011!

X1NN0 and so forth.

-------------------------

World's best Red Alert 2: Yuri's Revenge mod and Star Trek: Starfleet Command 3 mod: Overmind.ro

Ahhh yeah I guess so. What happens when 45nm parts start arriving and we have an overlap of 65nm and 45nm parts on the market? Could get confusing.

-------------------------
Multi-Core Upgrade Guide

Do you want a world ranking? Join Team Fusion in Forum Warz 2011!

9550 & 9650 already reserved for Error free versions of 9500 & 9600

and if they go for 9900, only 9950 will be left...





FX will keep thier names even for Phenoms ( at least this is what we know )







this is still 5 chars and yes it's long

I wonder why they keep the last char untouched for this numbering !!

but changing that will make saying it harder







that's if they didn't change the numbering for moving to 45nm !! and they don't plan a faster than 9900 version before 45nm...

and if thats true ( no faster than 9900 before 45nm ) this will be bad, very bad !!

Very bad? I doubt it, it's not like everyone who orders a PC from HP/DELL/walks into a BestBuy/etc,etc buys the fastest and most expensive PC.

Seeing how the higher speed bin parts are already 125+ Watts I doubt AMD will make anything much faster on 65nm unless they found/find a tweak in their 65nm process that allows more MHz at the same or lower wattages. I just hope their 45nm plans go OK without a hitch.

-------------------------
MSI 770-C45
Phenom II X2-550 @ X4 @ 3.5GHz @ Stock Vcore.
Thermaltake Big Typhoon
2x2GB DDR3 1333 @ 9-9-9-24-33-1T
1x60GB SSD /1x300GB VelociRaptor / 1x320GB Seagate / 1xDVD 22X
Audigy2 / HD 6670 1GB / Acer 22" / Win7-64_Ult.
Antec SOHO / Antec BP550 Plus

that's exactly what I mean...

if AMD will not produce any Chip faster than 9900 ( 2.6 ) in 65nm, this will mean 2.6+ clocks will be 45nm... this is 2 times bad

1- AMD's 65nm will need urget tweaks in order to enable faster clocks and lower watts, I'm assuming 125W will be good for 3.0+ Quad clocks not for less, I know QuadCore needs more power than Dual Core, but stating that AMD already had good experiece with 65nm process they will be able to tweak it, the current problem is just with the new K10 die as this die is harder to deal with than the old K9 ( duo to the larger silicon area + transistor count ), so they need some time...
2- 45nm will not come till 2H08, and for me I'm expecting Q4 as ramp timeframe that's only if everything goes ok with 45nm... a 2.6GHz Phenom is hardly stands these days infront of C2 Quads, and AMD surly need more clocks even today not talking about more than 6 months in best cases !!

Why it is named 9500, 9600, 9700,....... What does it mean?

-------------------------
"If you look at the last five years, if you look at what major innovations have occurred in computing technology, every single one of them came from AMD. Not a single innovation came from Intel." -- AMD CEO Hector Ruiz in 2007