Talk:Table of AMD processors

This article was nominated for deletion on 29 August 2008. The result of the discussion was Keep.

Redundancy

Isn't this essentially redundant with the various other pages containing lists of AMD processors? The size of all those articles (only some of which I linked) should be some indication of just how large this page would have to become in order to be complete. — Aluvus ^t/c 04:26, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could use some reader friendly editing. Not easy to look up and down the list unless you remembered all the really long columns — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.16.207.72 (talk) 17:34, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article also is fairly out of date, many modern processors do not appear here whereas they do on other similar pages I agree, It should be deleted or merged with other pages you linked. Allywilson 17:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed on this - the list here is not only out of date, it was incomplete when it was created. Also the title suggests AMD processors in general, yet this seems to be specifically Athlon series and up only. Needs to be deleted and links to it redirected to already existing and more accurate/complete articles. aelfwyne 21:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I just tagged it for deletion. Wikiinger (talk) 17:11, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dude! That comment was 10 years old! The page had been nominated for deletion because of this 9 years ago, but was kept! A LOT of editing and updating has been happening to bring this page up-to-date and to clean it up. Let's talk about this in a new section. Real tlhingan (talk) 18:14, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination for deletion suggests this page is similar to List of AMD processors, while it isn't. That page lists AMD processors, whereas this page gives very detailed specs in an apples-to-apples format.Real tlhingan (talk) 18:17, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AMD-V on Santa Rosa chips

The Santa Rosa chips all have AMD-V, but the chart doesn't list it. I'm not familiar enough with working with charts on Wikipedia to modify it though. Would someone else mind taking care of this? Thanks in advance. Caben42 (talk) 19:59, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

some Phenom II missing

i bought a Phenom II X4 810: http://products.amd.com/de-de/DesktopCPUDetail.aspx?id=526&f1=AMD+Phenom%E2%84%A2+II+X4&f2=810&f3=2600&f4=512&f5=AM3&f6=C2&f7=45nm+SOI&f8=95+W&f9=4000&f10=False&f11=False&f12=True

this line is completly missing... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.245.86.72 (talk) 08:26, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Duron Spitfire

The Duron Spitfire doesn't have SSE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.143.25.214 (talk) 13:21, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No comparison of AMD Fusion APUs created yet

(As per title) LittleBen (talk) 00:35, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Asterisk

There are two asterisk next to the 8's that identify the maximum number of cores some bulldozer chips can have. There's no explanation for them and they're the only two asterisk found by my browser's search function. Sdmitch16 (talk) 06:00, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

6/6 Cores?

What does "6/6" in the Cores column mean? Why not simply "6"? --DrSeehas (talk) 18:51, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

754 & 939 supporting DDR2?

In Athlon 64 range it's showing Venus [both the Socket 754 & the 939] and San Diego 939 as supporting DDR2 which i'm quite sure is incorrect. I think the separating bar for memory controller should be moved down from its present location between Winchester & Venice to between San Diego & Orleans as in that range only Orleans & Lima have DDR2 support being Socket AM2 CPUs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.219.141 (talk) 08:48, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: Perhaps my above earlier comment has not been noticed or it was ignored because it was unsigned as i didn't have an account at the time. I've now checked further and it's abundantly clear that no socket 754 or 939 CPUs have a DDR2 memory controller. I have no idea how to move the separator without risking messing up the table. Someone more competent might like to do the amendment, thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dropbear087 (talk • contribs) 01:07, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to "Table of AMD processors"

A comparison is a much more extensive process than just listing specs in a table. However the latter is just what this article (table) does. Therefore I suggest to rename this article to "Table of AMD processors". Thoughts? Wikiinger (talk) 11:05, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[x] done Wikiinger (talk) 18:39, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Renoir Desktop Processors

Renoir Code Name of the Zen2 Family has desktop & mobile processors. This table only lists mobile. Desktop processors should be added.24.123.84.22 (talk) 21:17, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Features column

While adding the "Changes" sub column, I found a lot stuff to be improved, but I cannot fit this all in one change / do it all at once.
Here are my notes:

K8 sort hierarchy?
Now: "Family"/BrandName > ??
TBD: Fabrication > Year > ???

K8 which do NOT support SSE3:

                             [2003] SledgeHammer, ClawHammer, Newcastle, Paris, Odessa, Dublin
                             [2004] Winchester, Palermo(some models for 754!!!), Oakville, Georgetown, Sonora

K8 which support SSE3:

                             [2005] Athens, Troy, Venus, San Diego, Venice, Palermo((some models for 754!!!, all models for 939))
                             [2005] Egypt, Italy, Denmark, Toledo, Manchester,
                             [2006] Manila, Keene,  Santa Rosa, Santa Ana, Windsor, Orleans Trinidad, Taylor, Richmond
                             [2006] Brisbane, Lima, Sparta Lion, Tyler, Sable, Conesus, Sherman, Huron

Improving the K8 sort hierarchy will improve readability by avoiding back-and-forth between "generations", and is also more in line with Zen ff.

Seems wrong: ECC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exchange_spring_media / Exchange_coupled_composite_media

Missing features: PAE, LAHF/SAHF, RVI,

 Zen ff:
   AVIC, SME [j], TSME [j], SEV[k], BMI2, MOVBE, ADX, SHA, RDRAND/RDSEED, MWAITX/MONITORX, SMAP, SMEP, XSAVEC, XSAVES, XRSTORS, CLFLUSHOPT, CLZERO, and PTE Coalescing   GMET, x2APIC[k], SEV-ES[k], WBNOINVD, CLWB, QOS, PQE-BW, RDPID, RDPRU, and MCOMMIT  MPK, SEV-SNP[k], VAES   x2AVIC[k], AES-256-XTS MCUs[k]
 PREFETCH/PREFETCHW (remains of 3DNow!), add since K6-2

Missing nuances: ABM was introduced with K10, IOMMU v1/v2 differences (v2:piledriver)
EVP: wikilink to nx bit
AVX2: sublink to #Advanced_Vector_Extensions_2
MMX vs MMX+: check/bring in line
add x86-64-v1, v2, v3, v4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64#Microarchitecture_levels

Btw: The colors and italics/Bold in the "Changes" column are there to improve readability in case of color-blindness (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Creating_accessible_illustrations) Intg (talk) 13:06, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The "Changes" column was a brilliant idea. It was getting pretty hard to tell feature changes between the CPU architectures, especially when it was only one change. Excellent use of colour coding and bold/italic and +/- patterning.

There is a loooooot of work to be done with the table. For example missing model number group and release dates for K10 and older CPUs.

I'm going to mostly focus on the easier stuff, i.e. filling out all the blanks, before getting to the corrections stuff.

It's a shame that comprehensive info for old AMD processors can't be easily found out there, AMD doesn't have spec pages to many of their processors from more than 10 years ago or before the FX era.

AP 499D25 (talk) 12:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]