AMD Silently Intros 95W Phenom II X4 945

btarunr · Jul 23, 2009, 12:58 PM

AMD quietly decked up shelves with a new processor, this time, a low TDP variant of the Phenom II X4 945 quad-core processor. Carrying the model identifier "HDX945WFK4DGI", the Phenom II X4 945 95W comes with a significantly lower TDP rating compared to its 125W predecessor. It first surfaced on a CPU-support list by MSI, that leaked details of some unreleased processors. Based on the 45 nm Deneb core, in the AM3 package, the Phenom II X4 945 has an operating frequency of 3.00 GHz, 3.6 GT/s HyperTransport 3.0 system interface, 512 KB L2 cache per core, and a 6 MB shared L3 cache. It supports DDR2 and DDR3 memory standards. It has a bus multiplier of 15.0x which is upwards-locked since this is not a Black Edition SKU. It will have the same suggested retail price as its 125W version, at US $225.

lococol · Jul 23, 2009, 01:01 PM

should these offer better overclocks?

btarunr · Jul 23, 2009, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lococol

should these offer better overclocks?

Looking at AMD's past record with Phenom 9750 125W and 95W, I'm skeptical.

Winterwind · Jul 23, 2009, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lococol

should these offer better overclocks?

maybe little.. but they should oc better with low vcore

TheMailMan78 · Jul 23, 2009, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lococol

should these offer better overclocks?

I doubt it with a locked multi.

btarunr · Jul 23, 2009, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

I doubt it with a locked multi.

The 125W one has a locked multiplier too.

Darknova · Jul 23, 2009, 01:50 PM

I think AMD missed out by not making this a BE, a 95W quad would be nice with an unlocked multi.

TheMailMan78 · Jul 23, 2009, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by btarunr

The 125W one has a locked multiplier too.

I was thinking of the 955

mdm-adph · Jul 23, 2009, 02:12 PM

Well, regardless of how it overclocks, that's a nice TDP. For people with boards that have shitty MOSFETS like me, it's great.

btarunr · Jul 23, 2009, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

I was thinking of the 955

He was asking about how it compares to the 125W version.

Cheeseball · Jul 23, 2009, 02:17 PM

Now all they have to do is make 65W versions (that aren't E parts) and we should have efficient processors. (Or at least to catch up to the awesomeness of the Q6600.)

mdm-adph · Jul 23, 2009, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheeseball

Now all they have to do is make 65W versions (that aren't E parts) and we should have efficient processors. (Or at least to catch up to the awesomeness of the Q6600.)

What's wrong with the E parts? Got the same amount of cache and everything.

newtekie1 · Jul 23, 2009, 02:34 PM

Hopefully this means that whole issue with the 140w barrier isn't really an issue. Maybe the first batch of 965s will be 140w, but hopefully they can release a second batch that is 125w, and something higher than the 965 that pushs back up to 140w.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdm-adph

What's wrong with the E parts? Got the same amount of cache and everything.

They are rediculously expensive, and have low clock speeds and multipliers...

1Kurgan1 · Jul 23, 2009, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheeseball

Now all they have to do is make 65W versions (that aren't E parts) and we should have efficient processors. (Or at least to catch up to the awesomeness of the Q6600.)

Then you need to have Intel make chipsets that don't consume so much power. The final results for AMD or Intel are pretty close in Wattage, one requires more to the proc and one requires more to the chipset.

Quote:

Originally Posted by newtekie1

Hopefully this means that whole issue with the 140w barrier isn't really an issue. Maybe the first batch of 965s will be 140w, but hopefully they can release a second batch that is 125w, and something higher than the 965 that pushs back up to 140w.

Is the 965 for sure a 140W model? I haven't looked into it a ton, but I could see it being released as a 125W model seeing as they just made this move.

newtekie1 · Jul 23, 2009, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1Kurgan1

Is the 965 for sure a 140W model? I haven't looked into it a ton, but I could see it being released as a 125W model seeing as they just made this move.

Since it hasn't been released yet, we aren't 100% for sure, at least I'm not. However, there is some evidence to suggest it. Main with motherboard manufacturers listing it in their support lists as 140w. Which is usually a pretty good indicator that it will be 140w.

mdm-adph · Jul 23, 2009, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newtekie1

They are rediculously expensive, and have low clock speeds and multipliers...

Yeah, and that's why no one in their right mind should be buying E parts for their clock speeds.

That's not the point.

newtekie1 · Jul 23, 2009, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdm-adph

Yeah, and that's why no one in their right mind should be buying E parts for their clock speeds.

That's not the point.

Actually, I think that was exactly his point.

Bjorn_Of_Iceland · Jul 23, 2009, 03:12 PM

mdm-adph · Jul 23, 2009, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newtekie1

Actually, I think that was exactly his point.

I don't think I see any point, sir.

Why don't Ferraris cost the same as Fords?

Ferrari seriously needs to make a car that costs the same as a Ford.

Bjorn_Of_Iceland · Jul 23, 2009, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheeseball

Now all they have to do is make 65W versions (that aren't E parts) and we should have efficient processors. (Or at least to catch up to the awesomeness of the Q6600.)

Well I do wish you have the numbers to prove that. If so, thats great.. AMD users are now experiencing performance on what intel users have been experiencing ever since three or more years ago

newtekie1 · Jul 23, 2009, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdm-adph

I don't think I see any point, sir.

Why don't Ferraris cost the same as Fords?

Ferrari seriously needs to make a car that costs the same as a Ford.

I didn't say I agreed with is point, I was just explaining what he meant.

He wants the best of all worlds: Cheap, Low Power, and Fast.

The normal Phenoms are Cheap and Fast, and the Es are Low Power. Personally, I'd at least like to see Low Power and Fast, or Low Power and Cheap. I don't see why the low power chips are suddenly being priced so high, they should at least be close to the price point of similar performance non-low power chips, a little bit more expensive is understandable, but the markup on them now is just insane. Intel and AMD are both guilty of this...

You car example is flawed. A Ferrari is a completely different car from a ford, for the most part at least...

A Ferrari is fast and expensive, a Ford cheap(relatively). Of course, this ignores the Super Snake, which at ~$75,000 is very close to being as fast as a Ferrari for a fraction of the price.

And ignoring all that, you are comparing to different companies in two completely different markets. Here we are comparing a single company, producing products for the same market.

A better anology would be Toyota trying to sell the Camery Hybrid for $10,000 more than the XLE. As it is now, the Hybrid is slighly more expensive, but not outragously so, only about $250.

johnnyfiive · Jul 23, 2009, 04:03 PM

BE or not, they all seem to overclock about the same. My 920 reached the same clocks as a 940 would. The 945's are a hell of a bargain IMO. Cheaper than a 955 but should reach similar clocks. Plus, you will be HT oc'ing which yields better performance across the board, litearlly.

TheMailMan78 · Jul 23, 2009, 04:05 PM

You guys are talking about Mustangs. I must be involved. Whos side am I on? newtekie1 or mdm-adph?

Kitkat · Jul 23, 2009, 04:07 PM

yay there it is finaly lol

Quote:

Originally Posted by newtekie1

Hopefully this means that whole issue with the 140w barrier isn't really an issue. Maybe the first batch of 965s will be 140w, but hopefully they can release a second batch that is 125w, and something higher than the 965 that pushs back up to 140w.

That 965 had alot of incorect info to begin with most of that is mobo manus fault and the web going apesh!t over early info. They anounced they got it down to 95w/3.0 a while ago. (2 months?) I think they have been testing it all this time. 975 should be awesome. The first batch of 965 WILL be 125w and the second.. And yes its 100% sure lol

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

You guys are talking about Mustangs. I must be involved. Whos side am I on? newtekie1 or mdm-adph?[/url]

rofl rofl

mdm-adph · Jul 23, 2009, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newtekie1

I didn't say I agreed with is point, I was just explaining what he meant.

He wants the best of all worlds: Cheap, Low Power, and Fast.

The normal Phenoms are Cheap and Fast, and the Es are Low Power. Personally, I'd at least like to see Low Power and Fast, or Low Power and Cheap. I don't see why the low power chips are suddenly being priced so high, they should at least be close to the price point of similar performance non-low power chips, a little bit more expensive is understandable, but the markup on them now is just insane. Intel and AMD are both guilty of this...

You car example is flawed. A Ferrari is a completely different car from a ford, for the most part at least...

A Ferrari is fast and expensive, a Ford cheap(relatively). Of course, this ignores the Super Snake, which at ~$75,000 is very close to being as fast as a Ferrari for a fraction of the price.

And ignoring all that, you are comparing to different companies in two completely different markets. Here we are comparing a single company, producing products for the same market.

A better anology would be Toyota trying to sell the Camery Hybrid for $10,000 more than the XLE. As it is now, the Hybrid is slighly more expensive, but not outragously so, only about $250.

Wasn't necessarily comparing Ford and Ferarri cars -- I was comparing Ford and Ferarri buyers (which are completely different). My point is that enthusiasts (like we have here) shouldn't be complaining about the price of E parts, just like I don't think E-part buyers complain about the wattage of enthusiast parts. They're for different markets. My problem isn't anything to do with E-parts -- it's that the poster seemed to imply that the exact same E-part chip could be made better simply by not making it an E-part chip.

And the Super Snake's not a Ford -- it's a Shelby.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

You guys are talking about Mustangs. I must be involved. Whos side am I on? newtekie1 or mdm-adph?

http://www.justanothergamingblog.com...rage_super.jpg

You will NOT take my side. I don't even care if you agree with me.

Jul 23, 2009, 12:58 PM	#1
btarunr News Editor Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Hyderabad, India Posts: 11,232 (13.15/day) Thanks: 565 Thanked 3,464 Times in 2,048 Posts System Specs	AMD Silently Intros 95W Phenom II X4 945 AMD quietly decked up shelves with a new processor, this time, a low TDP variant of the Phenom II X4 945 quad-core processor. Carrying the model identifier "HDX945WFK4DGI", the Phenom II X4 945 95W comes with a significantly lower TDP rating compared to its 125W predecessor. It first surfaced on a CPU-support list by MSI, that leaked details of some unreleased processors. Based on the 45 nm Deneb core, in the AM3 package, the Phenom II X4 945 has an operating frequency of 3.00 GHz, 3.6 GT/s HyperTransport 3.0 system interface, 512 KB L2 cache per core, and a 6 MB shared L3 cache. It supports DDR2 and DDR3 memory standards. It has a bus multiplier of 15.0x which is upwards-locked since this is not a Black Edition SKU. It will have the same suggested retail price as its 125W version, at US $225.

Processor:	Intel Core i5 750
Motherboard:	Biostar TPower I55
Cooling:	SilenX IXG-80HA2 + IXG-3F2 fans (GPU)
Memory:	G.Skill RipJaws PC3-10600 2x 2GB DDR3-1333
Video Card:	GeForce GTX 260 (192 SP)
Harddisk:	2x Seagate Barracuda 7200.10, 2x 500 GB, RAID 0; Seagate 80GB IDE
CD/DVD Drive:	Samsung DVD-RW IDE
CRT/LCD Model:	ViewSonic VX2240w
Case:	CoolerMaster CM690
Sound Card:	Creative SB X-Fi XtremeGamer
PSU:	Corsair VX550W
Software:	Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit

System Name:	lococol
Processor:	C2D E8500@4Ghz
Motherboard:	ASUS P5Q (vanilla)
Cooling:	swiftech H2O-220 water cooling
Memory:	4 x 1GB PC2-9200 ocz reaper heat pipe
Video Card:	SAPPHIRE 4870X2 AT STOCK
Harddisk:	2X SAMSUNG 1TB 1X SAMSUNG 500GB
CD/DVD Drive:	LG BLU-RAY RE-WRITER, SONY SATA DVD BURNER
CRT/LCD Model:	28"VIEWSONIC + 22" BELINEA
Case:	CHIEFTEC
Sound Card:	CREATIVE X-Fi XtremeGamer Fatal1ty Pro Series
PSU:	BE QUIET 650 WATT MODULAR
Software:	WINDOWS XP HOME , VISTA 64 ULTIMATE

Processor:	Intel Core i5 750
Motherboard:	Biostar TPower I55
Cooling:	SilenX IXG-80HA2 + IXG-3F2 fans (GPU)
Memory:	G.Skill RipJaws PC3-10600 2x 2GB DDR3-1333
Video Card:	GeForce GTX 260 (192 SP)
Harddisk:	2x Seagate Barracuda 7200.10, 2x 500 GB, RAID 0; Seagate 80GB IDE
CD/DVD Drive:	Samsung DVD-RW IDE
CRT/LCD Model:	ViewSonic VX2240w
Case:	CoolerMaster CM690
Sound Card:	Creative SB X-Fi XtremeGamer
PSU:	Corsair VX550W
Software:	Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit

Processor:	AMD Phenom II X3 710 @ 3.25GHz / 1.265v
Motherboard:	Gigabyte MA790GP-DS4H(HT 2500MHz / NB 2500MHz)
Cooling:	Xigmatek HDT-SD964
Memory:	2 x 2GB A-Data Over Clock Extreme 1066+
Video Card:	MSI Radeon HD4850 512MB @ 740/1075
Harddisk:	Western Digital Caviar GP WD10EADS 1TB, Samsung Spinpoint F1 HD753LJ 750GB
CD/DVD Drive:	SAMSUNG SH-S223F
CRT/LCD Model:	Benq G2110W
Case:	Thermaltake V2000A
PSU:	Zalman 460W
Software:	Windows Vista Ultimate x64

Jul 23, 2009, 01:01 PM	#2
lococol Join Date: May 2009 Location: london Posts: 26 (0.10/day) Thanks: 13 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post System Specs	should these offer better overclocks?

System Name:	The Mailbox
Processor:	AMD Phenom II 955 X4 @ 3.2GHz
Motherboard:	ASUS M4A78-E
Cooling:	Corsair H50 "Water Cooled"
Memory:	8 gigs PC 8500 Patriot "Viper" 5-5-5-12 @800
Video Card:	HIS HD5850 1gig @ 775/1125
Harddisk:	WD "Black" 1Tb (7200), WD 250gig (7200)
CD/DVD Drive:	LiteOn DVD/Sony DL DVD Burner
CRT/LCD Model:	24" Asus 1920 x 1080, 52" Sharp 1080p HDTV 60hz
Case:	Cooler Master 922 HAF
Sound Card:	VIA VT1708S 8 -Channel High Definition Audio
PSU:	Corsair TX750 watt
Software:	Win7 Ultimate "Steve Ballmer Signature Edition" 64bit
Benchmarks:	3DMark06:19,384 ; Vantage:14,298

Jul 23, 2009, 01:50 PM	#7
Darknova Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Manchester, United Kingdom Posts: 4,326 (3.64/day) Thanks: 109 Thanked 546 Times in 510 Posts System Specs	I think AMD missed out by not making this a BE, a 95W quad would be nice with an unlocked multi. __________________

System Name:	Red Dragon \\ Asus X5DAB
Processor:	AMD Phenom II X3 720BE @ 3.4Ghz \\ Athlon X2 QL-64 @ 2.1Ghz
Motherboard:	Foxconn A7DA-S \\ K50AB motherboard - RS780 chipset
Cooling:	Xigmatek H.D.T S1283 Red Scorpion \\ Laptop cooling
Memory:	4x2GB Crucial Ballistix Tracer Reds DDR2 800Mhz \\ 3GB DDR2 667
Video Card:	Sapphire 4870 1Gb + Asus GTS250 Dark Knight \\ ATi mobility 4570 + ATi HD3200
Harddisk:	2x 320GB Sammy F1 RAID 0, 250GB Spinpoint, 500GB Sammy F1, 750Gb Sammy F1 \\ 250GB
CD/DVD Drive:	LG DVD-RW/RAM 20x \\ DVD-SM
CRT/LCD Model:	2x Dell 20.1" E207WFP \\ 15.6" 1366x768
Case:	Thermaltake Elements S \\ K50 Chassis
Sound Card:	Razer Barracuda AC-1 @ Phoenix Cmedia Drivers \\ VIA HD Audio
PSU:	PCP&C Silencer 750W \\
Software:	Windows 7 Ultimate x64 \\ Windows 7 Ultimate x64

Jul 23, 2009, 02:12 PM	#9
mdm-adph Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Your house. Posts: 2,223 (2.12/day) Thanks: 295 Thanked 304 Times in 222 Posts System Specs	Well, regardless of how it overclocks, that's a nice TDP. For people with boards that have shitty MOSFETS like me, it's great. __________________ Win•dows: n. A thirty-two bit extension and graphical shell to a sixteen-bit patch to an eight-bit operating system originally coded for a four-bit microprocessor which was written by a two-bit company that can't stand one bit of competition. HD 4830 GPU-Z Validation

System Name:	The Black Vulcan!
Processor:	Phenom II X2 550 / 3500MHz at 1.35v
Motherboard:	MSI K9A2 CF-F (790X)
Cooling:	Stock AMD
Memory:	2GB (1GBx2) Mushkin Blackline @ 4-4-4-12 @ 880MHz
Video Card:	MSI HD 4830 512MB GDDR3 (670/1950)
Harddisk:	160GB WD Blue (SATA II)
CD/DVD Drive:	ASUS DVD-RW
CRT/LCD Model:	KDS 17-in LCD
Case:	Rosewill R103A
Sound Card:	Onboard HD
PSU:	Rosewill 350w
Software:	WinXP Pro SP3, Windows 7 64-bit
Benchmarks:	Finished Super PI on legendary mode in only 13 hours.

Jul 23, 2009, 02:17 PM	#11
Cheeseball Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 357 (0.89/day) Thanks: 11 Thanked 26 Times in 24 Posts System Specs	Now all they have to do is make 65W versions (that aren't E parts) and we should have efficient processors. (Or at least to catch up to the awesomeness of the Q6600.)

Processor:	AMD Phenom II X2 550 3.1GHz @ 3.9GHz 1.4v
Motherboard:	EMAXX EMX-AMD785G-FXN
Cooling:	OCZ Vendetta
Memory:	Corsair XMS2 DDR2 @ 450MHz x 2, 5-5-5-12-22-2T 1.9v
Video Card:	Sapphire Radeon HD 5770 x 2, Crossifre
CRT/LCD Model:	Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD
Sound Card:	Realtek HD Audio - ALC888
PSU:	HEC WinPower 550AB
Software:	Windows XP 32-bit - Service Pack 3

Processor:	Intel Xeon X3370 (ES) @ 4.0GHz (445x9) @ 3.6GHz (400x9) 24/7
Motherboard:	eVGA 780i A1
Cooling:	Thermalright Ultra-120 Extreme w/ 120mm Antec Tri-Cool Fan
Memory:	8GB G.Skill Pi DDR2-1100 5-5-5-15 @ DDR2-800 4-4-4-12
Video Card:	eVGA GTX285@675/1548/2754
Harddisk:	500GB Seagate 7200.10(OS), 3x 1.5TB Seagate 7200.11 in RAID 5
CD/DVD Drive:	Lite-On Blu-Ray Combo Drive IHES108
CRT/LCD Model:	ASUS 22" MW221U LCD
Case:	Lian-Li Lancool Metal Boned K7 w/ Windowed Side Panel
Sound Card:	Onboard is good enough for me
PSU:	Thermaltake Toughpower 750w Modular
Software:	Windows 7 x64 Professional

Processor:	PII 720 BE @ 3.6Ghz \| AII 240
Motherboard:	MSI GD-70 \| DFI LanParty DK M2RSH
Cooling:	Watercooled \| XIGMATEK HDT-SD964
Memory:	G.Skill Ripjaw DDR3 2000Mhz \| 4GB G.Skill DDR2 800
Video Card:	Diamond 4870x2 @ 800/950 \| MSI 9600GT OC
Harddisk:	WD 400GB SE16 + Samsung 1TB \| WD 250GB
CD/DVD Drive:	DVD-RW
CRT/LCD Model:	Soyo 24" LCD \| 17" CRT
Case:	CoolerMaster 690 w/sidepanel
PSU:	Coolmax 950W Modular \| HEC 585W $19 OH YEAH!
Software:	Win 7 x64 Ultimate \| Win 7 RC
Benchmarks:	19.7k 3D06

Jul 23, 2009, 03:12 PM	#18
Bjorn_Of_Iceland Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Isle of Man Posts: 697 (0.91/day) Thanks: 64 Thanked 37 Times in 30 Posts System Specs	nice __________________ Last edited by Bjorn_Of_Iceland; Jul 23, 2009 at 03:26 PM.

System Name:	Ye Old Polygon Grinder
Processor:	Q9550 4Ghz @ 1.38v (yeah.. 1.3 vid stablest. sucks)
Motherboard:	Asus P5Q Pro Turbo (Bang for the buck oclocker)
Cooling:	iFX-14 2x 3000 rpm FM121
Memory:	Corsair Dominators DDR2 1066 (5-5-5-15-2t) (Sucks I know)
Video Card:	Inno GTX 280 680/linked/1160
Harddisk:	80GB WD Sata, 160GB WD Sata, WD 1TB
CD/DVD Drive:	DVD ReWriter
CRT/LCD Model:	22" LG W2252TQ
Case:	CM690
Sound Card:	SB X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty
PSU:	Gigabyte Odin Pro 800w (2 1/2 years and still kickin)
Software:	Windows 7 Ultimate x64
Benchmarks:	http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=12551978

Jul 23, 2009, 04:03 PM	#22
johnnyfiive Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 1,799 (2.71/day) Thanks: 321 Thanked 276 Times in 236 Posts System Specs	BE or not, they all seem to overclock about the same. My 920 reached the same clocks as a 940 would. The 945's are a hell of a bargain IMO. Cheaper than a 955 but should reach similar clocks. Plus, you will be HT oc'ing which yields better performance across the board, litearlly. __________________ *Powered* ----------------------------------- Lynn⋅field - [Lynn-feeld] i5-i7 1. A badass architecture. ----------------------------------- HEATWARE / Rate My RIG / i5_alive build

System Name:	i5_alive
Processor:	Intel i5 750 @ 4.06GHz
Motherboard:	ASUS P7P55D Deluxe
Cooling:	Water
Memory:	G.Skill 2x2GB DDR3 1600MHz CL6
Video Card:	XFX 5770 w/ EK Water Block
Harddisk:	WD Raptor 74GB 10k RPM
CD/DVD Drive:	Samsung DVD-RW+/-
CRT/LCD Model:	Acer 20" WS LCD & 17" LCD
Case:	NZXT Tempest EVO
Sound Card:	Creative X-Fi Xtreme Gamer
PSU:	Corsair 650HX
Software:	Windows 7 Professional x64
Benchmarks:	i7 Rig - 26,143 - 3DMark06

Jul 23, 2009, 04:05 PM	#23
TheMailMan78 Banstick Dummy Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Miami, FL Posts: 5,936 (6.04/day) Thanks: 409 Thanked 1,224 Times in 768 Posts System Specs	You guys are talking about Mustangs. I must be involved. Whos side am I on? newtekie1 or mdm-adph? __________________ A monster lies in wait for me. A stew of pain and misery, But fiercer still in life and limb. Is me that lies in wait for him. Rate TheMailBox 2.0 The Crazy Mailman Computer Emporium!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
AMD Intros Athlon II X2 250 and Phenom II X2 550 Black Edition CPUs	malware	News	39	Jun 3, 2009 09:15 PM
Phenom 9850 95w CPU?	suraswami	General Hardware	16	Nov 14, 2008 08:45 AM
Dell Silently Intros the 23-inch 16:9 S2309W Widescreen LCD Monitor	malware	News	24	Sep 29, 2008 08:45 AM
AMD Intros New Phenom X4 Processors	btarunr	News	19	Jul 2, 2008 02:21 PM