AMD’s triple-core Phenom X3 is finally here. It may have sounded like an April Fool, but AMD has finally delivered on its announcement back in September 2007. Will the new holy trinity provide the renewed fortunes AMD needs to combat Intel?

The triple-core advantage

Although AMD’s Phenom X4 can’t quite compete with Intel’s Core 2 Quad even at the same clock speed, its real issue is the low frequencies currently available. The fastest Phenom X4 runs at 2.5GHz, whereas Intel’s Core 2 Extreme QX9770 is now on 3.2GHz. A clock speed issue is essentially a yield issue – AMD hasn’t perfected its Phenom production process sufficiently to produce enough high-clock CPUs just yet.

Although AMD would like to spin things another way, touting the benefits of three cores, the arrival of the Phenom X3 can only be an answer to this yield problem. AMD doesn’t have a special production line producing triple-core CPUs. They are all quad-core parts with one core disabled. The only reason AMD would want to do that is if one core isn’t performing up to the standard of the other three.

With its current designs, Intel can’t easily produce triple-core processors. Its quad-core parts are essentially two dual-core CPUs packaged together and joined at the FSB. So a triple-core design would mean two cores on one half, and one on the other – technically feasible, but hardly elegant.

So from AMD’s point of view, the Phenom X3 makes good sense. The Phenom X4 is hardly expensive – even the flagship 9850 Black Edition is only £150. But the entry-level Phenom X3 8450 is already below £100, putting it in the same league as AMD’s quickest dual-core Athlon 64 X2s.

Only a handful of Intel dual-core processors are cheaper – the Allendale 65nm ones with 2MB of L2 cache and 800MHz FSB rather than the usual 4MB and 1,066MHz of Conroe, plus the 45nm Core 2 Duo E7200, which has 3MB of L2 and a 1,066MHz FSB, rather than the usual 6MB and 1,333MHz respectively.

That’s likely to be an easy retail sell, now that true megahertz have been hidden behind mysterious model numbers in the processor market. For many punters, three cores for the same or less money than two sounds like a winner.

Intel strikes back

Intel’s response has been to slash its quad-core prices. And herein lies the rub for AMD. The 65nm Core 2 Q6600 can now be snapped up for a modest £134. The Q6600 has been a proven favourite amongst overclockers for nine months already.

So now the choice is dual-core, AMD triple-core for the same money… or add £40 and go quad-core. Intel’s other quad-cores are considerably more expensive, particularly the 45nm variety. The Q6600 is Intel’s single-handed spoiler.

If the Q6600 was available for £100, that would have been game, set and match to Intel. The current price leaves a little doubt, and a decision for potential buyers to make between price and an extra core.

So AMD should sell a few X3s. But only to those who don’t realise that an extra core is going to be of benefit primarily for tasks like professional 3D rendering. For most everyday software – and virtually all games – a higher-clocked dual-core processor will almost certainly be quicker.