Quad FX Platform Review on Xbitlabs.com...

[L'enFer]

Quad-Core from AMD: Quad FX Platform Review (http://xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-quad-fx.html).
it's time for testing :)...

[L'enFer]

it seems K8L architecture is the only AMD's hope...

[xenolith]

I never thought the quad FX made much sense. Even by the time the first killer multi-thread gaming apps (UT2007, Crysis, Alan Wake) are released -- which the quad FX is aimed at -- the K8L will probably soon be available and everyone will want that.

[xVeinx]

Notice though that AMD isn't marketing this as a gaming platform though, so I think even they realize this....

[Shintai]

Notice though that AMD isn't marketing this as a gaming platform though, so I think even they realize this....

So, then whats the difference between 4x4 and Opteron 2xxx?

[v0dka]

I think it only gets interesting when you get K8L quad cores in 4x4 setups.

[xenolith]

Notice though that AMD isn't marketing this as a gaming platform though, so I think even they realize this....

AMD 64 FX webpage (http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9485_9488,00.html):


The world's ultimate processor for PC enthusiasts
Featuring AMD’s most advanced processor technology, the AMD Athlon™ 64 FX processor is designed specifically for PC enthusiasts. Powering the AMD Quad FX platform with Dual Socket Direct Connect Architecture, AMD Athlon 64 FX processors enable enthusiasts to immerse themselves in their digital world. They can play games at a level previously only reserved for the world of simulations, create and manipulate digital media like a pro, and explore the possibilities of megatasking. The AMD Athlon 64 FX processor brings the next generation of digital media and games to life.

[skootyloops]

These would make mean folding machines


So, then whats the difference between 4x4 and Opteron 2xxx?

I think the memory controllers are different. The FX use normal non registered DDR2 while the Opterons need registered DDR2.

[Shintai]

These would make mean folding machines



I think the memory controllers are different. The FX use normal non registered DDR2 while the Opterons need registered DDR2.

Yes I know, but if they aren´t targetted as gamer machines but as workstations ;)

For folding you want C2D/C2Qs single cycle SSE and phat Gromacs cores.

[skootyloops]

Yes I know, but if they aren´t targetted as gamer machines but as workstations ;)
Why would they target two lines of cpu to workstation/server area :confused: I always thought of the FX line as the extremest platform. Thats definatly not what I think businesses do with thier servers :p:

[SunFlowerSeeds]

Quad FX would be cheaper than 2-way workstation that utilizing registered RAM. Not bad if Quad FX system used for video rendering or 3D finite element modelling which would benefit from the luxury of bandwidth. :toast:

[L'enFer]

will K8L cpus use 2 sockets? or it will be 4 cores on 1 cpu?

[duploxxx]

will K8L cpus use 2 sockets? or it will be 4 cores on 1 cpu?


its native quad core, so 1 die with 4 cpu's all managed seperataly, but the same design will be used for only 2 cores too

and the 4x4 is not aimed for gaming rigs, its a power rig! Most reviews always use bad test to figure out what the real performance is of this platform, Xbitlabs did a bad job, the only multithread they did were some cache friendly progs... guess why? Most reviews give the 4x4 a bad result, the only bad thing is the powerconsumption. for the rest its performance is ok. NO WAY a 3.0ghz k8 can manage the power against a c2d e6700, and the 4x4 fx74 gets really near the performance of the q6700.

so the fx70 is a real bargain, its cheaper that an e6700!

[Shintai]

so the fx70 is a real bargain, its cheaper that an e6700!

Problem is just that FX70 aint competeing with QX6700. FX74 is. Q6600 and lower in Q1 is who is to battle the lower bin.

And cheaper and cheaper...599+480$ board vs 999+120$ board. Its not much cheaper for the very lower performance. And the last 40$ is quickly spent on the eATA chassis and bigger PSU.

EDIT: Oh, than a E6700? 530$ vs 599$? Even if you split them up they get molested by 300$ E6600.

Next step just looks like K8L, 4x4 was a step backwards.

[SunFlowerSeeds]

4x4 was a step backwards? Not really.

Basically Quad FX is just a re-branded 2 ways K8 server. Architectural implementation and scaling wise, AMD Quad FX seemed to be much smarter than Intel Kentsfield. However, Core micro architectural is still giving Intel the advantage in the overall performance, as compared to the aging K8.

As shown in techreport:- http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q3/e6300-vs-sff/index.x?pg=1 , the performance difference between Kentsfield and Quad FX in multi-threaded applications is reducing, as compared to the performance difference between Conreo and X2.

I guess this performance difference between Kentsfield and Quad FX is likely to be further reduced in 64bit OS with NUMA enabled.

[Shintai]

I guess this performance difference between Kentsfield and Quad FX is likely to be further reduced in 64bit OS with NUMA enabled.

Like this?
http://66.249.93.104/translate_c?hl=en&u=http://www.hwupgrade.it/articoli/cpu/1611/quad-fx-la-ricetta-amd-per-i-quattro-core_10.html

[L'enFer]

for the rest its performance is ok
what's the rest perfomance?
and what tests should have they run?

[Scimitar]

Yes I know, but if they aren´t targetted as gamer machines but as workstations ;)

For folding you want C2D/C2Qs single cycle SSE and phat Gromacs cores.

Makes sense. Targeting these at gamers with the pitiful overclocking abilities would be a mistake.

Agreed. I read the Tech Report review on the 4X4. The Folding at Home comparison was interesting, but they neglected a couple key facts. About 80% of the work units out there are Gromacs, only about 20% are Ambers or Tinkers. The other is overclocking. A good Conroe can fold at 3.5GHz on the stock cooler, let's see a K8 do that. Those comparisons on Tech Report were done with stock clocks only. The actual ppd for the end user would be MUCH higher on the Kentfield than with a 4X4 when you include these 2 factors.

[Fred_Pohl]

so the fx70 is a real bargain, its cheaper that an e6700!


Only if you're buying them for use as paper weights. In which case FX70 is really a bargain offering 2 for the price of one!

Otherwise the other component costs of the FX70 system will drive the price much higher than a E6700 system, which is a silly comparison in the first place. :slap:

[flavoraid]

AMD coming back !! this will be interesting

[Nazu]

Vista should support the NUMA technology better and therefore making the 4x4 more competitive but even with that I can't see it beating the QX6700.

[xenolith]

Hey, maybe AMD should publicly amend the marketing of this platform like that of the PS3? I see some parallels, especially the "power suck toward a good cause" part. :p:

PS3 to join Folding@Home for cancer cure (http://www.engadget.com/2006/08/23/playstation-3-to-join-folding-home-for-cure-ps3/)


There's no denying it, even though the PlayStation 3 may be the most late, most expensive, and most, um, well ventilated of this this generation's consoles, Sony's also going out of their way to make the device appear as versatile as possible. So hell, if your machine is going to burn energy when not in use, best to put that power suck toward a good cause, right?

[L'enFer]

and the 4x4 is not aimed for gaming rigs, its a power rig!
what do u mean? it was produced only for "eating" power?
will it be possible to buy 1 FX74?