multiple choices allowed!
Printable View
multiple choices allowed!
Yes, if it were from ASUS or...EVGA! *gasp*
if i had the money EVGA would be my first choice
any will do
but do add in overclock feature
Too difficult to say.... If supermicro had a team devoted to OCing, it would rock. They produce insanely good boards (I own a dual sockt opty board by them). Tyan isn't bad either (killed one of their boards, my fault, but super solid).
Asus can be hit or miss and not being able to downgrade to a previous bios sucks.
I've had good luck with MSI as well as biostar and gigabyte, and who knows who would make the best board.....
It's almost an impossible question to answer since no one has done this.
No matter how much you try, you will not convince JF-AMD to do it, he don't think that we would ever justify the testing and support. What is annoying is that we aren't asking that they design Dual Processor Motherboards (A mostly Server only area) from the ground up for enthusiast, just that some of the current ones should have the necessary BIOS options for allowing enthusiast a decent deal of flexibility and that does perfectly the job. We are a niche market that could use Server platforms to suit our enthusiast needs, and they could provide that flexibility to allow us do so even if they aren't designing with us in mind. If the Motherboard is blow away for running out of specs, everyone knows who is responsible.
Actually, I disliked when both AMD and Intel attemped to sell the 4x4 and Skulltrail, that were Dual Processor platforms, to enthusiast, because I prefer Server class components reliabily and style, as most of the enthusiast designers thinks that components should have tons of colors, fancy stuff and ton of trash that justifies a lot of price premium, while Server parts are stetically neutral, with a very clean look, and best of all, highly reliable as they are intended for 24/7 operation that I doubt that enthusiast parts do (They can do so as any good component, but they aren't intended to do so, in the same way that Server class parts aren't mean to be tweaked but should be able to do so finely).
It's not my call, I am the director of marketing, not product management (they make all of the product decisions.)
Let me give you 2 scenarios where this could hurt us:
1. Some bonehead decides to overclock a server because he has figured out how to do it. Server crashes. Bad. Data lost, database corrupted. CIO comes to find out what happend. "Servers shouldn't allow overclocking. Why in the hell were we buying consumer products? Get these things out of here now."
2. Some person is intel biased and is trying to talk their company into spending more for intel. They point to the fact that Opteron can be overclocked as "proof" that this is a gamer platform and not a "real server."
The potential sales to consumers could never compensate for the potential damage to the brand. Every morning I walk into my office and try to convince the world that there is a better choice for server platforms. Anything that detracts from that will not help me meet my goals.
You have to look at this from a pure revenue and market perspective. I understand that everyone wants to overclock my parts. That meets your goals, not mine. There is no way that selling Opteron into the enthusiast market could allow us to grow share. We have run the numbers, it just won't work.
intel has the skull trails and the evga board, why not bring back an FX board. if u ban server OEMs from selling whole systems with them (as i dont think that they would anyways) i love to play with some mangy overclocking. or let some1 make a single socket mangy board for overclocking or make an unlocked cpu and only allow for vcore and multi adjustments (with proper ram support in the bios also.)
there are not many times that an OEM built pc and especially a server will allow overclocking so there is no reason not to let some1 put one out. maybe only let it use normal ram so no1 would try to server it
Let me give you a scenario that is hurting right now.......Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
1. Intel wins all 3d bencmarks............intel fanboy's chant AMD is teh sux......consumers that are easlily persuaded and not very budget minded listen or they go buy some castrated intel part that is indeed slower just based on some number they will never acchieve. Unfortunately intel has you on thread count......match the threads and in those benches we can be somewhat competitive again etc even a single magny cours.
2. intel is allowing ocing on a select board geared for enthusiasts......Due to the fact it OC's all the cruchers are opting for it over magnycours. Although this market share you belive to be small it is much larger than you can imagine.
I see a rather simple solution......a new SKU for desktops....with a server grade part "rebranded" that will not work in a server environment.......no ECC support......call it a stop gap for now. It surely would not be first time a server grade part was trickled down to desktops.........
chew has spoken the truth.
+999..............................999Quote:
Originally Posted by richierich
WHAT?! :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
That was pretty much what the 4x4 platform was all about, see how "sucessful" it was.Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
The deal of allowing overclocking on some Motherboards on the current platforms is so there are no design cost involved to fill our niche market, nor price premiums for the rebranding. But JF-AMD already stated why they wouldn't want to do it that way. And your way, was what AMD already did with little to no sucess. Actually, I was against it due the rebranding, downgrading of Server parts, and even the price premium over them for being enthusiast class parts. I prefer the professional Opteron brand name than some random Athlon 64 FX or Phenom.
yes but making 2 cpu's work in unison + OC good is rather complex.......
Making a single chip work + OC is not so complex.
I should refer you to s7's thread where he easily ramped up 2 unlocked ES chip on air and set global AMD wprime records.
View count was stellar.......guess no one is interested though ;)
Then just release a single processor, desktop, Socket G34 board. Load it with 12 phases, 16 phases, 4 PCIE x16 whatever and sell it for $400. Maybe, a classy SR2 type board for even more pwnage.
If AMD had a 12 core desktop part out now all the intel fanboys would stop and go "ooooh" "aaahhh" and whoever has the money will surely buy one.
Price tag of $1000? No problem. It will stop even intel's Gulftown to the ground. 12 cores vs 12 threads. AMD battles intel CPC...and potentially wins.
AMD instantly gains rep back.
Heres another look; why would you be stupid enough to have a enthusiast level server board listed with other server boards? A enthusiast level server board is surely a entirely new area and does not belong with business class server boards.Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
How many businesses buy classified SR2's and overclock them JF? Sorry but that's a pretty ridiculous way of looking at it. As chew said it's a much bigger market than you give it credit for, if you want to play the numbers game against xeon's it's a must.
How many enthusiasts hit the roof when they announced magny cores? Every computing message board was littered with news on it and we still don't have a desktop board to handle them :(
People had dual opterons back in the day and they would now definitely.
Somebody at AMD needs to be looking at this thread.
Sadly, the only AMD reps we have here are JF-AMD and 64NOMIS, which deal with marketing.
wasnt the 4x4 of whatever the 4 core 2p fx socket slower than the intel core2dup, and it cost way more at a time when almost nothing was multithreaded.Quote:
Originally Posted by zir_blazer
with no mangy on an overclockable platform i would like to see them, maybe a TWKR mangy with unlocked board to overclockers sent out by amd ;) , from a marketing point if u dont have the fastest benches on consumer parts then consumers wont want it even if at their price point amd is way better. or for overclocking maybe a VID and multi only, u cannot really mess that up in a server environment
i would like to see something like the old athlon MP were they were unlocked (by force but still unlocked), overclockable and not much more over the 1p parts. and for the enterprise people saying look its for gaming, how else would u evaluate a cpus performance and reliability sure u could run lineX or exchange with a virtual load but nothing shows reliability IMO more than having a bunch of gamers and overclockers like your stuff, thats like when u make a power tool and race teams are using it, or when u make a camcorder like the pansonic camcorders that cost $5-10k and they do 1080p better than the $50k sony ones so film students use them then when they can get the better expensive stuff they stay with panasonic. in the same way it would be nice to see amd get more low end or 2p server stuff into the overclocking gaming and coding community, and to get amd into the schools to teach people assembly properly instead of having the crap from intel that wont work cross platform that then gets the coders to like intel as their stuff dosnt work or they have to recode it for amd so they recommend intel, but if it was the other way then it would get amd alot more stuff.
Rant as we will, lets be realistic. All this is why AMD are still playing catchup with intel, because AMDs marketing sucks. When was the last time you saw a AMD ad on TV? ;)
Technically they could of released a 24 core desktop platform or even 48... back when magnycores first came out, they would of and would still be the top dog :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
Just let us play with these chips dammit. :shrug:
athlon 64 launch, if u do not include the dell ad for amd when they started selling them and some1 i think acer had an amd vision ad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
what would really help was if amd went and got a mac with it, even though i hate apple they got a resurgence in interest in intel laptops with gpus
i just want to see some mangy benching
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvlP9...eature=relatedQuote:
Originally Posted by Ket
:p:
i would not buy from ASUS. here's why:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=183499
That's ONE board :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
OK, so there we go. About 3 years ago :p: The last time I saw a intel ad was... yesterday. In the guise of Dell trying to shift those :banana::banana::banana::banana:ty i3 laptops.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
Do you want a Uniprocessor Magny Cours? It should be as hard as tweaking a Dual Opteron, as you're forcing both two dies and two Memory Banks, even though the two dies are now on a single package.Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
Besides, I don't see why it should be hard. They should have BIOS options to reach on the bare minimum the average overclocking headroom with current standard Server quality parts, something that should be very easy. From nominal, to average overclock, to extreme overclock, there are a whole bunch of differences and requeriments.
Pretty much anyone with free time can reach average overclock on a decent enough Motherboard (Processors are mostly out of question as their usually act the same. The only that is needed is Motherboard and BIOS support, so I actually don't see the point on requesting this to JF-AMD when an independent Motherboard manufacturer could decide to provide this flexibility themselves), or ignoring the entire overclocking deparment but being able to tweak the parts to meet the actual performance or power consumption needs. JF-AMD mentioned in other Thread that there are some Server customers that would like to undervolt Server Processors to reduce power consumption as much as possible when the performance isn't needed, but that also falls in the enthusiast class BIOS tweaking. Oh, do you forgot already this Thread when I asked flexible options in the BIOS for undervolting in mainstream consumer or enthusiast class Motherboards and everyone ignored me (You included)?
Thread views doesn't means sales, actually, they just mean that the Thread title is appealing for the casual viewer. I actually don't pay attention to extreme overclocks because they aren't useful for 24/7, requiere extremely expensive equipment, and are above the point in the Frequency/Voltage curve where power consumption skyrockets for just a 100 MHz jump. These things on practice are totally useless with the exception of bragging rights, and I won't spend my money on them.
The 4x4 platform was AMD sort of response to Core 2 Quad, and Intel replied to it with Skulltrail. And it would happen exactly the same right now because the per Core performance of K10s are slower than Nehalems.Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
If you think we are missing a huge market, just remember that we did 4x4, so we know exactly how large the market is (not).
Why does everyone want to overclock Opteron? Why not ask for a 12-core Phenom? We just aren't going to risk the Opteron name trying to take it into the enthusiast market, it just can't be justified.
You should be pushing on the client guys.
lets rewind back to socket 939......need i say more?Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
Better silicon was to be found in server grade than desktop grade.
as far as 4x4 apples to oranges........these chips OC like hell........those chips had a cold bug and couldn't OC even 50% of what these do.
We don't want to OC opteron but at this point we have no other option but to in order to stay competitive.......so rebrand the chip.......bang seperated from server division.
I can show you this really really really cool opteron chip i have........it's am3 package... but cpuid says its not an opty ;)
Then you will forever play catchup to intel. *Error.. Cyclic redundancy check. Stack Trace: Lack of drive to capture market shares.*Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
Because were all nuts and it just sounds like damn fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
We ARE asking for a damn 12-core Phenom. Sort of. Name the processor series "Angelica" for all we care.
4x4 sucked. Athlon 64 X2 was already way behind Core 2 Duo and AMD couldn't design a quad core for it's life at that point in time.
Having two Athlon 64 X2's on a single mobo sucked MORE. One peice of :banana::banana::banana::banana: plus another peice of :banana::banana::banana::banana: does not make a cookie.
Why don't you throw about 5 or so Magny-Cours chips at the Desktop guys faces and tell them to do something with it.
Good evening John,Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
Just some thoughts and I know you realise how I feel and to some extent understand your thinking but ponder this:
1) Intels name isn't hurt by the EVGA SR2 board with it's over clocking capabilities,at least not that I can see.
2) The 4X4 was a dog in terms of sales because it was an idea that was ahead of the technology needed.
It ran too hot at even stock speeds and I think you'd agree that your current processors are miles ahead of it.
3) As a guy mentioned above, No one is looking to have AMD spend lots of money validating anything here.
All people are looking for is a bios that allows changes on a dual MC system such as the Asus KGPE-16 board and that is a top choice as it's theonly dual MC board that has 2-PCI-16 slots.
Also not one that is being used as a "server" bymost companies.
Strictly a workstation design but a very good and stable one from my short experience with it.
Adjustments or vcore,vdimm,etc such as the EVGA SR2 has and we take it from there.
4) Last,if I blow up apart because I went over spec I do not RMA it.
That's my choice and my responsibility.
the plot thickens......
First let me clear anyone at AMD i may have contact with.......
This chip did not come from anyone at AMD.
I have my way's and sources and explanation ends there......
Who wants to bet i will kick the living hell out of any retail mass produced "c2" stepping with this cpu on ln2 ;)
http://chew.ln2cooling.com/TWKR%20contest/opteron.jpg
Whats this.....wheres the opty socket packaging ;)
http://chew.ln2cooling.com/TWKR%20contest/opteron2.jpg
So s7's air OC on stock volts is what you call extreme? Thats all it took to set the AMD global wprime Wr just some FYI ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by zir_blazer
Best to research before stating :)
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=233565
Very early c2 also. Lets see it you jammy sod :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
Then lets see some of those cpu's with a phenom sticker over the top and a 12 core inside that we can smash some records with.
The tech is there, USE IT! :shakes:
Personally, is not that I want to play with Opterons just because I like the brand name, but because if I wanted a Dual Processor platform, the Opteron platform is already estabilished and could fulfill my wished purposes with minor modifications. These minor modifications just includes BIOS controls to allow manual modifications to some values like raising or lower the Voltage, the Multiplier, Base Clock, and other things, as you would expect from a tweakable enthusiast Motherboard and not the one of an OEM machine. I don't care if their brand name is Opteron, Phenom, Athlon, Sempron or Duron, that is just for marketers :pQuote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
The logical advancement when you aren't satisfied by what a Uniprocessor platform can do is going Dual Processor, that is a consumer-no server-yes space. Talking to some consumer guy will get me the exact opposite view about that market needs and how useless it would be to design a Dual Processor platform (That would be mostly a copypaste of what a Dual Opteron platform already got, plus some add this and remove that, that was what 4x4 platform was). Actually, the Processor is what less matters, because if it would exist a Motherboard with a BIOS that allows tweaks, the Processor would do what the BIOS says and that is. The brand name doesn't matter, the silicon that it is made of does and its features (For example, Opterons 2xx and 8xx had the same silicon but the 8xx allowed me to use two more Coherent Hyper Transport Links for up to 8-Way. The 2xx does not).
As I stated on some other Thread, Opteron created for themselves an important brand name among enthusiast because some guy decided to use A64FX quality bins on even the cheapest parts, and those Opteron parts were all Toledos with 1 MB Cache L2 per Core while comparable A64X2 at the same price were Manchesters with 512 KB Cache L2 per Core of lesser bin quality. So, if for the same price Opterons had more Cache and had a higher Frequency headroom, they were a better choice any day. Had you sell them as Duron, they would be exactly as popular in the niche market that they were famous at.
I don't care about brand names, just features enabled in the silicon, that silicon quality, and possible expansion of the platform infrastructure without having to do full platform replacements.
Besides, I don't like that consumer guys thinks that the product designed for the enthusiast market requieres tons of PCB colors, possibily useless features, and awfully high price premiums. That is why looking at how to adapt the closest thing to what I want is easier that asking someone to design it from scratch and aiming at other market whose needs are fancier and more expensive.
Perhaps AMD has a inferiority complex and their subcontiously afraid to become the dominant CPU manufacturer? :p:
I remember that chipand know where it came from..:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
I also have a board here thats yours if you want it to play with those cpu's..:D
Actually that is what I would expect from an average overclock and conservative enthusiast. I was expecting that the overclocking crowd wanted doing voltage mods, phase cooling and other fancy and risky things on Server based Motherboards.Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
1300 series opteron???
@ JF-AMD: if amd were to make an FX branded dual socket workstation for a decent price it would sell well ..... 700$ motherboard 800$ per cpu and you have a winning combo that still is in the price of current opteron pricing ... now the hard part... a pcb partner who would jump on such idea ????? ... one can dream
I think our job here is done fellas. Theres nothing AMD can do to convince us otherwise because we aren't joe average, and actually know what we are talking about. Theres much food for thought for AMD in this thread, but ultimately, I wouldn't expect anything to happen as a result.
There is alot more than meets the eye with that CPU, it supports ddr 3 and goes right into an AM3 board......Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
This source no one knows about......it's my super duper secret source so not who you think either.....
read on. it's actually 22 and that's just from wcg guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
That's that "945 ES" isn't it. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
I meant one model. That model is flawed...and just that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
I though we had persuade board makers for this not amd ?....
Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
any numbers to go with that super duper cpu ?
Looks like an Opteron 1xxx (There were for AM2, AM2+ and AM3) with a preproduction OPN.Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
Opterons 1xxx series shares the Socket AM3 infrastructure for Uniprocessors and are compatible with Desktop Motherboards, but are intended to be used with Server Motherboards. As I never saw overclocking results, I don't know if they are still using top bin or not. But a Retail sample would be better proof.
As I read I mused as follows...
Aside from massive core count MC is simply the wrong chip on the wrong infrastructure for OC. If you are curious about what you would achieve, go OC a Phenom II X6 and know that those setting are better than you would ever get for MC. The cost to get an enthusiast-class MC infrastructure on par with, say, a Crossfire 4 are basically insane. An MC customer is already getting great consolidation and performance, and adding a second box or second processor is astonishingly affordable and a lot safer than OC.
A dual socket Phenom II board would be much more interesting. Easier to achieve stable results and potentially finding a home in the visualization space (and a couple others). It's a completely different world when Quadfather walked the earth and I think such a board would be interesting. It's not going to happen but it would be interesting.
The fundamental problem in client is multi-core scaling and right now there are a few application categories that love cores, and with most other categories completely saturated, GPU bound, unable to figure out what to do with more. The ultimate use for the PC in entertainment - the Holodeck (and it's predecessors, more on this soon) - needs CPU and GPU balanced performance. To achieve this in a reasonable TDP does not involve a dual headed monster, rather, a powerful CPU and a powerful GPU - those create plenty of noise and can pack plenty of cyberpower, thank you very much.
In server land there is infinite need for consolidated cloud compute enabled by virtualization. For mobility, there is infinite pull right now for sub-10W compute performance. So many reasons why I would love to see an exciting low power platform - I want smartphone DIY.
And I want a holodeck.
call it anything but the overclocking community would love some of the stuff that is opteron only, i have in the past used both opterons and xeons for gaming and overclocking as they had what i wanted, call it an FX or a phenom MP or something else, it cant cost that much to sell something with a different branding and it would allow for better benching so that would lead to better sales, like with the 939 daysQuote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
$800 is alot for a desktop part per chip and so is $700 for a board, the sr2 is sub $600, and the mangy are $750 normally i would think that a consumer one could run hotter or maybe use 8 core parts and could be unlocked so u would be around $1200 a chipQuote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
maybe with buldozer could there be a consumer 2p unit
and for the people in amd, when the stuff in QA do the bioses ever support multi changes or vcore/memory adjustment or changing ram timings
Jeez, another one of these puny single socket guys has to toss in his 2 cents!:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by 64NOMIS
( Yes, you know I'm teasing)
Your missing the point of all this Simon but lets talk numbers and I admit to being weak on the AMD end but I'll try;
1) Your saying it won't work or work as effectively as we'd like and be "satisfied" with for lack of a better term?
If so thats a subjective feeling.
I'll talk just from my own viewpoint.
The Asus KGPE-D16 board I have here with the 2-6168 MC's(1900MHz) is what I'd describe as a incredibly stable system that runs nice and cool BUT for my uses is a little on the weak side when compared with others.
To me it's all about seeing what is possible.
This runs at 9.5x200 for 1900mhz.
What would it do at 9.5x250 for 2375mhz?
Maybe 300 isn't doable or maybe it is but the bottom line is there is "more" hidden in these chips and why not find out what that "more" is?
The cost is only a bios and not a complete one, just a modded one so we're not talking huge $$ here.
Hell, I'll toss Asus $200.00 now towards the cost of doing the bios and I imagine others will also.
We like to explore and that is what drives us.
It is the chase of the unknown that you see here at XS.
From that chase comes knowledge that all can benefit from.
All we need at this point is from someone at AMD to make a call to Asus and say we have no objections to a modded bios for the KGPE-D16 board.
It's really the only choice as it's the only one with 2-PCI-e X16 slots and on top of that appears to be a very well built board.
Beautiful layout.
The defense rests.:D
how much does a high end 6 core xeon part that fits in an evga sr2 cost ???? about 1500 or so for the unlocked multi version???Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
i dont see it as too much .. its well within the sub market that these parts originated from .... so i still think that my 800$ and 700$ prediction arent bad
Darn you Simon...now I want a holodeck too. :(
A shame that AMD is being so shortsighted here... I thought they were interested in the overclocker market, whats with the unlocked processors, AOD, and finally, their TWKR processors. And now they won't consider doing this?
I thought they were in the business to make money?
I'd be curious how a dual-socket Thuban system would run. Charge $600 for the board and $500 for each processor with an unlocked multiplier. Might give AMD a chance at 3D06/3DVantage due to the thread limits in place in Vantage. If anything it would be a heck of a lot of fun and put a grin on a lot of faces :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
Bottom line for a "cheap" 6 core Westmere(X5650,20/21 multi on turbo) is a grand, top X5680(25/26 multi on turbo) is almost $1700.00 and there are no unlocked multi versions..Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
Well there are, but not for sale.. saw one in action one night but if I gave you the details I'd have to kill you!:rofl:
Yep, just a call to Asus/Gigabyte/MSI
Hide the OC bios when ECC ram is used, unlock the overclocking bios options when non-ECC memory is used. Note that Asus has a reputation of not updating their bios on server boards. They're slow, maybe 1.5 years on average? Gigabyte/MSI have a better track record than Asus in this regard, and don't compare the consumers boards with this.
Server technicians wouldn't overclock at work, putting their job on the line. If anything bad happens during an OC, just blame it on the non-ECC mode (1+1=3), not the Opteron!
I'm curious, when EVGA designed the SR-2, did it put a dent to Intel's coffers? How?
Why would Intel want to validate their Xeons for overclocking, and spend money on it?
1)I'm on the 2nd bios on the asus board thats been out for maybe a monthQuote:
Originally Posted by pokipoki
ECC or Non ECC shouldn't matter
2)I doubt the SR2 board hurt Intel in any way.
3)The people who built those SR2 systems are the types of people who would have been buying single 980X's or dual westmere's anyway.
4)No validating necessary that I can see.
Bins at X speed and whatever you get ovewr that you do.
That simple.:D
Make a clear distinction between server class operating environment and consumer. Server environments uses ECC memory, disallow overclocking in that mode, or any other mode that is peculiar to servers only. Most enthuthiasts won't use ECC memory and doesn't need that much maximum memory anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
Xeons can be overclocked to the Himalayas on many boards (uni & dual), and people use it for games too. Especially for Nehalems since both the server and desktop sockets are the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
Envelope the overclocking to non-server operating environments and this will be a no-occurrence.Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
We are helping you in this regard by testing stability till the wee hours of morning and saving PPDs when folding (clusters too), and we leave our mark everywhere in forums and statistics.Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
It's just a call to the board makers.
maybe 32nm desktop chips will be designed to work in 2p board, we can dream right? :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
thanks for the clarification movieman ...
I have already explained that allowing overclocking on opteron would result in lower net shipments of Opteron products. We would end up selling less because the net decrease in server sales would never be offset by the small number of enthusiast sales.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
If I want to sell more I need to keep Opteron focused where it is and leave the Phenom to enthusiasts.
i could have swore they suggested a Phenom FX or the like a few posts upQuote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
1) Phenom FX doesn't sound like opteron
2) It isn't spelled like opteron either
If by an incredible stroke of luck something should happen because of this innocent thread then it should be called the Phenom XS edition :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by stangracin3
Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
Quote:
Originally Posted by zir_blazer
:ROTF::rofl::ROTF::rofl:
This is too much for my heart. :eek:
Okay, back on topic.
That s7's results of taking WR (hell, that's only at 3 GHz!) has a point. Come on, if XS can push these babies to 6 and maybe even 7 GHz, that would be a real great PR stunt.
s7 has proven that these are OC friendly chips, so let everyone join in the fun! During the 4x4 days, AMD didn't have the tech to execute it properly. Now AMD does. What's stopping you guys?
Hmmm when will s7 put his ES chip under LN2?
Sorry, but all your saying sounds like poor excuses and poor marketing. I only switched to intel because of the crap nvidia chipsets you let near your CPUs and I would happily switch back if I saw AMD apply themselves. You guys are falling down in a lot of areas, and here are just a couple I can think of off the top of my head;Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
- As already mentioned poor marketing. How on earth do you expect to grow market shares if you don't advertise nearly enough to the general public? The last time I saw a AMD ad on TV was 3 years ago, I last saw a intel ad on TV 2 days ago. This is why Joe Average buys intel because they know barely anything (if anything) about AMD and why the sales clerk advises intel because their equally clueless. In contrast intel throw out ads all the time in differing flavors to the public about their stuff. Intel are essentially unchallenged in the public sector in this regard. I'm glad I don't run my business as AMD do.
- Unique Markets. Look at intel, their fine with a couple enthusiast server class boards available. Does this hurt them? No. Why not? Because their in a unique market that appeals to those who run programs for causes and these boards are simply not available in the business/corporate arena. Intel don't have to make any special changes to their Xeon CPUs. By allowing a few server class boards into the enthusiast market all intel are doing is increasing accessability and popularity of that hardware, and guess what that does? Raise sales of their Xeon CPUs and enthusiast server boards. Are you seriously saying your fine with crippling Opteron sales because your too stubborn to admit your wrong? Your argument of technicians "bashing" AMD for a few enthusiast server boards is a fruitless one. What idiot in a business/corporate environment would pick a enthusiast server board? They would have to be as retarded as your business philosophy on the sale of server grade enthusiast boards and CPUs in the enthusiast arena.
I could do a better advertising/marketing job for AMD, much better.
I tell you these things not to nag or critisise, but to make you realise AMDs true potential if you address some glaring issues.
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
:clap:
I'm going to have to back up JF here. All I'm seeing is a bunch of people complaining that they can't get something they want. I want it too, but his reasons make sense. You can't just disagree based on gut feelings with any degree of authority. He says his guys have actually investigated the numbers--you know, using statistics and people who actually do this stuff for a living. I'm going to have to take that information as much more authoritative than a bunch of enthusiasts biased because they want something they're not getting.
As an addendum: You can't just compare Opteron overclocking to Xeon overclocking. That would be realistic if AMD had the same reputation and similar market share as Intel, but as they're currently the minor of the two they basically have to do everything twice as well as Intel in order to maintain their reputation. At least, that's how it is for us in the real world when we go to get purchases approved at regular companies. There is even a saying warning people daring to buy AMD-based servers around this region: "Nobody has ever been fired for buying an Intel." The meaning is that people have been fired for ordering AMD systems, regardless of if or if not any problems down the line were/are actually caused by the AMD hardware. The people who sign our checks don't have the same level of understanding and don't really care. It's your butt on the line.
ive found that alot of these people that do statistics for a living are dumber than a doorknob. they only ask companies that actually build servers not the end user or buyer as it might be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle
now if you won't do a Phenom FX or a "Friendly Bios" ATLEAST GET SOME COMMERCIALS OUT THERE SO YOU CAN GET MORE MARKET SHARE!!!!!
its like you are trying to let Intel win. more like the whole marketing department is on intels payroll instead of AMD.
if i were AMD i would fire the marketing department for being a complete FAILURE.
The ONE board was terrible and the cpu's were over priced (at the time a core 2 raped the 4x4 setup at a lower price point). You guys tried to serve a half baked product and no one liked it, that shouldn't be a surprise. Don't call it an opteron just name it FX.Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
I don't think telling him how much better you are than him at his job is going to help you get your point across. Comes across as a bit childish.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
AMD needs to focus on bottom line stuff. Releasing a "Phenom FX" will make them jack nothing. No matter how much more awesome you are at advertising.
I'd certainly like to own one of course. :D
I'm sure you have, but that doesn't say anything about the people JF works with.Quote:
Originally Posted by stangracin3
For those that say we are missing a "huge market", do you have actual market share data on the number of 2P desktop boards being sold? I think that would go a long way towards shoring up your assertions. If you have a good business case, I would be more than happy to take that to the phenom folks.
I can tell you, that taking an Opteron and rebranding it as phenom would be costly. You are basically doubling the back end validation, qualification and dev resources. Not design resources, but pretty much everything else (there is not nearly as much leverage as you would guess.)
I have an open req for a marketing person, if anyone wants to submit a resume to me, PM me. I am dead serious. The job is in Austin, Texas and would require you to live here.
Advertising is expensive, and to the "rank and file" consumers, probably 80% of them can't tell you what processor is in their computer. Go as 10 random people on the street what processor is in their PC and see the response.Quote:
Originally Posted by stangracin3
Would you rather have AMD spend its money on advertising (actually low rate of return) or on developing products (probably higher rate of return.)
If you want to impact the consumers that buy the majority of the PCs (i.e. market share) then you need to influence the best buy sales guy.
But, hey, I am a server guy, so I am no expert here.
Realistically, does overclocking an Opteron undermine its reliability as a server platform? How do you choose/measure reliability anyway? I'm sure it won't be by our standards (enthuthiast). It's confusing to mix overclocking and reliability in the same pot.
People who decide which server platform to adopt have their own criteria to guide them. How well Opteron overclocks is not one of the criteria.
What we are petitioning here is for an extra feature, something that does not work in X (server environment) but works in Y (consumer environment). Until we make that distinction clear, we're going in circles. BTW, no one is trying to change/degrade Opteron's image.
Ouch, guys. Ouch. The marketing director has spoken, fellas. If you guys think you can do better than the marketing director, then you're welcome to apply at AMD and see where that takes you.Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
PS. Don't you have to know your target audience in order to effectively market your products to them....? Isn't that in marketing 101? :ROTF:
He markets servers and said he is a server guy. Isn't that exactly who you want marketing servers? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Deluded
I am no expert in the client space.
So, I actually went to do a little research for everyone in order to become more of an expert in the client space. The discussion would be better served with facts over feelings. It was actually worse than I was portraying it.
Xeon, as a desktop brand, represented ~1.3% of the overall client market in 2007. Today, Xeon as a brand, represents ~.3%, less than 1%, (and probably far less than people have been giving it credit.) That means the market for 2P desktops is merely a quarter of what it once was just 2.5 years ago. A rapidly shrinking market is not one to invest in, you want to invest in a growing market.
Now, what is so different about 2007 and today? In 2007, dual cores ruled the market. There were a lot of people that wanted 4 threads, and now they get that in a single chip. As you hit thread saturation in a single socket, there is less demand for that second chip. And, as we are at 6 today, and 8 next year, the need for that second socket, as a market aggregate, is continuing to shrink.
I also did the quick math on what it would take to bring a dual socket part to market, assuming that you take the exact same server design, call it anything else and sell it. You would need to sell about 2X what the current xeon sales desktop sales are (according to IDC) in order to make that a profitable product. That assumes $0 in advertising by the way, adding advertising on the top only makes the situation worse.
Heap on the fact that to bring the product to market you are probably assuming ~6-12 months to hit the market window from a productization standpoint, adding a new 2P platform would mean that your launch slot would be in 2011, which is right on top of Bulldozer. If the market continues to shrink (because of thread saturation), then the 8 cores of Bulldozer will accelerate that trend.
So I would need to be at 2X the market in sales, but the market is shrinking fast, and will probably accelerate that trend when we get more cores.
I am not trying to say that people aren't justified in wanting this product, just that there is no way to make the numbers work. I agree that for some it would be a very cool thing to have; I just wish people wouldn't say that it is so easy to do or that there is a huge market waiting to be tapped. Neither of those statements are true. If you had access to cost models and market share data all of this would be crystal clear. Unfortunately I can't share that, but I believe I have already shared a lot to hopefully show this in a different light.
Hmm... thanks for sharing this with us. I apologize for my previous statement. I can see from your standpoint and how it would be a unwise choice given the circumstance...Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
I can see that your (AMD)'s mind is quite made up on this topic, but I'd like to ask this one last request to see if it's even possible: call Asus or tyan or supermicro or whoever else, and ask them to release a beta BIOS on their existing motherboards that allow adjustments that we seek. Perhaps you'd need to release that beta BIOS to a very small group of people backed by whatever contract that legally binds them if that particular BIOS becomes public, therefore reducing the chance for a beta-BIOS getting into the hands of some idiot server IT admin somewhere and enabling AMD to lock horns with Intel once more. :yepp:
I mean, it's a thought. If you or AMD can't do it because of financial cost, then no biggie. You guys released TWKR chips to support the overclocking community, and I hope you haven't forgotten about us. :shrug:
or since we have some amd rep in thread action, how about phenoms that are clocked on the NB to start with and maybe a higher HTT like 222 that would keep the HTT buss at 2ghz but u would have an advantage on ram and with a higher NB like x12 that would give u 2662 and it would be much faster on the IO and for gaming/windows start. i know that i would not sacrifice the multi on my own chips unless it was 14x or higher as of now but for people who cannot overclock on OEM systems it would be a huge boost
XS Logo engraved to the IHS :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gappo
...
Anyway, what about a 12 core TWKR chip with no funds behind it? An "AS IS" processor? ...with board manufacturers doing whatever they want to adapt it?
Looking at all the people that bought Gulftown...:shrug:
:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
I actually understand you from the start, but me, like everyone, can't resist seeing these babies overclocked :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deluded
Now I see where you got your name from ;)
They would not do that work unless we guaranteed some degree of overclockability. Which means we incur all the cost anyway.
And only Opteron's mind is made up. I am the server guy, I am only concerned about Opteron.
I see your point JF-amd but there is a little group over here called the wcg team and some of us want all the core and speed we can have and we know ther is a little bit more left in the opteron chip for wcg. The only thing us are asking to say to tyan or supermicro ( i would never trust a asus server motherboard) that they gan hand out some special bios but with a drawback, it can be a sort of nda contract or simply a break of the warranty of the motherboard we have.Heck we would even be ready to pay a little bit more(maybe 50$ just for that special bios). We dont need any proof or validation that it will work we just want the option to do it. It can be hidden from the public better than a cia secret but we dont mind, We just want to have the option to be able to buy also from amd and not only from intel because they are at the moment the one with most ppd producing chip with the sr-2 and the xeon 56xx series. We dont mind about high initial cost because that was already planned but high electricity usage is something we dont want so a cluster of alot of desktop chip ca sometime be easily beaten a one mp rig because of the lower power usage.Thats why we are interested in mp and dp motherboard.So please, JF-Amd, dont leave us being obliged to buy only from intel just because you think we are not worth it. Remember a happy cruncher with a amd mp rig will also be more tempted to go for amd after when he need a gaming rig or his friends are looking for a new computer and ask the cruncher what they should get. Just look at the donation we had from gigabyte. it was a very nice move from them(especially dino22) helping us and by doing so, every cruncher of our team will now remember gigabyte when they have to buy a new motherboard for themself or for a friend.
Easily done. Just point them to s7 post -- he overclocked two mangy cours 1.3Ghz above stock on stock vcore. I don't know about you, but to us, that is DAMN impressive! 24 cores @ 3Ghz, up from 1.7Ghz stock.... :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
I understand if you can't share anymore data/info, but I'm not getting it (somewhat) from this post... You're telling us that it's not so easy as just slapping on a IHS with a different name and some die marking that would make it identify it to CPU-Z as a xxx processor rather than a Opty? For something as simple as rebranding you have to go through a whole cycle of testing and development?Quote:
I can tell you, that taking an Opteron and rebranding it as phenom would be costly. You are basically doubling the back end validation, qualification and dev resources. Not design resources, but pretty much everything else (there is not nearly as much leverage as you would guess.)
The first thing that I think about is that you are the wrong guy to ask these topics about. As overclocking the Processor is dependant on the Motherboard and BIOS more than the Processor itself (Locked Multiplier? Who cares. Push the Base Clock), it must be an independent Motherboard vendor that decides to provide tweaking tools for enthusiast in some models without AMD support. If enthusiast buy Opterons to overclock them is not something that you should be worried about, as you can't actually control what your parts will be used for, but attempt to sell them at a determined market. I doubt that the AMD Desktop guys likes that some dirt cheap Sempron gets tons of overclocking punishment from an enthusiast instead of them buying a much more expensive enthusiast class Athlon 64 FX, in the same way that there could be many small server guys that buy Desktop class Hardware for use as Desktop-as-Server (Didn't Google assembled clusters of Desktop machines?) and you can't prohibite them to do so. Though is something that I know that AMD is aware of and that is why Opterons 1xx migrated to S939, as you attemped to take on that market by using Server brandname parts at Desktops price points.Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
If anything, providing BIOS options for even the most basic tweaking should be idea and responsability of an independent Motherboard vendor without your support, as it isn't the intended use of the platform that you build.
i think that they can lock the clocks in the firmware that goes into the bios
Someone posted this in the News section. I doubt that eVGA got Intel blessings for doing an enthusiast class Dual Xeon Motherboard, yet they still did it. We need someone similar for doing that with AMD Opterons or whatever can be used for Dual Processor.
Interesing...Quote:
BT: But can you still overclock a single CPU Extreme Edition in the board though?
Shamino: No. You can't even run a single QPI [consumer Core-i7] CPU in it. The reason being that Intel twist the CPU in its socket for Xeon CPUs so it's in such a way that using a normal Core-i7 points the only available QPI to the other socket, and not the X58 chipset. Xeons with dual QPI point to both each other and the X58. Intel did it on purpose to make sure people bought their Xeon CPUs.
So unless some engineering company makes a link chip that diverts the QPI traffic to the X58, it won't happen, but I can't see why any company would bother.
So, let's take an Opteron and make it a Phenom. Pretty simple, just flip the bit in the CPUID, it's done, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Deluded
Well, here is all of the other stuff that has to happen (even with the exact same design - think Shanghai and Phenom):
1. Forecasting/biz opps - someone has to understand the market and decided how many to make and where to sell them.
2. Program management - You have to manage the development even though it is the same silicon.
3. Software development - believe it or not, you need people to make sure the products do what you want it to do under your OS.
4. Testing - Yes, you have different test procedures for server and desktop (I don't care if you can't run world of warcraft on my processors)
5. Inventory - I have to put them in a different location in the warehouse and handle them differently because they have a different name on them. I have to mark and fuse them, so once I do that there is some amount of excess/obsolete that I have to expect (and after 4x4....)
6. Marketing - if we build it they won't come, we need to tell them about it.
7. Partner support - you will have to go out and support this with all of your partners, both design in and sales out.
8. Advertising - Remember when someone complained that we don't advertise? Well, this crowd seems to think it is important, so toss that on there.
9. Sales - If we are going to build it we will have to sell it. Selling this is additional effort that takes away from sales productivity (nothing magically appears at Newegg on its own).
10. Support - once people buy it they will have questions. I am guessing that you will want them answered.
Then, of course, you will need new testers. Those are hundreds of thousands of dollars. You can't really run them through the server testers because ours are for different platforms.
1-5 are the really expensive things. All of that would need to happen if you have a different CPUID (i.e. new brand).
6-10 are the things we have to do if you expect us to actually sell the parts. But don't assume that they are cheap.
Testers are hardware, that is a major capital expense.
On average, the cost to do a new product (not counting design) typically has a $5M or so price tag. That is why you need volume. Remember that everything that is different requires a new process and requires us to handle things differently. And that adds cost.
Thank you. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
this makes you sound lazy.Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
I gaurantee you would have little to no marketing because this would be buzzing around the forums more than when the 48xx's came out and scared the :banana::banana::banana::banana: out of nvidia
One thing i have learned in this industry is "life finds a way"
For instance.....3 way sli on an amd chipset......or opterons with indentity crysis doing 3d at speeds/voltages only other c2 revision chips can only dream about......in fact at speed/voltages even some c3's dream about.
No that isn't a TWKR guys, a real TWKR would ID as AMD phenom 42 and also required more volts.......Cpu-z is just confused as it has no freaking clue what the cpu is ;)
http://chew.ln2cooling.com/qdig-file...480/lrg_11.jpg
To put chew* screen into perspective I can't even CPU-Z validate my C3 at that speed/voltage. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
Makes me want to pick up an Opteron 1385.
Wow. Thanks JF! I really appreciate it. Now I understand your side of the story. It pains me to say it, it seems you are indeed correct and the course of action you have to take regarding your optys is correct and what we ask is indeed a little bit too much to ask of AMD... but damn, you sure know how to kill dreams! :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
No matter, I'm sure someone on XS will be insane enough to mod a BIOS for their own use. :ROTF:
Although that position of tester/software testing is sounding mightily interesting... any chance you might have any info with regards to open positions in LA regions? :p:
This quote of yours piqued my interest...
You sound like you speak from experience. Are you perhaps speaking of AMD's decision to allow server grade processors to be sold as desktop processors back in s939 days, and the backlash from that moment onward (which apparently is still felt today, given your quote)?Quote:
I have already explained that allowing overclocking on opteron would result in lower net shipments of Opteron products. We would end up selling less because the net decrease in server sales would never be offset by the small number of enthusiast sales.
If I want to sell more I need to keep Opteron focused where it is and leave the Phenom to enthusiasts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stangracin3
Hmm are they lazy or do some forum dwellers not know when to give it up. Hmmmmm. ;)
opteron's are meant for 24/7 100% use for a couple of years ... so they need to be able to take a beating in a small enclosed space ..... so the extra validation steps are to ensure that each cpu branded as an opteron gets to live up to its nameQuote:
Originally Posted by Deluded
but to us its only a different name on the ihs ....
When the pricing for Opteron fell below the pricing for Athlon at the time, it was a disconnect inside the company (long story, too hard to explain.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Deluded
We saw an uplift in server parts as people started buying Opteron instead.
The problem was that resellers who were buying Athlon and not dealing with Opteron suddenly felt the shift. And Opteron resellers, who don't deal with consumers now had to contend with that.
Then, when prices came back in line, everyone jumped back to Athlon (who says price doesn't matter.) That disrupts the supply chain and creates all kinds of problems with forecasting, inventory, etc.
We never wanted to sell server parts as desktops and never meant for that to happen, it was a disconnect internally where the 2 teams were not in sync. So when people say we allowed it to happen in the past and why can't we do that again, they don't realize it wasn't intentional.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
Well what about Opteron 12xx series and 13xx series and Phenom/Phenom II?
SR2 keeps getting mentioned in here, yet no one linked this from new section ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron_Davis
this why is it's out...
Can you elaborate? I am not following your question.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
they are the same thing (or have corresponding electrically identical parts parts), they just have a different laser etch on the IHS and name on the cpu ID (and the testing and binning for opterons but thats not needed for a phenom). so for a mangy since all of the testing is done on the opterons and that is were u would pull from, then u would not have to do more testing just send out a small batch with a different etching and an unlocked multi and maybe a high VID as u can change the multi on some boards but not the VID. send it out to some benchers and get a huge jump on CB and WprimeQuote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
I repeat: We shouldn't look forward for AMD support on this. What we need is an independent Motherboard vendor or BIOS developer that wants to take that risk all by themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar