AMD 4x4 - 15% faster than core in gaming..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LOE

kentsfield will choke on it's fsb

---

Kentsfield benches here at XS have shown it not to be very fsb limited at all... it actually scales better from 2 to 4 cores than opterons do

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cMw

yet AMD announces it

---

Where have they announced it publically?

Errr...everyone seems to have missed the obvious from the 1st post.

Theres SPECULATION as to performance increase based on SPECULATIVE scaling, SPECULATIVE efficiency, SPECULATIVE CPU use (FX or not) and..oh yea!..SPECULATIVE coding (R-HT)

speculation x speculation x speculation x speculation x speculation= BS!

Any of the guys here could string together the same number of possibilities? and get told to shut the hell up. Bad link...bad thread, sorry to say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LOE

kentsfield will choke on it's fsb

13nm K8 chips ware about 60-70W at 2.4 Ghz, E6 chips ware about 30-35W, I don't mean the numbers amd says, but actual measured consumption. The average oc on 130nm was about 2.4 Ghz - went to 3 Ghz after 90n process got mature - thats 25% clock and 50% power gain (I talk about single core chips)

but lets stay on 4x4 shall we?

---

Mate, are you sure the AVERAGE oc for 90n is 3 GHz?

I guess I am asking why do you think a 25nm shrink to 65nm is going to yield a full 1 GHz headroom while a 40nm shrink from 130 to 90 only gained about 200-400mhz average?

You see, what you are doing is finding the absolute best numbers to support your wild clames and the absolute worst to support it while ignoring the actual average.

Just for clarification I am not a "Intel fan boy" and I laughed Hartley when people tried to say the pd was superior to the x2 but now every thing has just done a 180.

My thoughts

If 4x4 can use ANY x2 then it will be a winner
If it cannot and is limited to fx then it will be crap (but still blinding fast)

And what about Kentfield?
You say it will be choked by its fsb but that is just a statement pulled from netburst days, lets look at the facts

memron is the same as Conroe

memron runs on a 667fsb and could still put a fx62 in its place

So why should kentsfield be choked by its fsb when it will be double that of the very fast memron?

I honestly think that k8l quad core will be the winner not 4x4:toast:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K404

speculation x speculation x speculation x speculation x speculation= BS!

---

Awesome!

When will you people get it in your thick heads that reverse hyper threading cannot bloody exist.
Its like wishing AMD's K8L will be the first quantum chip, ridiculous. Hell actually its not even like that, cause quantum chips have a chance of existing some day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K404

@Ailleur...you`re agreeing with me, right?

---

I was agreeing with your basic equation, the rest of my comment was directed at everybody else, sorry for the confusion :)

with 4x4 you need 4 memory stick same as server motherboard?

2cpu
motherboard with 2 socket (more than 300$)
4 stick memory
psu ?
new case?
cooling ?

LOL

Thats cool..its nice to have someone agree with me for a change :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ailleur

I was agreeing with your basic equation, the rest of my comment was directed at everybody else, sorry for the confusion :)

---

informal, take a chill pill mate, its not woth it. :)


dark,
I think 4x4 will allow 1 cpu to use another cpu's due to the ll ht link;

2cpu - cheap0 x2
motherboard with 2 socket (more than 300$) - premium mobos cost alot but we cant say yet
4 stick memory- could share
psu - if you dont have a decent psu now i will be suprised
new case- it could fit in atx but it would be damm tight, i got an eatx case anyway :p:
cooling - same am2 coolers? (water 4tw)

Sounds like SLI technology to me. I vowed never to go near the "now you can buy TWO" tech crowd.

Would be hell to water cool too, depending on the space between sockets. And lots of space lost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oohms

Kentsfield benches here at XS have shown it not to be very fsb limited at all... it actually scales better from 2 to 4 cores than opterons do

---

can we get some links to show that the effecieny of kentsfield from core2 is better than dual dual core opterons from a single dual core opteron.


as that must be what you are speaking about considering i havent seen any benchs for quad core opterons, making it impossible for someone to claim kentsfield scales better than it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LOE

and how do you calculate the price of the mobo? I mean the only extra thing this mobo is going to have is a second socket and some rooting btwn the two sockets, otherwise it will be a normal mobo, with one chipset, standart expansion slots and so on. A quality Am2 mobo is about 150$, the cpu socket itself is not more than 10$, put some overprice for the high end BS and youre there.

I simply don't se a point for the 4x4 mobo to cost over 300$ - for that cash you can get a server board - no need of 4x4

I also happen to think 4x4 will fit in a standart case. I had a dual pentium pro board that fits in a standart tower many many years ago. There are SFF pc's with dual socket. There will be no problems fiting 4x4 in a normaln size board, there are no extra components, cpus are directly communicating thru HT

---

This is the new trend on XS, this is Xtreme Speculation, people just throw in some random numbers and then argue about how much the next guy's numbers are utter BS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LowRun

This is the new trend on XS, this is Xtreme Speculation, people just throw in some random numbers and then argue about how much the next guy's numbers are utter BS.

---

:clap:

I figure the real AMD yields will come after the 65nm migration.
Until they release a 65nm *something* I firmly reserve judgement.
Nuff said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brentpresley

On my WORST day I'm better than you on your SMARTEST DAY, so put up some facts or shut up.

---

Your repetitive "show some facts" babble is ludicrous since you have no clue of what that is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brentpresley

The 65nm delays have been written here for MONTHS. But you have nothing better to do than troll around and thread crap.

---

Oh really? Links, facts, proof?

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/V...101840,00.html
http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/attachments...zACBRFwUSQ.gif

Quote:

---

With the production ramp in Fab 36 progressing on schedule, the company intends to make 90nm production shipments in the first quarter of 2006 and begin 65nm production by the end of 2006. AMD has set a goal to be substantially converted to 65nm in Fab 36 by mid-2007.

---

There you go brent, a fact...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brentpresley

You know, mis-directed rage is a sign of serious mental instability. :fact:

---

You're the one who jumped on the insults... and i have mental instability why? because i don't agree with your virtual facts? lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brentpresley

EDIT - DoubleZero and informal have been added to my ignore list. I HIGHLY recommend everyone else do the same.

---

I think everyone with a IQ bigger then Forest Gump knows who deserves to be ignored.

Let`s stop bashing each other guys. There`s always a PM for that.
And no need to mention who`s on your ignore list and definatly no recomendations to put somebody on his list or it`s automatic 3 day ban.

Forum rules in case somebody forgot :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brentpresley

Last paragraph:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...207225940.html

FACTS:

---

So a xbitlabs article is a fact, AMD own words are not? lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brentpresley

Initially AMD indicated that the “idea” of AMD was to begin to process 65nm in the middle of 2005 and “bring it into production in 2006”. Late in 2005 the company said it would only begin production of 65nm in late 2006.

---

Did AMD ever said that 65nm will be in production in early 2006?

So from AMD saying that will bring it into production in 2006, to being more precise and saying late 2006, xbitlabs concluded that it was a delay... and then you got Intel fanboys that only read titles but keep churning out the word facts...

"No Single-Thread Boosters for Dual-Core Chips from AMD – Sources."

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...714052807.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlackX

2x FX-62 = 1600$
1x X6800 = 1300$

---

Optimistic i'd say...
European prices from Geizhals.de:
2x FX-62: 2*910€ (2*1140$)
+ 300€ board
+ 4 dimms 400€
= 2500€ (3100$+)

Edit:
After FX price cuts:
2x FX-62: 2*705€ (2*885$)
+ 300€ board
+ 4 dimms 400€
= 2110€ (2600$+)


1x C2X X6800: 960€ (1200$)
+ 200€ board
+ 2 dimms 200€
= 1360€ (1700$)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

3 little letters... F. S. B.

Intel's front side bus would choke the poor little chips to death. Kentsfield already has to talk between the 2 dies amongst the FSB, now add another 2 dies(making 4 dies total for kentsfield) and have them all communicate via that 1 fsb.

What do YOU think would happen?

---

there is no fsb bottleneck, nothing bad will actually happen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by largon

Optimistic i'd say...
European prices from Geizhals.de:
2x FX-62: 2*910€ (2*1140$)
+ 300€ board
+ 4 dimms 400€
= 2500€ (3100$+)


1x C2X X6800: 960€ (1200$)
+ 200€ board
+ 2 dimms 200€
= 1360€ (1700$)

---

Largon,what about price cuts?I think he meant those prices will be after the 24.

why you dont wait until they release it.... and about the rht lets wait until amd denies it..... please

That whole paragraph was nothing more than speculation. Anyone can speculate whatever they want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

Largon,what about price cuts?I think he meant those prices will be after the 24.

---

The price cuts are for the sAM2 & s939 A64 & A64-X2 with 512kB of L2 cache and Sempron.

Correct, AMD's "Counter-Conroe" price cuts won't affect the FX-series :(