Damn :) you want me overdosed.Quote:
Originally Posted by turtle
Printable View
Damn :) you want me overdosed.Quote:
Originally Posted by turtle
Which brings back the conspiracy theory...
What if your new desktop architecture couldn't beat the competition and you planned on refreshing it shortly anyway with a new memory controller...How would you release it?
Personally, if I had a separate socket/platform for just servers/enthusiasts using at least dual socket-capable chips I'd keep it out of the single-socket limelight and push it as an at least dual cpu solution to consumers first...because I think (barring something absurd) 2xK8L on desktop or 4x/8x K8L on servers is gonna beat anything Intel has....and AM2 is still only 1-way last time I checked, and Socket F is at the LEAST 2-way.
@Naw, only love amigo. You can never have too much chill :)Quote:
Originally Posted by gOJDO
replace K8L in your post with K8 and it's all ok ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by turtle
The most dissapointing piece of information in this is the obvious truth that AMD is having problems scaling their 65nm chips. If they were having good luck with speeds/yields it would make sense that they would move all their 2x1mb cache parts to 65nm asap.
They really need to be in the 3.6ghz range to successfully compete with existing and yet to be released conroes. This is a far cry from the 2.6ghz the 65 nanos are currently reaching (and yet to be released for a few more months). The only saving grace is that peak power consumption appears to be down on the new process.
For AMD, its K8L or bust. 4x4 is simply media hype to fight conroe.
I am a die hard AMD man but I cant for the life of me figure out how they let Intel sucker punch them for at least 12-18 months.
Now that i actually have read the text
So in October comes Stronger Sempron
Sempron 3800+ 2,2GHz 256KB 90nm 62W AM2 Oktober
Sempron 3500+ 2,0GHz 128KB 90nm 35W AM2 Oktober
Then In November Comes stronger X2
X2 6000+ 3,0GHz 2x1MB 90nm 125W AM2 November
X2 5600+ 2,8GHz 2x1MB 90nm 98W AM2 November
X2 5400+ 2,8GHz 2x512KB 90nm 98W AM2 November
Then in December comes 65 nm x2 (Cheaper to produce):D
X2 5000+ 2,6GHz 2x512KB 65nm 65W AM2 December
X2 4800+ 2,4GHz 2x1MB 65nm 65W AM2 December
X2 4400+ 2,2GHz 2x1MB 65nm 65W AM2 December
X2 4000+ 2,0GHz 2x1MB 65nm 65W AM2 December
Now this comes at the End on the Year when Intel is ramping up with Conroes
See a connection;)
AMD knows very well that Core dou 2 is a treat and are reoginasing their lineup to better compete.
No the big question is
Will we see Price Cuts?
I have a feeling we will:toast:
i do not know if this is true , the best that i can tell is that this has been disprovenQuote:
The most dissapointing piece of information in this is the obvious truth that AMD is having problems scaling their 65nm chips.
why is amd still using 90nm for it's fx cpu's , well i don't think that amd sells a whole lot of fx cpu's , and is probably making the fx chips in fab 30 , when fab 30 is converted to fab 38 , the fx cpu's will probably be 65nm
what do we think of amd being ableto take a 90nm cpu to the mhz that they are taking it to , this has to say something for amd and 90nm
Your conclusion is wrong!Quote:
Originally Posted by LexDiamonds
You don’t want to use volume production for parts that will sell in low quantities.
Beside that AMD has sharpened 90nm ‘till the very edge of the tech, so it’s natural that they’re using 90nm tech for the new FX CPU’s. Those are really Opterons 2xxx series, and its common knowledge that Opterons are always produced on the highest quality wafers
In the long run, 4x4 on Socket F is really a way to go!
And of course it makes me smug seeing I was right long time ago ;)
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...4+motherboards
I guess this will be the prime-time 4x4 mobo:
http://www.tyan.com/products/html/thundern3600b.html
I don't believe it.
The FX series is for enthusiasts, the major feature being the unlocked multiplier - which means overclocking friendly.
It doesn't make sense to put the enthusiast platform on registered RAM. There is no "overclocking" RAM available for it and it is more expensive, and right now all registered RAM has ECC which further limits speed scaling and increases cost.
For the enthusiast there is no benefit in registered RAM as they rarely use more than 2 or at most 4 sticks of memory, and they won't use ECC either.
The point about the original 4x4 design was to give people a dual-socket solution that they can use with "enthusiast"/overclocking memory.
Also, who's going to design an overclocking board for dual socket 1207? The board will all be server-style designs.
The above plan basically means "there is no 4x4". It goes back to what we had in first place - more than one CPU socket means moving to AMD's server platform, including the need for registered RAM.
It's not a question of yours belives! That's AMD's plan, and me thinks it's a good one! They wnt to sell CPU's so they will give you two FX7x CPU's for the price of the one FX6x!
actually i got the impression that the 4x4 high end enthusiast platform was gonna not require registered ram at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by uOpt
so what you will be seeing is asus, msi, dfi mobos, with 2 sockets, slots for your fav flavor of ram and then you buy a pair of processors initially and plop it into the LGA sockets. then clock the crap outta it and have an awesome system.
Of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by el rolio
But socket 1207 does.
So that doesn't fit, something odd is going on here. Either the original report is wrong, or AMD effectively drops 4x4 (going back to "need server platform for > 1 CPU socket).
That was the original plan, unregistered RAM, 4x4 using socket AM2.Quote:
so what you will be seeing is asus, msi, dfi mobos, with 2 sockets, slots for your fav flavor of ram and then you buy a pair of processors initially and plop it into the LGA sockets. then clock the crap outta it and have an awesome system.
I wouldnt believe this stuff.. LOL The person that made that chart didnt even know how to spell Clock. They spelled it "Klok". AMD wouldnt do us like this. Atlease I hope not. Using ECC memory for thier ELITE line isnt really ELITE. I think this would be a bad mistake for them. I know they are smarter than this. I would be puzzled why they would bring a FX line to Socket F. Doesnt make sense to me. Which is why Im saying this is bunk.
~Mike
How ignorant are you, it's dutch :stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by arisythila
Fud
So now 4x4 uses ECC, is on 90nm still, and costs more than most people will pay. Also they sell 90nm CPUs clocked higher than the 65nm? RIIIIIGHT
ok, so just to make sure im not missing hte boat in my impression here:Quote:
Originally Posted by uOpt
is there anything about the socket and mobo that determines the ECC vs nonECC ram thing? i assumed that its built in as part of the ram controller on the cpu DIE. so along that lines, i assumed the 4x4 would be as you said in your orignal plan, save for the fact that it starts on the socket F, presumably cuz of hte extra HT connects blah blah blah.
so what we essentially get is:
budget line (sempron?)
consumer line (x2)
high end enthusiast line (4x4)
server line (opteron)
all that goes out the window if im wrong about the ECC requirement being based in the mem controller on die. if not, all of the info so far makes sense to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by biohead
geen faecalien
~Mike
Not ECC RAM but registered RAM. Big difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by afireinside
You mix up ECC and registered/unbuffered. Different concepts. All AMD64s do optional ECC. Socket 754, 939 and AM2 always use unbuffered (unregistered). Socket 940 and 1207 always use registered.Quote:
Originally Posted by el rolio
I don't think it is possible to put a controller for unregistered RAM into a socket 1207. In any case, even if that's possible that would introduce a new processor line entirely incompatible with 1207 and all other sockets so that's not going to happen.
So it is still one of two:
- Either 2+2 (4x4) is dead. And going 1207 means dead.
- The report is wrong.
My money is on AMD not having found anybody to make a board for the original 2+2(4x4) concept with unbuffered RAM. There is just not enough money in that market, and it is a difficult board to make, and a difficult customer base (overclockers). Which mainboard maker would be so insane to do that when every overclocked kentsfield will be faster.
So I say 2+2(4x4) is dead and AMD just now markets it's server platform as "the new 4x4".
However, there is a chance we will get unlocked multipliers in 1207 FX chips, which would make me very happy.
ok, yea i meant registered, and ok thanks for breaking own your point of view and i definately see what you are saying now. so yea, i guess im with you there, either the report is wrong or 4x4 as we knew it is gone. im gonna hope for the possibility the report is wrong...of course.
faecalien :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by arisythila
why would the socket have anything to do with changing the ram controller?
i'm going to dismiss this entire thread and the original post as PURE AND STUPID SPECULATION, IF NOT SHEER FUD!
Since the memory controller is on the CPU, the socket in AMD systems is also fixed either registered or unbuffered. The additional pin in socket 940 over 939 was exactly for this.Quote:
Originally Posted by SlicerSV
The situation is different for Intel where the northbridge decides whether you go unbuffered or registered (or FB-DIMM) and the CPU socket could be the same.
Well... not this time ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
I think what AMD meant was a pair of FX70s for under $1000. :(