AMD has changed release of AM2

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

04-19-2006, 04:26 PM
dave_graham

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piotrsama

Not this year, at least not on retail.

late Q1, 2007. the tech demo is done already in Taipei. :)

dave
04-19-2006, 05:07 PM
metro.cl

its official the embargo ends on the 23th of may.
04-19-2006, 07:43 PM
zabomb4163

Quote:

Originally Posted by nn_step

Yes but like Pentium D, it is just going to be two dies fighting over a SINGLE FSB. Which is going to kill the performance.

and around that time intel will have 45nm quad core.

http://www.intel.com/technology/sili...nm_silicon.htm

"20 percent improvement in transistor switching speed or more than a five-fold reduction in transistor current leakage."
04-19-2006, 07:47 PM
nn_step

Quote:

Originally Posted by zabomb4163

and around that time intel will have 45nm quad core.

http://www.intel.com/technology/sili...nm_silicon.htm

"20 percent improvement in transistor switching speed or more than a five-fold reduction in transistor current leakage."

:stick: Dude we are talking about the CPU to be limited to 133Mhz of Bandwidth per Core. The last Intel processer that had that little bandwidth was the 80486.
We are talking about a Strangle hold that Will KILL the performance. it is kind of like having a 10,000 horse power engine but only feeding it 1cc of Gas per Second.
04-19-2006, 09:09 PM
Poodle

Quote:

Originally Posted by nn_step

:stick: Dude we are talking about the CPU to be limited to 133Mhz of Bandwidth per Core. The last Intel processer that had that little bandwidth was the 80486.
We are talking about a Strangle hold that Will KILL the performance. it is kind of like having a 10,000 horse power engine but only feeding it 1cc of Gas per Second.

I hear ya. All the talk about Conroe is impressive but the Amd tehnology seems better for multi core. Intel might take back some of the desktop market though, with the conroe. On the server market Amd will probably continue to grow or at least not drop sales becuase of the good reputation they've gained.

I'm personally changing sockets due to the new more efficient chipsets. The NF4 chipset is dated with it's high energy consumption, which is a pain in the...
04-19-2006, 10:31 PM
incurable

Quote:

Originally Posted by nn_step

:stick: Dude we are talking about the CPU to be limited to 133Mhz of Bandwidth per Core. The last Intel processer that had that little bandwidth was the 80486.

'133MHz of Bandwidth'? What are you, and id ... oh wait, nn_step, it's YOU! Nevermind. :slapass:
04-19-2006, 10:43 PM
nn_step

Dude Clovertown, will require Two processors (thus 8 cores) to share a 1066 mhz FSB.. thus 133mhz per core. Servers are the bread and butter of AMD and Intel really wants a bigger slice of that Pie.
04-19-2006, 11:20 PM
incurable

Quote:

Originally Posted by nn_step

Dude Clovertown, will require Two processors (thus 8 cores) to share a 1066 mhz FSB.. thus 133mhz per core.

Clovertown (which btw is a processor and doesn't require a sibling to work) will be launched on the Bensley platform which features dual independet busses (DIB), connecting each socket via its own private FSB to the northbridge. Depending on the FSB speeds it'll debut at (1066/1333), there'll be at least 2.13 GB/s or 2.67 GB/s available to each of the four cores in each socket.

(The sad thing is that this has been explained to you before.)
04-20-2006, 03:20 AM
Krug

I hope that AM2 dosent end up as another s754...I got suckered into that back when AMD64 first came out...
04-20-2006, 03:30 AM
ozzimark

Quote:

Originally Posted by Krug

I hope that AM2 dosent end up as another s754...I got suckered into that back when AMD64 first came out...

what's wrong with s754? i have a feeling my original s754 machine that i got will outlast my s939 one by a long shot... plus, AMD is putting EOL on s939 before s754.. :banana:
04-20-2006, 06:32 AM
T2k

Quote:

Originally Posted by OmegaMerc

If this is true, then you wouldn't find half the video cards in the market available, since their performance gain is so low from one to another that it voids any reasoning.

Care to elaborate? I always tested/bought the latest top cards and I have never seen any new or prerelease card from ATI or NV with less than 10% faster performance than its predecessor. 10-15% - that's the usual minimum, even without architecture change.
04-20-2006, 06:35 AM
T2k

Quote:

Originally Posted by zabomb4163

and around that time intel will have 45nm quad core.

http://www.intel.com/technology/sili...nm_silicon.htm

"20 percent improvement in transistor switching speed or more than a five-fold reduction in transistor current leakage."

You want me to quote from papers Intel/HP weres sending me years ago before we bought our Itanics? ;)
04-20-2006, 06:36 AM
nn_step

Quote:

Originally Posted by T2k

You want me to quote from papers Intel/HP was sending me years ago before we bought our Itanics? ;)

yes, I'll be really funny.. oh and do you have those Itanics Running R@H yet?;)
04-20-2006, 06:37 AM
Pegaso

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thorry

Why the hell would a new release automatically mean better performance???

I have to agree, when amd pased from 754 to 939 the perfomance boost wasnt really huge :nono:
04-20-2006, 06:50 AM
T2k

Quote:

Originally Posted by BSill

So you are saying the performance difference from the x800 series to the x1900 series is minimal?

The release of the x1800 to the x1900 is a good example of 939 to AM2.

Umm excuse me? 4x extra PS power is in the range of 1-7%? :) Show me any area where AM2 will beat 939 by this margin...

Quote:

The release of the 7800 to the 7900 series is a good example of 939 to AM2.

Noway either - IIRC 7900GTX is faster around 25-30% margin in 3dmark05 (say 1920@4xAA)

Quote:

I'm not saying its wrong, I'm just saying it would be a better idea to save about 800 dollars (AM2 CPU + AM2 Compatable Mobo) and put that 800 dollars towards a crossfire or sli setup that would give you a MUCH HIGHER in game performance increase.

I think your commanding sentence is this one:

Quote:

Originally Posted by BSill

I still dont see the point of switching over from 939 until 2007.

And this is absolutely true, I think, unless AMD will pull some new trick around Fall. AM2 is nothing but a transition to DDR2 for future memory bandwidth. Unfortunately this time AMD couldn't make another magical memory controller like it did with DDR - this time mem controller sux big time. :(
04-20-2006, 07:01 AM
T2k

Quote:

Originally Posted by nn_step

yes, I'll be really funny.. oh and do you have those Itanics Running R@H yet?;)

Hehe, I have them saved somewhere... TBH I believed at the time for a short period - then they arrived and I was really pissed very soon.
OTOH we didn't really have a choice back then: at the time there wasn't any other platform you could get a machine w/ 16GB RAM and run your Windows-based app on it - I was only pissed by the fact that its 32bit performace was so ridiculous that it was totally useless for anything else than our single speacial IA64 apps (which was also buggy, of course.)
It was a good lesson - I never believed a word of Intel ever since.:cool:
04-20-2006, 07:28 AM
Ailleur

Quote:

Originally Posted by nn_step

:stick: Dude we are talking about the CPU to be limited to 133Mhz of Bandwidth per Core. The last Intel processer that had that little bandwidth was the 80486.

Funny how the utter stupidity of that comment went unnoticed. It goes to show how.. well... to put it nicely.. how retardedly stupid you are
04-20-2006, 08:10 AM
P8baller07

Sounds like another s754 to 939 to me

Won't be a big difference at first, but AMD's newer beefy processors will
mostly AM2 processors.
04-20-2006, 01:28 PM
BSill

Quote:

Originally Posted by T2k

I think your commanding sentence is this one:

And this is absolutely true, I think, unless AMD will pull some new trick around Fall. AM2 is nothing but a transition to DDR2 for future memory bandwidth. Unfortunately this time AMD couldn't make another magical memory controller like it did with DDR - this time mem controller sux big time. :(

I don't think they are going to pull anything out of their hat. Most likely will release AM2 as 80nm like we were informed sense they even boosted up the release date to 6/6, bascially same architecture with ddr2 memory controller. Getting ready for DDR2 before it takes way in the future. I think they'll get it out to us as they stated, see how it clocks and then focus their attention on the 65nm version (i believe its 65 correct?) for next year. By their 2007 releases we'll have sb600, r600 and g80 hopefully available to work with. Wouldnt bother upgrading till q1 of 07 which will most likely be pushed back to late Q1 maybe early Q2 just guessing?

Edit: Typo
04-20-2006, 01:49 PM
ozzimark

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ailleur

Funny how the utter stupidity of that comment went unnoticed. It goes to show how.. well... to put it nicely.. how retardedly stupid you are

it makes perfect sense to me?
04-20-2006, 06:16 PM
darkhelmet

i just know i'm pumped to upgrade my preshott 540 and P5AD2 Premium....although a nice mobo it is
04-20-2006, 07:34 PM
mesyn191

Quote:

Originally Posted by BSill

Thank you for proving my point. I dont understand either why people think newer is better. Yes there are SOME examples disregarding processors.

this is a release for economic concerns, not so much performance IIRC, at least at launch anyways.

DDR RAM is starting to become expensive vs. DDR2 (good for thier OEM partners, saves them money building AMD machines..), performance on DDR will remain stagnant (at stock...) while DDR2 will still scale some too you know.

Also allows them to unite the dekstop sockets, no more 754 and 939, just socket 940 for value and performance markets.

Bear in mind of course if you've already got a A64 or higher clocked P4 upgrading to a AM2 system would be a waste of money, but lots of people have older machines and for those looking to upgrade before Conroe comes AM2 is a nice upgrade.
04-20-2006, 07:38 PM
mesyn191

Unfortunately this time AMD couldn't make another magical memory controller like it did with DDR - this time mem controller sux big time.

Eh? Nothing wrong with AMD's DDR2 mem. controller at all. You've seen the Anadtech benches? Lower latency, more bandwidth, and support for DDR2 800. WTF is there to complain about?
04-20-2006, 08:21 PM
biohead

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ailleur

Funny how the utter stupidity of that comment went unnoticed. It goes to show how.. well... to put it nicely.. how retardedly stupid you are

then what's your theory, einstein?

oh, and he is probably far more educated than you are.
04-21-2006, 01:24 AM
incurable

How about (1) you don't measure bandwidth in Hz and (2) -diregarding (1)- his math is plain wrong (which he was told only days before this comment). Stupid enough?

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page