Dual Core AMD Opteron. First screenshot!

[cpuz]

Actually dual core Athlon/Opteron really report the Hyper-Threading flag as being set, and also 2 logical CPUs.
IMO this is just for software compatibility, even if the CPU does not support HT stricto senso.

[Ailleur]

Intel HT = HyperThreading, A method of splittings pipelines into seperate proccesses

AMD HT = HyperTransport, A physical communication link like PCI, SATA, etc, that connects processors together and processors to the chipset. Your 939 has an HT link between the processor and the chipset.

There will be a dual-core 939, that information is posted on AMD's website.

AMD uses a different type of manufacturing process that creates very low power, very low voltage components. I believe they develope it with IBM (partners).

AMD is reporting very high yields on their processors.

The pricing strategy is such that a dual core will be slightly cheaper than two single cores. This is to make as much money as possible (you want AMD to do that so they can afford more R&D). This strategy is being applied to the server/enterprise market (big companies). No home user is going to want to buy opterons anyway. There is no telling what the pricing strategy will be for 939.

939 should be out in a couple months, June I believe.

The discussion wasnt about the meaning of HT across both company but was about amd enabling the hyperthreading bit on their cpu

Read http://www.x86-secret.com/?option=newsd&nid=871

[drcrawn]

Intel is in so much trouble it's not even funny anymore I'm sold on Opteron more than ever now. And do I even need to mention that XS is fast becoming the place for first looks on just about everything. Love this place. Socket 940 power baby!
As for the voltage, I believe it. It's already been shown the Opty E4s run much cooler and use considerable less power. We are witnessing AMD come into a period of pure greatness and things just keep getting better.

[[XC] leviathan18]

Originally Posted by Quanticles
Intel HT = HyperThreading, A method of splittings pipelines into seperate proccesses

AMD HT = HyperTransport, A physical communication link like PCI, SATA, etc, that connects processors together and processors to the chipset. Your 939 has an HT link between the processor and the chipset.

There will be a dual-core 939, that information is posted on AMD's website.

AMD uses a different type of manufacturing process that creates very low power, very low voltage components. I believe they develope it with IBM (partners).

AMD is reporting very high yields on their processors.

The pricing strategy is such that a dual core will be slightly cheaper than two single cores. This is to make as much money as possible (you want AMD to do that so they can afford more R&D). This strategy is being applied to the server/enterprise market (big companies). No home user is going to want to buy opterons anyway. There is no telling what the pricing strategy will be for 939.

939 should be out in a couple months, June I believe.

you are right but in this chips amd did this:

Athlon 64 Simple Core - CPUID (EAX = 1)
Hex (EDX) : 0x078bfbff
Bin (EDX) : 0b00000111100010111111101111111111
Hex (EBX) : 0x00000800

Athlon 64 Dual Core - CPUID (EAX = 1)
Hex (EDX) : 0x178bfbff
Bin (EDX) : 0b00010111100010111111101111111111
Hex (EBX) : 0x00020800

The bit 28 in register EDX (which is emphasized in red here) corresponds to the support of HyperThreading. However, we can see clearly that this bit is now set to 1 whereas it was to 0 for a standard, Single Core, Athlon 64. In the same way, the bits [23:16] of register EBX, which indicate the number of logicals CPU supported on Intel CPUs with Hyperthreading enabled, are also set to "2" in the case of a DC Athlon 64.

So, It seems that AMD chose to activate the "HyperThreading" bit on those Athlon 64 Desktop CPUs in order to profit from optimizations already done by many programmers for HyperThreading technology. This will make possible for those upcoming Athlon 64 Dual Core to also benefit from work already carried out. For now, we do not know yet if the Dual Core Opterons will also have this bit active.

as i said before just to take advantage in the programs that have some optimizations with hyperthreading.....

[Quanticles]

I thought there was a question about Intel HT and AMD HT, I must have been mistaken.

There's no reason to not take advantage of HyperThreading optimizations using a dual-core scheme, that's what HyperThreading was supposed to represent. I'd imagine Intel is doing the same thing.

[terrace215]

Intel HT = HyperThreading, A method of splittings pipelines into seperate proccesses

AMD HT = HyperTransport, A physical communication link like PCI, SATA, etc, that connects processors together and processors to the chipset. Your 939 has an HT link between the processor and the chipset.

Yes, but in this case, the reference to HT is to hyperthreading support, which AMD's dual core parts will have. Just so that software that checks for HT will run properly, and take advantage of both cores.

This has been known for some time, announced last year by AMD, despite Samuel of x86-secret thinking he discovered something.

[terrace215]

Intel is in so much trouble it's not even funny anymore I'm sold on Opteron more than ever now. And do I even need to mention that XS is fast becoming the place for first looks on just about everything. Love this place. Socket 940 power baby!
As for the voltage, I believe it. It's already been shown the Opty E4s run much cooler and use considerable less power. We are witnessing AMD come into a period of pure greatness and things just keep getting better.

It may be possible with DSL / a different transistor mix.

E4 Optis are nice, but they run at 1.35v/1.4v at top clock, like Venice and San Diego.

1.2v is just amazing.

MT-xx Turions might run at 1.2v as well, I suppose.

[terrace215]

The Inquirer called this back in January, upon review.

In fact, they were even more optimistic, saying there would be a 55W HE part at 2.2GHz and 1.15v.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=20420

Still, 68W and 1.2v is very, very good for dual core 2.2GHz.

So I guess the answer is, VVJ is showing us the 2.2GHz HE Dual core Opteron.

[aoc007]

The Inquirer called this back in January, upon review.

In fact, they were even more optimistic, saying there would be a 55W HE part at 2.2GHz and 1.15v.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=20420

Still, 68W and 1.2v is very, very good for dual core 2.2GHz.

So I guess the answer is, VVJ is showing us the 2.2GHz HE Dual core Opteron.

Please AMD release it to s939 as an FX cpu (maybe with higher voltages/clocks?) crosses fingers. Although I have heard the reports that AMD has no plans for a dual core FX cpu, so you guys dont need to reiterate that But really, shouldn't they have a competitor to the EE?

[karelke]

The Inquirer called this back in January, upon review.

In fact, they were even more optimistic, saying there would be a 55W HE part at 2.2GHz and 1.15v.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=20420

Still, 68W and 1.2v is very, very good for dual core 2.2GHz.

So I guess the answer is, VVJ is showing us the 2.2GHz HE Dual core Opteron.

That's an old roadmap.
Here's one from February.

[terrace215]

That's an old roadmap.
Here's one from February.

True. Interesting... OTOH, they are currently supplying 68W single-core Opterons at 2.4GHz to HP for blade servers, so I guess they want a drop-in replacement for that.

Perhaps there's a new category in between 55W and 95W.

[terrace215]

Please AMD release it to s939 as an FX cpu (maybe with higher voltages/clocks?) crosses fingers. Although I have heard the reports that AMD has no plans for a dual core FX cpu, so you guys dont need to reiterate that But really, shouldn't they have a competitor to the EE?

Well, whatever you call it, the A64 X2 4800+ *is* a dual San Diego, i.e. a dual FX, with 2 x 1MB L2 at 2.4GHz.

That is, 2 x FX-53, i.e. 2 x 4000+.

This will blow the 840 EE out of the water.

[dippyskoodlez]

THe idea is slick, but compatibility would be the last of AMD's worries. It's patented by Intel....so I smell a lawsuit...and a big one. Only that AMD knows that if Intel does pursues that route, it has its own case against Intel's monopolizing influence in the market which could get Intel into a VERY sticky situation.

Perkam

No, AMD could actually implement it if they wanted. they have a technology sharing agreement. thats how AMD uses SSE, SSE2, etc.

[perkam]

AMD HT = HyperTransport, A physical communication link like PCI, SATA, etc, that connects processors together and processors to the chipset. Your 939 has an HT link between the processor and the chipset.

Right...uh huh...so if HT was HyperTransporT bus, then can u pls educate us on what HTT would be

Perkam

[dippyskoodlez]

Right...uh huh...so if HT was HyperTransporT bus, then can u pls educate us on what HTT would be

Perkam

lol.

Gotta love comments like that

[some_young_guy]

THe idea is slick, but compatibility would be the last of AMD's worries. It's patented by Intel....so I smell a lawsuit...and a big one. Only that AMD knows that if Intel does pursues that route, it has its own case against Intel's monopolizing influence in the market which could get Intel into a VERY sticky situation.

Perkam

I don't know why it would be a problem since AMD owns the patent to Hyperthreading.

patent 5,944,816
Link 2

[dippyskoodlez]

I don't know why it would be a problem since AMD owns the patent to Hyperthreading.

patent 5,944,816
Link 2

That, too.. lol

AMD and intel have a cross-technology license, so they can use what they want when they want prettymuch.

[Quanticles]

Alot of people call it HT, not HTT. Talk trash if you want.

[[XC] leviathan18]

chill out ppl...

[dippyskoodlez]

Alot of people call it HT, not HTT. Talk trash if you want.

Geez.. no need to get all angry :P

The CBID screenie says "hyperthreading" not HT.

[Quanticles]

If I was angry I would have put

[Quanticles]

I didnt mean to kill the thread x.x

[[XC] leviathan18]

so athlon 64x2

only have 512kb of cache per core, 1mb total?

and some opteron dc have 1mb per core 2mb total?

i tought every dc would have 1mb per core 2mb total cache

we need to see if a heavy multithread program gains a lot of perfomance with 2 cores and how perfom the EE vs any athlon 64x2

this is just a nice year, the best thing we amd buyers can keep our mobos

[terrace215]

so athlon 64x2

only have 512kb of cache per core, 1mb total?

and some opteron dc have 1mb per core 2mb total?

i tought every dc would have 1mb per core 2mb total cache

we need to see if a heavy multithread program gains a lot of perfomance with 2 cores and how perfom the EE vs any athlon 64x2

this is just a nice year, the best thing we amd buyers can keep our mobos

No, some A64 X2 are 1MB x 2, some are 512K x 2.

[aoc007]

Well, whatever you call it, the A64 X2 4800+ *is* a dual San Diego, i.e. a dual FX, with 2 x 1MB L2 at 2.4GHz.

That is, 2 x FX-53, i.e. 2 x 4000+.

This will blow the 840 EE out of the water.

Ah, I didn't know that, havn't been keeping up on the tech news lately like I used to. San Diego is FX-57 right? Or is it the 90nm FX-55?