AMD has changed release of AM2

[Starscream]

Seems AMD isnt gonna release AM2 at 6/6/06

but at the end of may. rumor has it that these are the dates:

* May 16, 2006: Global announcement of Energy Efficient Processor roadmap and pricing
* May 23, 2006: Global announcement of Socket AM2 and new desktop product availability and pricing
* May 21, 2006: Global announcement of AMD LIVE! desktop system availability

reason: CPUs and motherboards are already finished.

link to the article at dailytech:
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=1854

[physics_geek]

6/6/06!!! AMD is being superstitious here. :P
Seriously, Conroe might be another reason.

[nn_step]

sounds good to me

[BSill]

AM2 procs right now only provide a 1 to 7% performance increase while in game. And that is with higher end ram. Ex: OCZ's new DDR2 xtc. I still dont see the point of switching over from 939 until 2007. It seems they are rushing the release.

[Starscream]

AM2 procs right now only provide a 1 to 7% performance increase while in game. And that is with higher end ram. Ex: OCZ's new DDR2 xtc. I still dont see the point of switching over from 939 until 2007. It seems they are rushing the release.

i dont think their rushing it.
boards and CPUs have been floating around for a while now i think the products r simply already finished

[BSill]

Maybe I confused you. My point meaning 1 to 7% performance increase seems pretty pointless to release the product.

[DaWaN]

Maybe I confused you. My point meaning 1 to 7% performance increase seems pretty pointless to release the product.

No it isn't, Intel is atm almost for 100% on DDR2, AMD can't stay with DDR1..

[Cobalt]

I think they just want to setup a user base so when the real improvements come those people will be more willing to upgrade and any problems with the socket can be ironed out. They also make more money this way because people will essientially be paying for the same thing twice, now and whenever K8L comes out. Of course a lot of people will probably hold out till then anyway but it still gets the product into the market.

[OmegaMerc]

Maybe I confused you. My point meaning 1 to 7% performance increase seems pretty pointless to release the product.

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.

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

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.

[Thorry]

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

In the CPU world this has NEVER been true.

To tell you guys the truth I'm getting damned sick of the entire thing. It's like everybody has forgotten the last 15 years...

Also AMD can't lag behind Intel, and I'm sick of seeing AM2 compared to Conroe. AM2 is next month, Conroe is unknown (but slated Q3 or Q4)... my Pentium 3 also was slower as my X2 now... :S

[BSill]

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

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

[[XC] leviathan18]

when intel changed to ddr2 it was backstep in perfomance amd has little gain conroe is a new Marchitecture AM2 is just a new socket with a new IMC no new Marchitecture or new process i..... compare AM2 with current gen chips 939 or intel p4 not conroe... for conroe is coming another thing

[Thorry]

Very true, AMD has just been waiting for the performance of DDR2 to catch up with the performace they were getting out of DDR. Now that pricing and performance is basically equal to DDR (even a 3 to 5% increase) AMD is switching.

The AM2 CPUs will be just the same as the 939 CPUs except for the memory controller. (And some improvements on some but not all models)

Now people are flipping saying: Well the AM2 3800+ is no faster as the 939 3800+ or a AM2 CPU clocked at 2.5 ghz is only 3 to 5% faster as a 939 CPU clocked at 2.5 ghz...

AMD is going to introduce some higher clocked CPUs, also when buying a new PC now you can hang on to your memory and maybe even your mobo for some time. Also if you are now running a preshott with DDR2 memory the switch to AM2 is easier.

Just hold on to your hats when the 65nm production reaches the market, can anybody say 4 ghz X2 with 16mb L3 cache?

[dave_graham]

Maybe I confused you. My point meaning 1 to 7% performance increase seems pretty pointless to release the product.

lol

you're kidding, right?

ANY platform change is accompanied by the requisite failures/strengths of that new platform. For AM2, higher bandwidth applications will benefit more from DDR2 than the S939 platform. incidental latency aside, the average user (read: 99.3% of customers out there) will notice absolutely nothing different than the .7% of customers who think that benchmarking is indicative of complete system performance.

sorry, bud, but Intel and AMD make money off of "real life" applications, not power users that try to scape another second of of SuperPI. 1-7% performance increase is what I expect from any evolutionary change to the AMD platform design.

in any case, spending $800 on a new AM2 platform isn't exactly the cost it'll be... pricing parity is there with S939 on the processor parts and the mainboards will be a little pricey initially.

dave

[|3ourne]

ok , so at stock , AM2 is roughly equivalent to Skt 939. But you all fail to realise that the true power of DDR2 shows at high speeds. At those speeds ( 800 mhz+) the bandwidth is more than you see from DDR most of the time. Combine that with the super efficient mem controller of AMD , and overclock that combo ( what we all do on XS neways ) , hopefully we will see some good ocs higher than current skt 939. A couple of tests dont prove anything. Wait till real world users try and overclock them.

Im not trying to take AMD's side but speculation is running rampant lately here.

[NickS]

Yeah but is that going to increase the performance enough to justify a rather expensive upgrade?

The performance difference between Socket A and socket 754/939 was CRAZY. IMO it's stupid to re-release the same architecture on 3 sockets. s754, s939, now AM2 and more all based on K8? AMD's pulling an intel I think I'm going to wait for the next mainstream socket, as socket AM2 seems to be like the "new" s754 .. or maybe I'll pick up a Conroe when they're released.

Nick

[johnanderson]

hmm. i dont know how much amd can improve their cpu from now until june. in any case if they dont come out with a good conroe competitor then i guess theyll just have to lower prices, which = win for me

[Thorry]

Yeah but is that going to increase the performance enough to justify a rather expensive upgrade?

The performance difference between Socket A and socket 754/939 was CRAZY. IMO it's stupid to re-release the same architecture on 3 sockets. s754, s939, now AM2 and more all based on K8? AMD's pulling an intel I think I'm going to wait for the next mainstream socket, as socket AM2 seems to be like the "new" s754 .. or maybe I'll pick up a Conroe when they're released.

Nick

Have you been with your head in the s hit all this time?

For your information:

S754 has been around a long while and will be around for some while to come, what you mean to say is AM2 is the new 939.

Also what do you want? AMD to stick with DDR? That just not realistic.

Conroe.... yeah when it comes, that'll be a while.

I agree that the upgrade costs are high, but if you have a nice high performance 939 system with a PCIe you really don't need to upgrade.
This platform is now mainly aimed at people that now have a 775 system and don't want to wait for Conroe, they only need to upgrade the CPU and the mobo (which is pretty normal when getting a new CPU anyway).

If you now have a 754 or 939 with AGP you'll be in for a world of hurting, you need a new CPU, new mobo, new GPU and new memory... but it'll be worth it.

A new CPU platform has in the past never ment a performance upgrade, but you will have the maximum upgrade time if you get a AM2 system right away.

[BSill]

in any case, spending $800 on a new AM2 platform isn't exactly the cost it'll be... pricing parity is there with S939 on the processor parts and the mainboards will be a little pricey initially.

dave

AM2 3800+ = 500 to 550 bucks (what do u think the fx AM2 will cost man?)
Memory = a decent 2gig set will cost 180 bucks on average
AM2 motherboard = 200 bucks average

thats over 800 right there

my point being that money can be spend differently to obtain a larger performance jump

[ozzimark]

AM2 3800+ = 500 to 550 bucks (what do u think the fx AM2 will cost man?)

same PR ~= same price.

try around $300 for a 3800+ X2

[nn_step]

If quad cores isn't a good enough reason to switch to AM2 I'm not sure what Is.

[BSill]

Oh my bad.

AM2 Proc = 300
Memory = 180 average
Board = 190 average

670 bucks average total
could use it on a second gpu, or a vapo

nn_step - serious question, doesnt intel have quad cores coming out as well?

[Piotrsama]

nn_step - serious question, doesnt intel have quad cores coming out as well?

Not this year, at least not on retail.

[nn_step]

Oh my bad.

AM2 Proc = 300
Memory = 180 average
Board = 190 average

670 bucks average total
could use it on a second gpu, or a vapo

nn_step - serious question, doesnt intel have quad cores coming out as well?

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.