Which Architecture?

[Kooda]

I'm looking at buying a new box in Feb. It will need to med-high end, as I am doing 3D CAD/modeling/rendering. I reckon I will be spending around £600 (box only, no optical drives). I have been an AMD man since day 1.

The issue I have is over the upgradability of certain architectures. It seems AMD are pushing the 64bit thing, which is fine except that the technology is very new & prohibitavely expensive, which leads me to think that faster socket A processors may not be in the pipeline. Ie if I buy an athlon system I may not be able to upgrade it beyond a XP3200 with out a mobo swap. Has anybody heard what AMD's plans are in this regard?

As much as I hate the Idea of buying an Intel CPU, It looks like they are talking of 4gz in the next year. Does this mean it will be on the 478 pin format & I will be able to buy a cost effective CPU soon & upgrade to a 4gz later with the same mobo?

The P4 EE looks damn fast, but again is cost prohibitive, but is it a glimpse of the possable future of the P4 architecture?

A P4 based system is going to cost me a bit more for the mobo/CPU, is this upfront cost worth it for potential upgradability? or do I save the dosh & get the cheaper AMD setup in the knowledge that I will be buying a new (64 bit) Mobo/CPU in a yr from now?

Id like to hear you opinions on the above.
Thanks.

[TazUk]

That's a very difficult question to answer without the benefit of a crystal ball :D A lot I guess depends on how often you upgrade your PC, if it's every 2-3 years then pretty much all the current platforms, with the exception of the AMD64, will be discontinued by then. If it's around a year then socket 478 should still be around but it's unlikely AMD will want to keep socket A going that long. As to when socket A processors will stop being released, that's really dependant on how well AMD64/Opteron sells. Availability and price are the two major influences on that which are in turn related to what kind of yeild levels AMD are getting. The higher the yeild the lower the cost of manufacter, which in turn means a lower street price.

[master baits]

There really is no comparison mate , im an amd fanboy myself but therealtime (non gaming) enviroment does benefit from the other camp I'm afraid.Intel p4 and a decent motherboard is the only way to go , most cad pakacages are optimised for p4 instuctions that the amd chips simply do not have.

[TazUk]

Originally posted by master baits
...most cad pakacages are optimised for p4 instuctions that the amd chips simply do not have.

By that I assume you mean SSE, which all the latest AMD CPU's have, or SSE2, which the AMD64's and Opterons have :confused:

[master baits]

the dont have ht and if I remember correctly they dont have full sse or sse2 implementaions at all and the amd native sets have never really been implemented readdily into apps(wintel consiracy), I like amd but really p4 if going to be used for intensive computations is the only real way to go , the compile times simply justify the extra bucks coupled with higher busspeeds and higher rate ram it is the only true way to go shaving 50 percent off times compared with a simmilar say amd 3200xp.Fifty percent is a huge saving not always acheived.

Even then if the cpu is mated to a pretty ruff mobo and ram anything is knobbled be it amd or intel , I will however stick with p4 and on a newer board with good ram is the guys best bet.

The 64 bit cpus unless using a 64 bit os from the off is pretty much usless also (meaning running in 32bit mode not 2 pipes of 32 bit), the guy wants cheap ,realitively powerful and affordable now.

If you want the most for your bucks mate in the work enviroment ie faster render times use what the software you will use is optimised for NOW , that means xp corp with sp1a , a p4 ht and at the higher fsb and no more than a gig of good 2ns or better ram , there is really no comparison to using a processor not yet fully viable nor supported in the app enviroment like the 64 bits its a bit like a super car engine and fitting it to deisel and into a smartcar if you dont.

[slartiBardfarst]

athlon xp's get a new core design middle of next year which could mean a new socket design.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,51_104_608,00.html

intel have a new core out early next year for the p4 and no doubt they will pull their trick of altering the socket slightly making everyone get a new board at the same time.
they also doubt they will be releasing another extreme edition in the future.




if it was me i would go with an athlon64. as you can see form their roadmap above, it is going to be the top end of the desktop market which is what you are after. if you go into the workstation\server bracket then prices start to get silly.
athlon 64 is a new design and so will have a lot of life left in it. the current crop of p4's are reaching the limits of the design and actually produce more heat than the amd equivalents.

also, if you go 64bit you have the option to run a 64bit os like linux64 so you can take advantage of the technology. there are also 64bit versions of most of the big CAD packages.

there is no doubting that 64bit is the future, just for most people the price and lack of software makes them rather pointless at the moment. for you, price is still an issue but 64bit CAD software would show big benefits.
if you don't want to run linux, there will be a 64bit windows xp pretty soon, and even if you don't want to run that, the athlon64 can run 32bit code just as fast, if not faster than current athlon xp's

athlon64 has FULL SSE and SSE2 despite what has been said along with HyperTransport to improve the FSB speeds.

[mrochester]

And as this is something you are looking to buy in February next year, Win64 will be ever closer and prices will have dropped. The socket 939 version of the AthlonFX should be around by then too meaning that if you spend a bit more to start with, you'll have something that lasts much longer (and of course it wont require registered memory).

Michael.

[Tom]

This is a tricky one to answer, and the main reason is that all the current sockets will be going relatively quickly.

The P4 will be moving to a new socket, to accomodate the Prescott line of P4 (however long that will last, is a mystery), so their upgradibilty is currently, very limited.

Also, there's very recently been a BIG change in the AMD roadmaps (or at least what people know of them), being that now BOTH the Athlon 64, and the 64 FX will be migrated to Socket 939, so both will be Dual Channel.

To keep a distance in performance, the vanilla 64 will get half its cache taken away.

The Socket A chips (Athlon XP) will be migrated to the 754pin design, and fill the low-end/budget market that AMDs famous for.

I have no clear idea about the Opteron, but I do not think it'll be deviating from the Socket 940 configuration, so to be quite honest I do believe this is the way to go for upgradability. The Hammer cores scale extremely well and AMD have many more chips lined up in the Opteron range.

I've recently read an article showing a Dual Opteron setup kicking the spots off of a Dual Xeon setup, on 32bit apps! A pair of 246's would really provide the muscle you need.

That's my 2 pence anyway.

[slartiBardfarst]

but with a budget of £600?

you may just be able to buy a single opteron for that but not 2 and not the necessary board, memory, graphics card........

[JADS]

Intel is moving to the LGA-775 socket for the new Prescott processors next year. In fact it is likely even Prescotts released in the 478 design will not run on most current P4 motherboards due to power and heat specifications. A similar move is to be expected for Nocona/Potomac the Prestonia/Gallatin replacement (current Xeons, also the EE P4 [which is packaged in the S478 format]).

As has already been said the Athlon FX is moving to Socket 939 and maybe the Athlon 64 to. This would cut the Socket 754 shelf life to a matter of 1/2 a year before it was outdated, similar with the FX.

Athlon XP is essentially being discontinued slowly, with it first taking over the budget line and then when 64 production prices drop it will dissapear entirely. It is highly likely that the socket A format is essentially a dead end now.

[Tom]

Originally posted by JStormont
Athlon XP is essentially being discontinued slowly, with it first taking over the budget line and then when 64 production prices drop it will dissapear entirely. It is highly likely that the socket A format is essentially a dead end now.

It will be killed off, rather quickly too I expect. AMD is keen to get everything running with HyperTransport.

Like I said though, the Athlon XP architecture will be re-packaged to work in a 754pin configuration, and will probably retain the budget sector that AMD is incredibly famous for. They need something to put there!

In modification to my original reply, I'd like to add that a Dual Opteron setup is a bit optimistic on a £600 budget, but even a single Opteron would be a better choice (with upgradability in mind as well as performance) than an Intel solution.

[JADS]

Originally posted by Tom Hill
In modification to my original reply, I'd like to add that a Dual Opteron setup is a bit optimistic on a £600 budget, but even a single Opteron would be a better choice (with upgradability in mind as well as performance) than an Intel solution.

From DABS
AMD Opteron 240 1.4Ghz 1Mb S940 Box £185.00 inc VAT
AMD Opteron 242 1.6Ghz 1Mb S940 Box £269.99 inc VAT AMD Opteron 244 1.8Ghz 1Mb S940 Box £388.00 inc VAT
AMD Opteron 246 2.0Ghz 1MB S940 Box £665.00 inc VAT

From Rainbow-IT
AMD Opteron 246 2.0Ghz 1MB S940 Box £817.10 inc VAT

For the Operton a dual CPU motherboard is sensible,
From Rainbow-IT
Tyan Tiger K8W £200.34

Memory has to be ECC Registered
From Rainbow-IT
Kingston 512MB PC 2700 ECC Registered DDR RAM £112.41

For 3D CAD work need a card designed for the task,
From DABS
PNY Quadro 4 380XGL 64MB AGP RP £155.00 inc VAT

So adding up the other system components we get a price of
£467.75

Which leaves £132.25 for the CPU, so add a base 1.4GHz Operton and you have a total of £652.75. Prices should drop a bit between now and Feb though.


EDIT: I do apologise quoting other sites prices, but I don't think any of this stuff can be sourced from Kustom ;)

[MetalStorm]

JStormont has pretty much summed it up, though I don't know if he mentioned that Intel will be moving to socket T in late 2004 - for the Tejas core, so new upgrades all round again there.

One other thing - Athlons of any variety might not have the advantages of Hyper threading or a very fast bus but they do compare well, some things they don't do so well in - for example audio conversion, and some video encoding, but they are good chips - the FX 51 wouldn't be the fastest desktop CPU in the world if AMD sucked...

[JADS]

Originally posted by MetalStorm
JStormont has pretty much summed it up, though I don't know if he mentioned that Intel will be moving to socket T in late 2004 - for the Tejas core, so new upgrades all round again there.

Socket T is Socket-775 based on a Land Grid Array. Introduced first on Prescott then continued with Tejas. Nehalem after Tejas is apparently a new architecture entirely and not Netburst (Willamette - Tejas).

[MetalStorm]

Thanks for that JStormont, I was aware that prescott would be the first Socket T chip, and that Nehalem would be a completly new architecture, however, one question - what does socket T bring to the table, is it just for DDR2 (or 3) and PCI-E?

[blackstar]

Originally posted by master baits
the dont have ht and if I remember correctly they dont have full sse or sse2 implementaions at all and the amd native sets have never really been implemented readdily into apps(wintel consiracy), I like amd but really p4 if going to be used for intensive computations is the only real way to go , the compile times simply justify the extra bucks coupled with higher busspeeds and higher rate ram it is the only true way to go shaving 50 percent off times compared with a simmilar say amd 3200xp.Fifty percent is a huge saving not always acheived.

Even then if the cpu is mated to a pretty ruff mobo and ram anything is knobbled be it amd or intel , I will however stick with p4 and on a newer board with good ram is the guys best bet.

The 64 bit cpus unless using a 64 bit os from the off is pretty much usless also (meaning running in 32bit mode not 2 pipes of 32 bit), the guy wants cheap ,realitively powerful and affordable now.

If you want the most for your bucks mate in the work enviroment ie faster render times use what the software you will use is optimised for NOW , that means xp corp with sp1a , a p4 ht and at the higher fsb and no more than a gig of good 2ns or better ram , there is really no comparison to using a processor not yet fully viable nor supported in the app enviroment like the 64 bits its a bit like a super car engine and fitting it to deisel and into a smartcar if you dont.
it has SSE and SSE2, it doesnt have HT but then again, HT does not really benefit many apps at all.
the hammer chips are often faster then P4's/ EE even without HT in some apps.
64 bit has nothing to do with 2 pipes, at all, its 9IPC either 32 or 64 bit.
if you like AMD's, you should know about the 64bit linux tests carried out testing FPU operation, in 64bit the hammer shows anything up to 3 times performance in encoding/ FPU apps, which is worth something for a raytracer (FPU task).
the A64/ FX is faster in 32bit then the P4/ EE, so who cares if the 64 bit is not yet supported? it will be, unlike Intel's 64 bit instructions.

edit - why do you keep mentioning FSB? its irrelevant, whereas performance isnt... the P4 needs FSB, cos of its hugely long pipeline - the FX51 has faster memory buses, a completely seperate 1600MHz system bus, and much lower latency.
1600MHz plus 800MHz memory (dual channel controller) is more then 800MHz P4 bus, if that actually matters.

i really think you should read this http://discuss.futuremark.com/forum/showflat.pl?Cat=&Board=techmobocpu&Number=2975480&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=1

[Tom]

Originally posted by blackstar
[url]i would save money, or wait for the A64 3000+ to arrive soon. it is already available in short quantity in the US, should be here soon.

I've already stated that the A64 (non FX) will be switching to socket 939 shortly, along with the FX, and he wanted upgradability! :p

MetalStorm: AMD do not *need* hyper-threading. Hyper-Threading is nothing more than a little gimmick Intel tapped on. Sure, it gives a little bit of a performance increase, by enabling multi-threading on the CPU to increase efficiency. Basically using up the processing power it should've been using since the P4 was launched. It's all PR these days, however...

The performance enhancements in the AMD chips are the reason why they don't need to clock their chips anywhere near as high as the P4 -- The AMD enhancements, actually work all the time.

[slartiBardfarst]

it makes no difference really because no matter what you buy there is a limit to how far you can upgrade it. new features come along that become standard such as HT and dual channel (ddr2, gddr3 next year) which you need a new board to take advantage of. just because you can put a brand new chip in an 12 month old board doesn't mean it will work particularly well.

i don't really think he was that bothered to begin with anyway as he never replied to anyone’s comments. :rolleyes:

[JADS]

Originally posted by Tom Hill
MetalStorm: AMD do not *need* hyper-threading. Hyper-Threading is nothing more than a little gimmick Intel tapped on. Sure, it gives a little bit of a performance increase, by enabling multi-threading on the CPU to increase efficiency. Basically using up the processing power it should've been using since the P4 was launched. It's all PR these days, however...

SMT is not a gimmick, it is a method for improving the efficiency of the CPU by completing more at once. In fact Athlons would probably benefit more than the Pentium 4 from SMT, due to the large number of executive units featured in the core. Not all are in use at one time (especially the FPU units). SMT would allow different threads to be scheduled on the CPU simultaneously greatly improving Athlon efficiency.

[blackstar]

Originally posted by Tom Hill
I've already stated that the A64 (non FX) will be switching to socket 939 shortly, along with the FX, and he wanted upgradability! :p

MetalStorm: AMD do not *need* hyper-threading. Hyper-Threading is nothing more than a little gimmick Intel tapped on. Sure, it gives a little bit of a performance increase, by enabling multi-threading on the CPU to increase efficiency. Basically using up the processing power it should've been using since the P4 was launched. It's all PR these days, however...

The performance enhancements in the AMD chips are the reason why they don't need to clock their chips anywhere near as high as the P4 -- The AMD enhancements, actually work all the time.
you already stated it, i disagree. here is the latest roadmap.

for his budget, the FX is too expensive.

AMD are not completely switching over to 939 pin for some time yet, 754 is supported until Q304, and probably into 2005.

the shortest lived socket for home users will be the 940 socket, although Opterons should be available for some time to date they have not been clocked so highly as the FX.

http://www.theforumisdown.com/uploadfiles/1203/amd_2004_roadmap.jpg

[Tom]

Originally posted by blackstar
you already stated it, i disagree. here is the latest roadmap.

for his budget, the FX is too expensive.

AMD are not completely switching over to 939 pin for some time yet, 754 is supported until Q304, and probably into 2005.

the shortest lived socket for home users will be the 940 socket, although Opterons should be available for some time to date they have not been clocked so highly as the FX.


Your image is dead.

However, I disagree. That was the case not too long ago, but there have been very, very recent developments in the AMD roadmaps, which I've already out-lined. All Athlon 64's, will be socket 939 (around the Q104 time), and the Opteron will (even though it's not been stated) more than likely stay in socket 940 because it was always meant to use ECC Registered RAM. AMD had problems with people using XP's in MP motherboards -- I'm sure they don't want that again.

The XP is a tricky one. I've understood up till now that it'll be coverted to the 754pin socket, as it would make sense to get some extra power into their budget line. However, I don't think it'd be cost-effective for AMD to do this. Time will tell, but I don't think you'll be seeing XP's around by 2005.

It's a shame this guy hasn't replied. I sent him a PM, but no response! The reason I suggested an Opteron though, was because I don't see the socket changing -- There's no reason to do it, so it's the most future-proof solution going right about now.

[blackstar]

image works here Tom. maybe you have browser problems - try clearing internet cache.

this is the absolute latest roadmap, and replaces the previous one of a few weeks ago.
if you are using the one @ www.amd.com, you must be aware that this does not include many of their chips..

perhaps your firewall is blocking the image?

can anybody else see it? i have it in a sticky @ futuremark, no complaints yet.

he could run opterons, it would prolly be better for CAD if it supports SMP - but not for the reason that the 754 socket is dying immenently certainly, its going to be current for pretty much as long as any other board bought now is.
considering, in 14 months, any current board is going to be fairly obselete (and 754 may still be supported, the roadmap does not go that far into the future).

the only consideration is budget. the FX is not affordable with his budget. two Opterons is not either, unless he has some registered RAM. he *may* be able to use his current RAM with an A64, but has not replied yet so we don't know.

what would i do personally? id wait for 939 pin, but not because you say 754 pin is about to snuff it. its not, certainly not next year.

join AMD forums and double check to put your mind at rest.

[mrochester]

I can see it...

[blackstar]

irrelevant for CAD, but interesting anyway:

http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=60000267

[Tom]

Originally posted by blackstar
image works here Tom. maybe you have browser problems - try clearing internet cache.

this is the absolute latest roadmap, and replaces the previous one of a few weeks ago.
if you are using the one @ www.amd.com, you must be aware that this does not include many of their chips..

perhaps your firewall is blocking the image?

can anybody else see it? i have it in a sticky @ futuremark, no complaints yet.

he could run opterons, it would prolly be better for CAD if it supports SMP - but not for the reason that the 754 socket is dying immenently certainly, its going to be current for pretty much as long as any other board bought now is.
considering, in 14 months, any current board is going to be fairly obselete (and 754 may still be supported, the roadmap does not go that far into the future).

the only consideration is budget. the FX is not affordable with his budget. two Opterons is not either, unless he has some registered RAM. he *may* be able to use his current RAM with an A64, but has not replied yet so we don't know.

what would i do personally? id wait for 939 pin, but not because you say 754 pin is about to snuff it. its not, certainly not next year.

join AMD forums and double check to put your mind at rest.

Ok, firstly, the image is not completely dead, I was being a bit vague there. The server's actually throwing back an 'Oi, you can't hot-link that' image. So, there's nothing wrong with my browser cache.

Secondly, I don't even bother looking at the AMD roadmap, it's not always updated accordingly, and they don't always put everything on it. There are rough plans on there, not specific details -- No company is going to give all their secrets away for people to peruse at their leisure, now are they? I gain my information from the nice people at The Inquirer, who (in my long-winded experience) constantly produce accurate insider-info about the marketing directions of large chip companies.

http://theinquirer.net/?article=13019

That might back-up some claims I've been making.

As for socket 754, the article mentions 'Athlon XP', in the same sentance. It would make a great deal of sense!

[blackstar]

hotlinking from www.theforumisdown.com is not allowed? its a free image hosting site :)

file URL -> http://www.theforumisdown.com/uploadfiles/1203/amd_2004_roadmap.jpg

you would see it is *much* more detailed then the publicly released one. no comment...

754 is supported, in that map up to 3700+, which is mentioned as being available in both 754 and 939 pin and listed as becoming available in Q304.

if you cant see it, its not the web hostings fault.

the inquirer are incorrect IMHO.

the Inquirer say:
If you buy a 939 board with one memory channel, and an FX chip, you potentially lose half your RAM bandwidth, and the reason you spent the extra $300. Someone must be Crank-y with this marketing gem.

they posted some very confusing and negative stuff when AMD originally went 64 bit, about the socket types..

Xbit labs and extremetech (and that korean roadmap) completely disagree with that being able to happen - next years roadmap and AMD sources mentioned in those two articles indicate all 939pin is dual channel. to clarify, that means 939 pin FX (suppose they mean san diego).
so why would single channel 939 pin boards exist, if no chips do? that wouldnt be AMD condoned - IMHO it would be very bad indeed for scam sellers.

its illogical for AMD to build it, and even harder to sell without confusion, even if those two articles are wrong.

"ClawHammer 940-pin – 1MB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, made at 0.13 micron SOI nodes.
ClawHammer 939-pin – 1MB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 0.13 micron SOI nodes.
Newcastle 939-pin – 512KB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 0.13 micron SOI nodes.
Winchester 939-pin – 512KB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 90nm SOI nodes.
San Diego 939-pin – 1MB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 90nm SOI nodes."
Xbit labs

[Tom]

Originally posted by blackstar
haha, the Inquirer is one of the most innacurate sites available...

If you believe that, fine, but I've been reading that site for over 2 years and they've always been able to provide accurate information before anyone else.

AMD's, Intel's, Via's, Sun's and countless other companies marketing departments; HATE The Inquirer because they are journalists that constantly find out, and print what these companies do not want us to know!

If you want to trust a marketing deparment, please go and work with one first.

Money... Money.... Money... Money. I swear that's what they say with every exhalation.

[Edit: After putting some effort/interest into that image, it actually says 'Thisforumisdown.com uploader is not available for this site' -- So, I honestly do not believe it's my fault.]

[blackstar]

here is an alternate image site:

http://webpages.charter.net/tates/MO/amd_2004_roadmap.jpg

http://www.technoa.co.kr/content/powerreview/event/2003amdreseller/_autozoom_06.JPG

there is a thread about it here (note - on front page roadmap was removed/ edited to hide details - i dont think its meant to be available yet)
http://discuss.futuremark.com/forum/showflat.pl?Cat=&Board=techmobocpu&Number=3102949&page=&view=&sb=&o=&vc=1

the roadmap was found on a korean website, and validate by AMD. there are some good links about it in that thread..

[TazUk]

I'd have to agree about The Inquirer, some of it's true, some rumour and the rest pure speculation. Same goes for The Register too, Mike Magee's former employers.

[blackstar]

Xbit - labs have some news, thought i'd post it here..

"To summarize the facts known about desktop AMD64 products, there will be no 64-bit processors with single-channel DDR controller in AMD lineup introduced after the Q2 2004. Moreover, all Socket 939 microprocessor are expected to feature 1000MHz HyperTransport bus; it effectively means that all AMD64 processors will begin to get faster bus starting from early Q2 2004." so thats the last 754 pin CPU then, the 3700+.

good stuff about bus speed :D

6 - 7 months, being able to upgrade to the 3700+.

the last 940 pin is the FX53 (according to Xbit using AMD sources), which is released @ the same time.

performance difference between the 3700+ and FX53 ? dont know.

"ClawHammer 940-pin – 1MB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, made at 0.13 micron SOI nodes.
ClawHammer 939-pin – 1MB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 0.13 micron SOI nodes.
Newcastle 939-pin – 512KB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 0.13 micron SOI nodes.
Winchester 939-pin – 512KB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 90nm SOI nodes.
San Diego 939-pin – 1MB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 90nm SOI nodes.
ClawHammer 754-pin – 1MB L2 cache, single-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 0.13 micron SOI nodes.
Newcastle 754-pin – 512KB L2 cache, single-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 0.13 micron SOI nodes.
Paris 754-pin – 256KB L2 cache, single-channel memory controller, 32-bit only, made at 0.13 micron SOI nodes.
Barton 462-pin – 512KB L2 cache, 32-bit only, made at 0.13 micron nodes."

[JADS]

Of course this is entirely speculation ;)

Also I should mention that no matter how zealous fanboyism is it doesn't shift chips. That is all the counts in the end.

[johnwibble]

PCI Express should be on the scene next year. This is a radical change to the motherboard and it's components (rather like the change from ISA slots to PCI and AGP). This will mean that the fastest and newest graphics cards will also be using the PCI Express architecture. This will offer massive bandwidth increases for every device. PCI Express is an Intel baby so it is inevitable that it will be the next standard.
I'm leaving my next motherboard purchase until this is released to see what happens.

[blackstar]

Originally posted by JStormont
Of course this is entirely speculation ;)

Also I should mention that no matter how zealous fanboyism is it doesn't shift chips. That is all the counts in the end.
it certainly works for Intel :p

*resist*..
SMT would allow different threads to be scheduled on the CPU simultaneously greatly improving Athlon efficiency. HT on Athlon would not greatly improve Athlon efficiency, notice how it doesnt greatly improve netburst (and thats an architecture thats perfectly suited to it - long pipes benefit a lot from HT as the P4 spends so much time off - task).

[Tom]

Originally posted by blackstar
Xbit - labs have some news, thought i'd post it here..

"To summarize the facts known about desktop AMD64 products, there will be no 64-bit processors with single-channel DDR controller in AMD lineup introduced after the Q2 2004. Moreover, all Socket 939 microprocessor are expected to feature 1000MHz HyperTransport bus; it effectively means that all AMD64 processors will begin to get faster bus starting from early Q2 2004." so thats the last 754 pin CPU then, the 3700+.

good stuff about bus speed :D

6 - 7 months, being able to upgrade to the 3700+.

the last 940 pin is the FX53 (according to Xbit using AMD sources), which is released @ the same time.

performance difference between the 3700+ and FX53 ? dont know.

"ClawHammer 940-pin – 1MB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, made at 0.13 micron SOI nodes.
ClawHammer 939-pin – 1MB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 0.13 micron SOI nodes.
Newcastle 939-pin – 512KB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 0.13 micron SOI nodes.
Winchester 939-pin – 512KB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 90nm SOI nodes.
San Diego 939-pin – 1MB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 90nm SOI nodes.
ClawHammer 754-pin – 1MB L2 cache, single-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 0.13 micron SOI nodes.
Newcastle 754-pin – 512KB L2 cache, single-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 0.13 micron SOI nodes.
Paris 754-pin – 256KB L2 cache, single-channel memory controller, 32-bit only, made at 0.13 micron SOI nodes.
Barton 462-pin – 512KB L2 cache, 32-bit only, made at 0.13 micron nodes."

You don't trust The Inquirer, but now you've just posted up information from Xbit, that The Inquirer were saying weeks ago?

The Inq wasn't as specific, but that's insider-info for you.

The performance difference between the 3700+ and FX53 will more than likely (assuming they're clocked at the same speed) be about the same as it would be now. The Athlon 64 is having one half of its cache taken away, in return for a dual-channel memory bus. Losing half a dozen of one, and gaining 6 of the other.

I'm sure geeks the world over will be waiting to see if they can un-lock the disabled cache.

John: I was never aware of the fact that Intel are anything to do with PCI Express? They're adopting it, yes, because AGP hasn't got much headroom left, but I was under the impression that http://www.pcisig.com/home represented a collabrative effort by many companies -- not just Intel.

[blackstar]

the inquirer are not being very accurate @ the mo.

its either a case of waiting, getting the 754 (operons = out of budget, so is FX), or getting an Intel chip. simple..

for cad, he wants dual CPU really - but cant afford it.
so, its single CPU (3200+ or 3000+ A64 754 IMHO), cheaper MP CPU (not opteron), or something im really suprised hasnt been mentioned - a single Opteron in a dual CPU board which supports 1 CPU operation (until another can be bought).

edited - i was OTT..

[slartiBardfarst]

geek fight.........geek fight.........geek fight....

listen to what you guys are arguing about. lol :D
i know a bit about computers but what you 2 have been quoting makes no sense to me and has no importance to 99% of people. who knows what will happen, not even AMD will entirely. they could decide to stop making chips altogether and move into farm machinery for all we know. what's the point in arguing over pin configurations then. :)

it was a simple question as to the best bit of kit £600 could get him without it be obsolete 12 months later. FX51's and opterons were never an option due to cost.

let it go, you'll live longer :)

[blackstar]

FX51's and opterons were never an option due to cost.
fair comment.

[mrochester]

I don't know if I've lost the plot here... but this is what I've come up with.

Dual Socket 940 from Komplett - £165
1 x Opteron 240 - £211
512MB Registered memory - £92

That leaves only £120 for everything else which is probably a bit too tight, but if you can save some extra pennies it would be well worth having the option to add another Opteron in the future. And as it seems Opteron will be sticking with socket 940, you wouldn't have that worry either.

Michael.

[johnwibble]

Tom Hill
I was assuming that Intel are the major force behind it to be honest, as they tend to want to be the "big boys" in any kind of development ;)

[Tom]

Yeah, they are generally the first people behind something they see a future in, and PCI Express is very un-doubtedly the future as far as GFX cards go.

But, nVIDIA, ATi, VIA and AMD are allllllllllllllllllll pushing it through as much as Intel! Intel just likes making a big song & dance about anything. They thrive on PR, remember... ;)

Slarti: What do you think us geeks do, other than quarrell over the smallest things? :p

We love nothing more than to teach others our (personally undisputed) knowledge of technical jiggery-pokery, but when another geek is encountered, a battle forms. This is know as a 'Geek War'... :p

[slartiBardfarst]

:D

[johnwibble]

I do hope when the PCI Express boards come out that they will drop the absolutely useless floppy channel ! Just a waste of space as far as I'm concerned.

[MetalStorm]

Originally posted by mrochester
I don't know if I've lost the plot here... but this is what I've come up with.

Dual Socket 940 from Komplett - £165
1 x Opteron 240 - £211
512MB Registered memory - £92

Michael.

The only thing wrong with that rig is it seems pretty underpowered, the 240 opteron is only running at 1.4GHz, is the motherboard able to overclock, if it is then I would recommend the 240. I know you are on a budget, but when you upgrade, won't you HAVE to get another 240 opteron?

[markn]

Originally posted by JStormont

From Rainbow-IT
AMD Opteron 246 2.0Ghz 1MB S940 Box £817.10 inc VAT

For the Operton a dual CPU motherboard is sensible,
From Rainbow-IT
Tyan Tiger K8W £200.34



EDIT: I do apologise quoting other sites prices, but I don't think any of this stuff can be sourced from Kustom ;)

I too apologise to kustom but as stated they don't stock opteron gear. Does anyone have experience with Rainbow-it. I am thinking of getting a couple of opteron 240's plus a tiger k8w from them. Or any other srecommended stockists.


Mark

[Tom]

CPU City, http://www.cpucity.com stock a nice range of CPUs and motherboards.

If all else fails, you could try http://komplett.co.uk or http://novatech.co.uk. All the companies above have past the Tom test of certified customer support (of which a score out of 10 is awarded, Kustom receiving 11 ... </sneak>), but watch out for Komplett's delivery charges.

I've never even visited the Rainbow-IT site though, has anyone else had experience with them?

MetalStorm ... The Opterons are by no means under-powered. And, as any follower of the CPU times will tell you, the Megahurtz myth is truly upon us. AMD introduced the PR ratings of their chips, to prove that it's not just megahurtz that account to a fast chip!

As the optimisations go up, AMD can drive the clock speed down. Which, in the long run, is really going to shoot Intel in the back. I've read a story today saying that Tejas (suspected P5) samples are running at 150w! That's high. Intel are going to have to work hard to keep the heat down, whilst ramping the clocks up.

Long live AMD :D

[mrochester]

Yes, it is over at www.anandtech.com that they have some pictures and info. on Tejas. They suspect that the 150w power requirement is due to there being multiple processor on the chip :D AMD still woop their ass any day tho!


Michael

[markn]

Originally posted by Tom Hill
CPU City, http://www.cpucity.com stock a nice range of CPUs and motherboards.

If all else fails, you could try http://komplett.co.uk or http://novatech.co.uk. All the companies above have past the Tom test of certified customer support (of which a score out of 10 is awarded, Kustom receiving 11 ... </sneak>), but watch out for Komplett's delivery charges.



Thanks for the suggestions. However, no luck with the tyan k8w at these shops. Anyone else seen the tiger k8w advertised at a good dealer?

Thanks

Mark

[jsterling]

you can now get an athlon 64 3000 fot £170, 3200 for £200 and a suitable motherboard should set you back about £90. Add 1GB DDR £130, 2*120GB HDDs in raid £140, 9600xt £120.
That'll give you a good fast system