Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Athlon 64 FX or Dual Opteron?

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Video Encoding
  • Opteron
Last response: in CPUs
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 29, 2004 6:03:53 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

I do a lot of video encoding (2 at once sometimes) as well as other
fairly heavy CPU intensive things while encoding goes on. I also do
some GPU/CPU intensive gaming like Far Cry and will likely get into
Doom III. I also use VMWare GSX a lot. I'm considering building...

2-way Opteron 242
(242 is $300 on pricewatch vs. $440 for 244. 2x244 worth the extra
$280?)
Tyan Thunder K8W (S2885)
ATI AIW 9700 Pro (already have one)
WinXP Pro and Suse Linux

What's the difference between Opteron and Athlon other than that
Althon is not SMP capable? Should I go for a single Athlon 64FX or is
dual Opteron better for doing many tasks at once, especially VMWare?
I'm thinking the latter, especially for WinXP.

Please respond to this thread and not email.

Thanks in advance.

More about : athlon dual opteron

Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 30, 2004 3:42:13 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On 29 Mar 2004 14:03:53 -0800, xenophonite@hushmail.com (Xenophon)
wrote:
>I do a lot of video encoding (2 at once sometimes) as well as other
>fairly heavy CPU intensive things while encoding goes on. I also do
>some GPU/CPU intensive gaming like Far Cry and will likely get into
>Doom III. I also use VMWare GSX a lot. I'm considering building...
>
>2-way Opteron 242
>(242 is $300 on pricewatch vs. $440 for 244. 2x244 worth the extra
>$280?)
>Tyan Thunder K8W (S2885)
>ATI AIW 9700 Pro (already have one)
>WinXP Pro and Suse Linux
>
>What's the difference between Opteron and Athlon other than that
>Althon is not SMP capable?

The Athlon64 FX and the Opteron 14x chips are 100% identical. The
only difference between those chips and the Opteron 24x chips is that
the latter are dual capable while the former are not.

> Should I go for a single Athlon 64FX or is
>dual Opteron better for doing many tasks at once, especially VMWare?
>I'm thinking the latter, especially for WinXP.

For multiple tasks at once, dual processors systems will almost always
be a lot better than single processor systems. I don't know how much
VMWare enters into this equation, but it supports multiple processors,
so it's almost certain to work better with two chips than just one.

Now, games are a slightly different case here. Games will almost
certainly be faster with just a single fast processor than two
slightly slower processors. Most games are not multithreaded to any
meaningful amount, and I doubt that we'll see this change for Doom III
or Far Cry (ID has made some noise about multithreading in the past,
but it hasn't lead to much actual performance).

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 30, 2004 1:27:43 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Thanks for the response. I didn't realize Althon FX was identical to
Opteron other than SMP. I thought FX had additional boosts and 64-bit
features of some sort... like a dot release or something like that.

I should have clarified my question though. For what I intend to do
below, would it be better to have a single 3000+ FX (~$800) or dual
1.6ghz Operton (~$300 ea.). Gaming may be the only reason to have a
single faster CPU but will the 1.6Ghz be enough for the most demanding
games coming up? Even though the games are not dual capable, the OS
calls and other services could go to the other CPU so there may be
some benefit with the second CPU.

If it is true that the only difference of FX and Opteron is SMP
capability, I may just go for dual Opteron.

Thanks...


Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote in message news:<v6uh6057oismgmht2h8sqp747hhqpsnfcn@4ax.com>...
> On 29 Mar 2004 14:03:53 -0800, xenophonite@hushmail.com (Xenophon)
> wrote:
> >I do a lot of video encoding (2 at once sometimes) as well as other
> >fairly heavy CPU intensive things while encoding goes on. I also do
> >some GPU/CPU intensive gaming like Far Cry and will likely get into
> >Doom III. I also use VMWare GSX a lot. I'm considering building...
> >
> >2-way Opteron 242
> >(242 is $300 on pricewatch vs. $440 for 244. 2x244 worth the extra
> >$280?)
> >Tyan Thunder K8W (S2885)
> >ATI AIW 9700 Pro (already have one)
> >WinXP Pro and Suse Linux
> >
> >What's the difference between Opteron and Athlon other than that
> >Althon is not SMP capable?
>
> The Athlon64 FX and the Opteron 14x chips are 100% identical. The
> only difference between those chips and the Opteron 24x chips is that
> the latter are dual capable while the former are not.
>
> > Should I go for a single Athlon 64FX or is
> >dual Opteron better for doing many tasks at once, especially VMWare?
> >I'm thinking the latter, especially for WinXP.
>
> For multiple tasks at once, dual processors systems will almost always
> be a lot better than single processor systems. I don't know how much
> VMWare enters into this equation, but it supports multiple processors,
> so it's almost certain to work better with two chips than just one.
>
> Now, games are a slightly different case here. Games will almost
> certainly be faster with just a single fast processor than two
> slightly slower processors. Most games are not multithreaded to any
> meaningful amount, and I doubt that we'll see this change for Doom III
> or Far Cry (ID has made some noise about multithreading in the past,
> but it hasn't lead to much actual performance).
>
> -------------
> Tony Hill
> hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
Related resources
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 30, 2004 3:04:55 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

I'm confused with the memory the Tyan s2885 requires. According to
the manual....
ftp://ftp.tyan.com/manuals/m_s2885_100.pdf

....it says it 'requires registered' memory but that it 'supports ECC'
memory.

Doing a search, it looks like the only registered memory IS ECC
memory. So I'm guessing the board requires ECC. Wonder why it
doesn't explicitly state it that way.




xenophonite@hushmail.com (Xenophon) wrote in message news:<90a8db17.0403291403.1cafcc97@posting.google.com>...
> I do a lot of video encoding (2 at once sometimes) as well as other
> fairly heavy CPU intensive things while encoding goes on. I also do
> some GPU/CPU intensive gaming like Far Cry and will likely get into
> Doom III. I also use VMWare GSX a lot. I'm considering building...
>
> 2-way Opteron 242
> (242 is $300 on pricewatch vs. $440 for 244. 2x244 worth the extra
> $280?)
> Tyan Thunder K8W (S2885)
> ATI AIW 9700 Pro (already have one)
> WinXP Pro and Suse Linux
>
> What's the difference between Opteron and Athlon other than that
> Althon is not SMP capable? Should I go for a single Athlon 64FX or is
> dual Opteron better for doing many tasks at once, especially VMWare?
> I'm thinking the latter, especially for WinXP.
>
> Please respond to this thread and not email.
>
> Thanks in advance.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 30, 2004 4:15:57 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Xenophon <xenophonite@hushmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the response. I didn't realize Althon FX was identical to
> Opteron other than SMP. I thought FX had additional boosts and 64-bit
> features of some sort... like a dot release or something like that.

Caveat: the Opteron 148 and Athlon 64FX both are DDR400 fsb, while the
Opteron 140/142/144 are all DDR333; I can't recall if the 146 is available
in both DDR333 and DDR400 or if it's also DDR333 only.

> below, would it be better to have a single 3000+ FX (~$800)

FX51 (2.2ghz, 1mb) -- the 3000+ is the Athlon64 non-FX, and (2ghz, 512kb,
single channel)

> or dual 1.6ghz Operton (~$300 ea.).

That's a 242, and thus DDR333. Also, bear in mind that the difference
between the $600 total for hte dual 1.6s and the single FX51 will be
swallowed up by the increased cost of a dual-processor motherboard.

You might also want to consider a single Opteron 146, or Athlon 64 3200+

Both sell for around $300, and offer a very significant fraction of the
performance of an Opteron 148 or Athlon 64FX-51.

> Gaming may be the only reason to have a single faster CPU but will the
> 1.6Ghz be enough for the most demanding games coming up?

In the very short run, a 1.6ghz should be fine, although I'd be a lot more

> Even though the games are not dual capable, the OS calls and other
> services could go to the other CPU so there may be some benefit with the
> second CPU.

There is a general perception that there's a slight benefit, but in general
it has not been borne out in

> If it is true that the only difference of FX and Opteron is SMP
> capability, I may just go for dual Opteron.

That's true for the top-speed models; for the slower models, note the FSB
difference. It's probably not that significant, but it's worth considering.

--
Nate Edel http://www.nkedel.com/

"Elder Party 2004: Cthulhu for President -- this time WE'RE the lesser
evil."
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 30, 2004 4:18:52 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Xenophon <xenophonite@hushmail.com> wrote:
> I'm confused with the memory the Tyan s2885 requires. According to
> the manual....
>
> ...it says it 'requires registered' memory but that it 'supports ECC'
> memory.
>
> Doing a search, it looks like the only registered memory IS ECC
> memory. So I'm guessing the board requires ECC. Wonder why it
> doesn't explicitly state it that way.

Registered memory and ECC memory are two different things.

MOST registered memory supports ECC, but there's nothing inherently
preventing someone from manufacturing non-ECC registered memory.

--
Nate Edel http://www.nkedel.com/

"Elder Party 2004: Cthulhu for President -- this time WE'RE the lesser
evil."
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 30, 2004 4:36:16 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

In article <v6uh6057oismgmht2h8sqp747hhqpsnfcn@4ax.com>, Tony Hill
<hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> writes

>The Athlon64 FX and the Opteron 14x chips are 100% identical.

Doesn't the Opteron require registered memory, whereas the A64FX will
work with cheaper unbuffered SDRAM?

--
A. Top posters.
Q. What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 30, 2004 4:44:56 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"Mike Tomlinson" <nospam@nospam.jasper.org.uk> wrote in message
news:whU0P7AwuVaAFw+1@jasper.livjm.ac.uk...
> In article <v6uh6057oismgmht2h8sqp747hhqpsnfcn@4ax.com>, Tony Hill
> <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> writes
>
> >The Athlon64 FX and the Opteron 14x chips are 100% identical.
>
> Doesn't the Opteron require registered memory, whereas the A64FX will
> work with cheaper unbuffered SDRAM?
>


No. Not yet.

--
Derek
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 30, 2004 9:03:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 12:36:16 +0100, Mike Tomlinson
<nospam@nospam.jasper.org.uk> wrote:
>In article <v6uh6057oismgmht2h8sqp747hhqpsnfcn@4ax.com>, Tony Hill
><hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> writes
>
>>The Athlon64 FX and the Opteron 14x chips are 100% identical.
>
>Doesn't the Opteron require registered memory, whereas the A64FX will
>work with cheaper unbuffered SDRAM?

The current revision of the Athlon64 FX requires registered memory as
well, just like the Opteron.

In a few months time AMD plans on switching the Athlon64 FX to a
different socket (socket 939) and at that time it will work with
unregistered memory, among a few other little differences, but for now
it's the exact same chip as the Opteron.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 30, 2004 9:03:14 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On 30 Mar 2004 09:27:43 -0800, xenophonite@hushmail.com (Xenophon)
wrote:
>Thanks for the response. I didn't realize Althon FX was identical to
>Opteron other than SMP. I thought FX had additional boosts and 64-bit
>features of some sort... like a dot release or something like that.

Nope, same exact chips. There's a very minor issue where the first
revision of the Opteron (that went on sale last April) would only work
with DDR333 memory or slower, while the newer Opterons and the
Athlon64 FX work with DDR400 memory, so in that sense I suppose it is
a "dot" release, but so are the Opterons now.

>I should have clarified my question though. For what I intend to do
>below, would it be better to have a single 3000+ FX (~$800) or dual
>1.6ghz Operton (~$300 ea.).

Well the Athlon64 FX 51 runs at 2.2GHz while the Athlon64 FX 53 runs
at 2.4GHz. There is no Athlon64 FX 3000+, I think you might be
confusing the regular Athlon64 line ($150 to $400 or so) and the
Athlon64 FX line ($700 - $800).

> Gaming may be the only reason to have a
>single faster CPU but will the 1.6Ghz be enough for the most demanding
>games coming up?

With a fairly high-end video card, yeah it should be ok for the next
while. Most games are more dependent on the video card these days
than the processor.

> Even though the games are not dual capable, the OS
>calls and other services could go to the other CPU so there may be
>some benefit with the second CPU.

There will be a (very) small benefit here, and things like sound are
sometimes handled by a second thread, however you also lose a little
bit of performance in a dual-processor setup for extra overhead. In
the end the small performance gains you mentioned and the extra
overhead more or less cancel each other out and you get roughly
equivalent performance to a single processor setup.

>If it is true that the only difference of FX and Opteron is SMP
>capability, I may just go for dual Opteron.

If you can afford it, it's a great setup!

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 30, 2004 9:03:14 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 12:18:52 -0800, archmage@sfchat.org (Nate Edel)
wrote:
>Xenophon <xenophonite@hushmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm confused with the memory the Tyan s2885 requires. According to
>> the manual....
>>
>> ...it says it 'requires registered' memory but that it 'supports ECC'
>> memory.
>>
>> Doing a search, it looks like the only registered memory IS ECC
>> memory. So I'm guessing the board requires ECC. Wonder why it
>> doesn't explicitly state it that way.
>
>Registered memory and ECC memory are two different things.
>
>MOST registered memory supports ECC, but there's nothing inherently
>preventing someone from manufacturing non-ECC registered memory.

See, for example, the Corsair TwinX 1024-3200R memory. Registered but
non-ECC. That's the only company that jumps to mind selling non-ECC
registered memory, but it certainly is possible. This stuff should
work just fine with the Tyan board.

Unregistered/unbuffered ECC memory is also quite possible. This stuff
is actually reasonably common and most big memory companies produce
it.

So, long story short, the Tyan motherboard manual is 100% correct in
saying that it "requires" registered memory and that it "supports" ECC
memory.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 30, 2004 10:29:34 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> Nope, same exact chips. There's a very minor issue where the first
> revision of the Opteron (that went on sale last April) would only work
> with DDR333 memory or slower, while the newer Opterons and the
> Athlon64 FX work with DDR400 memory, so in that sense I suppose it is
> a "dot" release, but so are the Opterons now.

Which speeds of Opteron have been released with DDR400 support? The 148/248
are all DDR400 compatible, and I seem to recall there being both DDR333 and
DDR400 versions of the 146/246 but may be wrong. Are there now DDR400
versions of the slower Opterons?

--
Nate Edel http://www.nkedel.com/

"Elder Party 2004: Cthulhu for President -- this time WE'RE the lesser
evil."
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 30, 2004 10:32:30 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> Unregistered/unbuffered ECC memory is also quite possible. This stuff is
> actually reasonably common and most big memory companies produce it.

It was more common than registered, at least in low-end servers of the
pre-DDR SDRAM generations. I've put together a lot of servers using it, and
have never actually bought registered memory, although I have 2x 256mb
PC100/ECC/Registered sticks that were in a Dell I was rebuilding.

--
Nate Edel http://www.nkedel.com/

"Elder Party 2004: Cthulhu for President -- this time WE'RE the lesser
evil."
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 31, 2004 4:10:22 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Nate Edel wrote:
> Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>>Nope, same exact chips. There's a very minor issue where the first
>>revision of the Opteron (that went on sale last April) would only work
>>with DDR333 memory or slower,

A pair of four month old Opty 240's on a Tyan S2885 seems to
handle Corsair PC3200 ECC registered DIMMs just fine.

>>while the newer Opterons and the
>>Athlon64 FX work with DDR400 memory, so in that sense I suppose it is
>>a "dot" release, but so are the Opterons now.
>
>
> Which speeds of Opteron have been released with DDR400 support? The 148/248
> are all DDR400 compatible, and I seem to recall there being both DDR333 and
> DDR400 versions of the 146/246 but may be wrong. Are there now DDR400
> versions of the slower Opterons?
>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 31, 2004 4:16:30 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Xenophon wrote:

> I'm confused with the memory the Tyan s2885 requires. According to
> the manual....
> ftp://ftp.tyan.com/manuals/m_s2885_100.pdf
>
> ...it says it 'requires registered' memory but that it 'supports ECC'
> memory.
>

I've built two systems with the S2885 and helped on
one other, and I also wished that they had explicitly
stated whether or not that it supports registered non-ECC.

However, I have tried 1 GB Corsair registered non-ECC
DIMMs with those S2885 motherboard and they did *not*
work. If I move those same DIMMs and one of the CPUs
to an Asus SK8N motherboard everything works fine, so
I'm reasonably sure it is not the fault of the RAM or
the memory controller on the processor.


> Doing a search, it looks like the only registered memory IS ECC
> memory. So I'm guessing the board requires ECC. Wonder why it
> doesn't explicitly state it that way.

Once in a while you'll find a place that advertises
registered DIMMs without explicitly stating whether
they are ECC or not. In such situations it is always
wise to contact the vendor or manufacturer for
clarification before buying.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 31, 2004 9:26:32 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 18:29:34 -0800, archmage@sfchat.org (Nate Edel)
wrote:
>Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>> Nope, same exact chips. There's a very minor issue where the first
>> revision of the Opteron (that went on sale last April) would only work
>> with DDR333 memory or slower, while the newer Opterons and the
>> Athlon64 FX work with DDR400 memory, so in that sense I suppose it is
>> a "dot" release, but so are the Opterons now.
>
>Which speeds of Opteron have been released with DDR400 support? The 148/248
>are all DDR400 compatible, and I seem to recall there being both DDR333 and
>DDR400 versions of the 146/246 but may be wrong. Are there now DDR400
>versions of the slower Opterons?

Yup. DDR400 support is determined by the stepping of the processor,
not the speed. All chips that are stepping C0 or later, and that's
basically all of them these days, support DDR400. In fact, pretty
much all Opterons should be stepping CG by now, though there may be
some older C0 stepping chips floating around. It's quite unlikely
that there are any of the really original B3 stepping chips left
(these are the chips that do not support DDR400), AMD stopped shipping
those back around August of last year.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 31, 2004 5:52:55 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Thanks much all. I've decided to get 3x512MB Reg-ECC PC3200 rather
than 2x1GB ECC. I hope this memory works...

http://www.acmemicro.com/estore/merchant.ihtml?pid=1894...

Man, getting memory spec'd right gets to be a bit more of a bitch
every year.

Thanks again everyone. I'm ordering the 1.5GB 2x240 Opteron Tyan
system today!





Rob Stow <rob.stow@sasktel.net> wrote in message news:<106ko3rsl0sle8e@corp.supernews.com>...
> Xenophon wrote:
>
> > I'm confused with the memory the Tyan s2885 requires. According to
> > the manual....
> > ftp://ftp.tyan.com/manuals/m_s2885_100.pdf
> >
> > ...it says it 'requires registered' memory but that it 'supports ECC'
> > memory.
> >
>
> I've built two systems with the S2885 and helped on
> one other, and I also wished that they had explicitly
> stated whether or not that it supports registered non-ECC.
>
> However, I have tried 1 GB Corsair registered non-ECC
> DIMMs with those S2885 motherboard and they did *not*
> work. If I move those same DIMMs and one of the CPUs
> to an Asus SK8N motherboard everything works fine, so
> I'm reasonably sure it is not the fault of the RAM or
> the memory controller on the processor.
>
>
> > Doing a search, it looks like the only registered memory IS ECC
> > memory. So I'm guessing the board requires ECC. Wonder why it
> > doesn't explicitly state it that way.
>
> Once in a while you'll find a place that advertises
> registered DIMMs without explicitly stating whether
> they are ECC or not. In such situations it is always
> wise to contact the vendor or manufacturer for
> clarification before buying.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 31, 2004 8:12:26 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Rob Stow <rob.stow@sasktel.net> wrote:
> > Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> >>Nope, same exact chips. There's a very minor issue where the first
> >>revision of the Opteron (that went on sale last April) would only work
> >>with DDR333 memory or slower,
>
> A pair of four month old Opty 240's on a Tyan S2885 seems to
> handle Corsair PC3200 ECC registered DIMMs just fine.

Running at full speed or underclocked? PC3200 will run fine at 166mhz.

--
Nate Edel http://www.nkedel.com/

"Elder Party 2004: Cthulhu for President -- this time WE'RE the lesser
evil."
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 31, 2004 8:31:20 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

In article <vcqj60dev2a1sobiquc9brcd2d5brduh5d@4ax.com>, Tony Hill

>The current revision of the Athlon64 FX requires registered memory as
>well, just like the Opteron.
>
>In a few months time AMD plans on switching the Athlon64 FX to a
>different socket (socket 939) and at that time it will work with
>unregistered memory, among a few other little differences, but for now
>it's the exact same chip as the Opteron.

Thanks. It's tricky keeping up with all these new chip releases.

--
A. Top posters.
Q. What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 31, 2004 11:32:18 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Nate Edel wrote:

> Rob Stow <rob.stow@sasktel.net> wrote:
>
>>>Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Nope, same exact chips. There's a very minor issue where the first
>>>>revision of the Opteron (that went on sale last April) would only work
>>>>with DDR333 memory or slower,
>>
>>A pair of four month old Opty 240's on a Tyan S2885 seems to
>>handle Corsair PC3200 ECC registered DIMMs just fine.
>
>
> Running at full speed or underclocked? PC3200 will run fine at 166mhz.
>

Underclocked, AFAIK. I haven't run any memory test
utilities that report the RAM speed - care to suggest
something I can download and run ? Preferably
one that works with W2K or the 64 bit beta for XP
because I don't have a Linux password for that system.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 1, 2004 1:14:44 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 18:29:34 -0800, archmage@sfchat.org (Nate Edel)
> wrote:
> >Which speeds of Opteron have been released with DDR400 support?
>
> Yup. DDR400 support is determined by the stepping of the processor,
> not the speed. All chips that are stepping C0 or later, and that's
> basically all of them these days, support DDR400.

Sweet. Thanks; I hadn't read that before, and am glad to know it. Are
motherboards up to date enough to run the DDR400 with the older chips?

--
Nate Edel http://www.nkedel.com/

"Elder Party 2004: Cthulhu for President -- this time WE'RE the lesser
evil."
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 1, 2004 2:24:09 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

>Thanks much all. I've decided to get 3x512MB Reg-ECC PC3200 rather
>than 2x1GB ECC. I hope this memory works...
>http://www.acmemicro.com/estore/merchant.ihtml?pid=1894...
>Man, getting memory spec'd right gets to be a bit more of a bitch every year.
>... I'm ordering the 1.5GB 2x240 Opteron Tyan system today!

[1] please do not top-post ...
[2] Opterons really require DIMMs in pairs. On some motherboards a single
DIMM will work, but not you won't be getting anywhere near top speed.
Both CPU's needs to have a pair (for best results, two pairs) for the
opterons to be running at its best.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 1, 2004 2:24:10 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

by@moscito.org wrote:
>>Thanks much all. I've decided to get 3x512MB Reg-ECC PC3200 rather
>>than 2x1GB ECC. I hope this memory works...
>>http://www.acmemicro.com/estore/merchant.ihtml?pid=1894...
>>Man, getting memory spec'd right gets to be a bit more of a bitch every year.
>>... I'm ordering the 1.5GB 2x240 Opteron Tyan system today!
>
>
> [1] please do not top-post ...
> [2] Opterons really require DIMMs in pairs. On some motherboards a single
> DIMM will work, but not you won't be getting anywhere near top speed.
> Both CPU's needs to have a pair (for best results, two pairs) for the
> opterons to be running at its best.

I was wondering if he'd made a typo and intended to say ...
"I've decided to get *4*x512MB Reg-ECC PC3200 rather than 2x1GB ECC.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 1, 2004 9:44:47 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 21:14:44 -0800, archmage@sfchat.org (Nate Edel)
wrote:
>Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 18:29:34 -0800, archmage@sfchat.org (Nate Edel)
>> wrote:
>> >Which speeds of Opteron have been released with DDR400 support?
>>
>> Yup. DDR400 support is determined by the stepping of the processor,
>> not the speed. All chips that are stepping C0 or later, and that's
>> basically all of them these days, support DDR400.
>
>Sweet. Thanks; I hadn't read that before, and am glad to know it. Are
>motherboards up to date enough to run the DDR400 with the older chips?

They might need a BIOS update, but yeah, they should all be up to date
enough to run DDR400 on all current Opterons.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 1, 2004 9:44:48 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 21:14:44 -0800, archmage@sfchat.org (Nate Edel)
> wrote:
> >Sweet. Thanks; I hadn't read that before, and am glad to know it. Are
> >motherboards up to date enough to run the DDR400 with the older chips?

> They might need a BIOS update, but yeah, they should all be up to date
> enough to run DDR400 on all current Opterons.

Thanks. We're still figuring things out, but we should be getting 4-5
desktops plus a dualie server in the next few months, and this makes the 146
a _lot_ more attractive for the desktops -- I'd be running on the assumption
that we had to jump to the 148 or 64FX to get the 400FSB.

--
Nate Edel http://www.nkedel.com/

"Elder Party 2004: Cthulhu for President -- this time WE'RE the lesser
evil."
!