DID AMD DELIBERATELY DELAY ATHLON 64 DDR-II?

[9-inch]

Read the whole story here:
http://theinquirer.net/?article=30155

...Although almost every motherboard manufacturer exhibiting on SnowBIT is showing a Socket AM2 motherboard, the fact is that the CPUs were not delayed, but the new and improved memory controller is being placed into the marchitecture.

 

[MadModMike]

Read the whole story here:
http://theinquirer.net/?article=30155

...Although almost every motherboard manufacturer exhibiting on SnowBIT is showing a Socket AM2 motherboard, the fact is that the CPUs were not delayed, but the new and improved memory controller is being placed into the marchitecture.

/me awaits the Intel Fanboy flames...

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[ltcommander_data]

Contrary to people's beliefs, I'm not going to flame you.

I just found that article a little bit rich, especially since it was The Inquirer themself who first reported that AM2 was delayed because of a memory controller bug.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29776

The thing is, does this mean that there was never a memory controller bug? If there wasn't I'd be very interested to see an alternative explanation of why the AM2 system evaluated by THG performed so poorly other than "THG rigged it".

Just thought I might also point out that just yesterday Anandtech reported that the memory controller does exist and persist.

http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2709

The second spin of the AM2, widely called DVT or DeVelopmenT, combined with the latest NVIDIA MCP55, Rev. A02 or the ATI RD580, is widely reported to bring AM2 performance very close to Socket 939 levels. The earlier EVT chip fell far short of Socket 939 performance levels.

It appears that an issue remains with the latest DVT AM2 in that single channel and dual-channel memory performance are virtually the same on the latest DVT spin. If this is corrected, AMD may finally see the performance gains that they told the industry to expect with the move to AM2 and DDR2. Another AM2 spin is expected in the next few days, and until performance is more representative of the final shipping product, AMD likely does not want benchmarks leaving the wrong impression.

It's only my speculation of course, and I've said it previously but it's possible that there was a memory controller bug with the original DDR2 667 memory controllers. Since AMD had to delay to fix it anyways, they probably just took the opportunity to finalize DDR2 800 support. DDR2 800 was always supposed to come to AM2 anyways, it was just a matter of whether it would be available at launch.

 

[hergieburbur]

I think its more the memory controller bug as well. I have been mentioing that everytime someone mentions AM2's poor benchmark results as if they were going to stay that way.

FTR, I am not usually that impressed with the Inquirer as a source of info.

 

[qurious69ss]

I don't know if they are having bug issues, but if they have a working AM2 board, they should demo it now that the press is watching.

 

[Action_Man]

Why? If its underwhelming they shouldn't show it until its finished and ready to rock, which is what they're obviously doing.

 

[scoobertscoobydoo]

beta drivers...


when crossfire was first out, the reviews looked like crap, heck 2 were slower then one. but when the drivers were updated, now its about as fast as sli.

so with AM2 beta VS. release we will see a big diff.

 

[3Ball]

My computer plays games?

Antec NeoHE 550w PS
DFI Lan Party UT NF4 Ultra
AMD Athlon 3700+ Sandy @ 2.8ghz (10x280) - "Arctic Freezer 64"
2gb (2x1gb) Patriot Performance Memory (2-3-2-5)
ATI Original X1900XTX
Creative XF-I
(2x120gb WD SATA II HD's) - Raid 0