Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AM2 Performance Preview

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 10, 2006 11:58:56 AM

In case anyone missed it... here's an AM2 performance preview...

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=273...

For now I still prefer AMD, but this platform is really making me think about my next system purchase.

"The disheartening news for AMD and its fans alike is that if AM2 can't offer significant performance increases over what we have now, then all Intel has to do is execute Conroe on schedule, delivering the performance we've been promised and 2006 will be painted blue."
April 10, 2006 12:31:39 PM

I don't understand....why new socket and new much more expencive memory for the same architecture...looks like AMD are going to suicide....
Bye-bye K8, bye-bye AMD...
April 10, 2006 12:41:24 PM

Points to fanboy sign that says Intel for gOJDO.

We can point this out. Intel had the same problem other cpus. let take a look at the frist P4 vers p3. Also Northwood .130nm to .090nm Presscott. So Both Intel and Amd has there ups and downs. Which helps US. In prices which gOJDO dose not know anything about.
Related resources
April 10, 2006 1:16:09 PM

Quote:
Points to fanboy sign that says Intel for gOJDO.

We can point this out. Intel had the same problem other cpus. let take a look at the frist P4 vers p3. Also Northwood .130nm to .090nm Presscott. So Both Intel and Amd has there ups and downs. Which helps US. In prices which gOJDO dose not know anything about.

First of all, being a fanboy means that you are stupid uneducated person with stereotypic point of view. I don't feel I have any of this propreties.
I was using Intel until Athlons came in to play. Than I switched to AMD, more becouse of their CPU prices, and less becouse the performance(P3s were so close to the Athlons). I prefer AMD now, but I am disapointed of what(i mean the greater prices for the same things I already have and nothing else) they are going to bring for the new AM2 systems.
Anyway, the topic was about AM2 K8, so talking against Intel as rival of AMD that have nothing with this topic makes me think that you are fanboy of AMD. P4 was the biggest mistake Intel ever made, I wonder if AMD will make the same big mistake with AM2 and trying to reach 3GHz.

Yes both AMD and Intel has ups and downs and I don't care about them as much as they don't care about me and my budget. I am just buying what gives me more pefrormance for less money and I never buy the top models which are for the rich fanboys.
I will not buy AM2 system with the same K8 architecture, whether is 90nm or 65nm.
April 10, 2006 1:28:41 PM

I don't think that AMD is going to die. I believe that this new socket and using DDR2 is a mistake personally because they are still using the old core. Anyways they are not going to die because Intel MAY have a faster chip. We need to wait until productions starts before comparing them anyways.
April 10, 2006 2:09:19 PM

maybe AMD is merely keeping a tested and true core to ensure the AM2 platform is stable - remember that since AMD doesn't make chipsets, they must rely upon 3rd party vendors (Nvidia, Ati, Via) to make the actual chipsets. Bringing out a very stable CPU to a new platform will ensure that all problems are ironed out before they launch a new core for said AM2 platform.

If you remember, Athlon's coming out was hampered by the lack of chipsets (AMD had to provide, very reluctantly, a 750 chipset no better than a 440BX). Intel had platform problems too, when they tried to provide low-cost systems when their chipsets supported only Rambus (MTH and its memory corruption).

What would be most devastating for AMD? Having good but not-quite-the-best chips to try out platforms and manufacturing processes with, or having the best chips on systems that can't run reliably?

While AMD isn't as solid financially as Intel, remember that Intel kept all of us waiting for YEARS for a correct chip to replace Netburst with - so AMD making us wait for some time for a new chip, selling us Athlons (they can't be THAT bad, can they?) in the mean time, may just not be that hard to understand. Remember K6?
April 10, 2006 2:22:06 PM

No the Athlon 64 isn't that bad, I want to get one of the X2 ones. You might be right, maybe they will test this new platform with tested CPU's then develope a new core for it later on, I don't know. But what I do know is AMD is not going to die from it like I see alot of people saying.

I do see one good comming out of it, AMD will no longer have two socket standards. That might help them out because first time builders won't have to find out or ask questions about the different sockets.

Personally I hope that AM2 brings the prices down on the S939 so I can get one cheaper when I upgrade later this year.
April 10, 2006 3:08:19 PM

Quote:

First of all, being a fanboy means that you are stupid uneducated person with stereotypic point of view. I don't feel I have any of this propreties.
I was using Intel until Athlons came in to play. Than I switched to AMD, more becouse of their CPU prices, and less becouse the performance(P3s were so close to the Athlons). I prefer AMD now, but I am disapointed of what(i mean the greater prices for the same things I already have and nothing else) they are going to bring for the new AM2 systems.
Anyway, the topic was about AM2 K8, so talking against Intel as rival of AMD that have nothing with this topic makes me think that you are fanboy of AMD. P4 was the biggest mistake Intel ever made, I wonder if AMD will make the same big mistake with AM2 and trying to reach 3GHz.

Yes both AMD and Intel has ups and downs and I don't care about them as much as they don't care about me and my budget. I am just buying what gives me more pefrormance for less money and I never buy the top models which are for the rich fanboys.
I will not buy AM2 system with the same K8 architecture, whether is 90nm or 65nm.


You may not have that view, but did you even read the article? Intel did the same thing AMD is doing now, they just did it earlier. DDR2 didn't do shit for intel when they did it, and its not doing much for AMD either. This whole thing isn't some ploy to get you to buy new stuff to replace your 939 dumbass, they're building an upgrade path. Pull your head out of the sand long enough to realize that they're not even marketing it as a performance boost.

And no, I'm not a fanboy, I don't even own an AMD.
April 10, 2006 3:15:19 PM

Quote:
In case anyone missed it... here's an AM2 performance preview...

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=273...

For now I still prefer AMD, but this platform is really making me think about my next system purchase.

"The disheartening news for AMD and its fans alike is that if AM2 can't offer significant performance increases over what we have now, then all Intel has to do is execute Conroe on schedule, delivering the performance we've been promised and 2006 will be painted blue."


Well, this maybe true but let's take a look at the past. When Intel started using new types of memory, it had performance problems of its own. I think AMD maybe having problems now but, they will get em worked out and we'll see performance gains. AMD wouldn't be switching to AM2 without cause.

Just like anything that comes out, it may have bugs that any manufacturer needs to fix. We can't judge a book by it's cover and can only judge it once we get to the last page.
April 10, 2006 4:09:31 PM

Quote:
No the Athlon 64 isn't that bad, I want to get one of the X2 ones. You might be right, maybe they will test this new platform with tested CPU's then develope a new core for it later on, I don't know. But what I do know is AMD is not going to die from it like I see alot of people saying.

I do see one good comming out of it, AMD will no longer have two socket standards. That might help them out because first time builders won't have to find out or ask questions about the different sockets.

Personally I hope that AM2 brings the prices down on the S939 so I can get one cheaper when I upgrade later this year.

Athlons are good and the best for desktop now, but what we have now is architecture pushed to its limits that can't peform better with improvisations like unoptimized DDR2 controler. Anyway, even if the controller was optimized like the DDR one on the s939/s754/s940, there would be no significent performance boost becouse the K8 architecture is not starving for more memory bandwidth. s939 have double the bandwith of s754 and it is about 5% faster on the same clock.
You are wrong about the sockets. There are 3 different sockets now, and when AM2 and socket F(1207) arrives there would be 5 different sockets for the same architecture. Consider that s754 is still in the game, there are new chips with the Venice core for this socket.
AMD will not die, but they will lost almost all what they achieved with K7 and K8 on the desktop arena. Considering that Intel chips are better and are leading the mobile computers, AMD will be better only for the servers due to HTT and its links.

Quote:
You may not have that view, but did you even read the article? Intel did the same thing AMD is doing now, they just did it earlier. DDR2 didn't do **** for intel when they did it, and its not doing much for AMD either. This whole thing isn't some ploy to get you to buy new stuff to replace your 939 dumbass, they're building an upgrade path. Pull your head out of the sand long enough to realize that they're not even marketing it as a performance boost.

And no, I'm not a fanboy, I don't even own an AMD.

I found nothing new in the article, there were many articles and reviews made for sAM2 saying the same. And do you read the topic?
Put you head deeper in the sand and continue thinking that they are building an upgrade path.
Anyway the memory no matter if it is EDO, DDR2, XDR or whatever type of memory does nothing. It is the chip that uses it, northbridge, ondie memory controller, graphics core or whatever.
What AMD should do in order to find the expencive DDR2 usefull is to optimize(aka Intel Core architecture Smart Memory Access technology) their integrated controller or to remove it and let the chipset manifacturers do that like they did for K7.
What I don't understand is why they are forcing to bring new socket for the old architecture that will rise their system prices giving no improvements and loosing on the price/performance factor which is most important for consumers. I think that they should cancel AM2 and improve the K8 architecture before they transit to DDR2.
April 10, 2006 5:51:48 PM

Yes there will still be the other sockets, but there won't be any more chips designed for them. I have also read that Socket F is going to be for the Opteron processors, and most 1st time builders won't buy one of these.

EDITED for spelling
April 10, 2006 6:00:45 PM

I don't get this though about not developing new chips for at least 939.

in fact, i don't know why we needed a new socket. it seems almost weird.

socket 939 has 939 pins.

AM2 has 940 pins.


does that ONE pin reallymake a huge difference for DDR2 over DDR?

why couldnt they have kept the same socket and added the neew memory controller to the existing socket 939.

I understand when they went from 754 to 939 they were adding a shitload of pins to add more way for data to get to the CPU due to dual channel memory.

but aside from faster ram. what difference does the DDR2 have that required a whole new socket?

it seems like AMD wants to force people to upgrade to the AM2 platform for some other reason.
April 10, 2006 7:22:47 PM

Here is something funny too:

940 pins -> 939 pins -> 940 pins
April 10, 2006 7:24:44 PM

mpasternak, it wouldn't exactly work well if you tried to stick a DDR 939 chip into a DDR2 board now would it? It couldn't communicate with the memory at all.

As far as the sockets go, its not really different from what intel had going at the time they did the switch either. They had the socket 478 (they made prescotts for them), LGA775 and (if you're going to roll server chips into it, since P4's and Xeon's are about the same difference level as Athlons and Opterons in terms of core, not socket) the 604 Xeon socket. AMD will have the 939, AM2 and the socket F (they're NOT going to keep making stuff for the 754, and it'll be sketchy whether or not they'll maintain the 939).

I do think they should have at least put the K8 on 65nm and do some optimization on the chip before they did this because the cost isn't justified based on the info right now. I personally won't be buying one, not until I can see what they're going to do after the first set of AM2s. Hopefully their turn-around time will be shorter than intel's when they switched to DDR2 to the point where they could get real performance gains on that setup. What was that, about a year ago or so? It'll be close to a year and a half since the advent of the 775 socket until conroe, I hope AMD can best that number...
April 10, 2006 7:32:42 PM

Theaxemaster is right, they probably added that extra pin on to prevent people from using a DDR Athlon 64 with a DDR2 Athlon 64 motherboard since the memory controllers are built into the CPU. If the memory controller was on the motherboard they could do it. I wonder if someone will try putting an AM2 processor in an old s940 to see what happens.
April 10, 2006 8:36:04 PM

Quote:
Theaxemaster is right, they probably added that extra pin on to prevent people from using a DDR Athlon 64 with a DDR2 Athlon 64 motherboard since the memory controllers are built into the CPU. If the memory controller was on the motherboard they could do it. I wonder if someone will try putting an AM2 processor in an old s940 to see what happens.

damn...DDR2 won't fit in DDR slot and vice versa! So there is no need for changing the socket to prevent idiots to damage the hardware that should be kept away from them.
sAM2 processor will not fit without breaking few pins in s940. It is not for idiots also.
I really don't understand the point of transition to DDR2. If they plan to improve the current K8 architecture than they should do it before complicating our lives with useless new sockets and expencive memory that performs slow on their architecture. Anyway, they can ship K8s cores with DDR2 controller on all their existing sockets s754, s939 and s940.
April 10, 2006 8:49:16 PM

:roll:

I hate to say this..

but it sounds like they are pulling an... "intel stunt"

:oops:  <--runs.. flees.. hides..
April 10, 2006 9:09:44 PM

they change the socket to be sure no one will plug a DDR2 CPU in a DDR motherboard - that's sensible.

Pulling an Intel: actually, pretty much, yes - however last time Intel did something similar, we were given a bazillion sockets, even more core revisions, add a layer of translated SDRAM support/native SDRAM support from the chipset, voltage differences... At one time you even had to be sure bout the revision your board was to be sure your brand new P4 wouldn't fry!

I think AMD's 940->939->different 940 (AM2) pin at least prevent these mistakes. And it's not as if it's really complicated:
754: for low-cost chips (being slowly fazed out)
939: for present high-cost consumer chips and low-cost server chips, IS REPLACED by AM2
940: for present high cost server chips. should be replaced by AM2 too if I'm not mistaken - and 4/8-way Opterons actually go the DDR2 way.
April 10, 2006 9:22:26 PM

Quote:

754: for low-cost chips (being slowly fazed out)
939: for present high-cost consumer chips and low-cost server chips, IS REPLACED by AM2
940: for present high cost server chips. should be replaced by AM2 too if I'm not mistaken - and 4/8-way Opterons actually go the DDR2 way.

s754 chips are only few % cheaper than the s939 ones. A month or two ago, new s754 chips were shiped with the Venice core. Low-cost Semprons are shiped for this socket(they don't need that much bandwidth).
s939 is for normal-cost and high-end desktops. The sAM2 will be for "low-cost" and performance-dektop systems but those systems will be cost much more while there is only expencive high latency DDR2.
s940 will be replaced with socket F(or s1207) which is planed for server chips.
April 10, 2006 9:24:59 PM

Quote:
I don't understand....why new socket and new much more expencive memory for the same architecture...looks like AMD are going to suicide....
Bye-bye K8, bye-bye AMD...


..i think someone calready called u stupid but i will continue on that path to prove u wrong


1 DDR2 isnt any more expensive than normal DDR RAM

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E1682...

Corsair 1 GB DDR2 91 bucks

so before posting next time use google
April 10, 2006 9:50:09 PM

DDR2-667 is as cheap as DDR400 yes, but it is expensive when looking at DDR2-800 FOR NOW. By June/July that could very well change. Anandtechs review is again pre-mature. In January AM2 was worse than 939 by about 8%, now they are showing that its about 2-3% faster in what 3months. So in 3 months there has been a 10% increase in performance. If we see another 10% increase in performance by July when the chips will be ready then it will be faster than 939 in all cases and with Quake 4, it would be about 15% better. Now thats complete specualation, but I do know that performance increases will be seen with new MB drivers/bios. I certainly recall a large change in performance from one bios to another on some gigabyte and asus boards. Yes I know that according to everything the socket is actually compatible with todays MB chipsets so no real revamping has to take place, but I do think there will be some room for improvment coming soon.

Intel like to jump early, when AMD thinks its too soon. Intels jump to DDR2 was way too soon, as was their jump on RD-Ram back in the early P4 days. Now that DDR2 manufacturing is cheaper, and a performance increase is feasible, AMD is coming on board. Yes AM2 isn't gonna show a big difference right away, but shortly, when you can get DDR2-1000 for the prices of 800 now, you will begin to see the change. Remember that Intel can't handle the full bandwidth of DDR2, while AMD can. Also OCing will be an issue when it starts to affect memory bandwidth. AMD will still be better at handling the higher bandwidth associated with 1:1 memory timings. Intel has a great product on the horizon when it comes to numbers but remember this is a new architecture, while AM2 is just a socket change. When AMD decides to come out with the K8L or the K9 THEN we "should" see the larger difference in performance. Basically as I see it, Intel will own the desktop FPS crown in Oct/Nov but then possibly conceed it as early as Feb 07 as the K8L comes out. We shall see, but thats not a long period of crownage for Intel.
April 10, 2006 9:55:48 PM

Quote:
..i think someone calready called u stupid but i will continue on that path to prove u wrong


1 DDR2 isnt any more expensive than normal DDR RAM

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E1682...

Corsair 1 GB DDR2 91 bucks

so before posting next time use google

Tell me more about me being stupid.....I don't feel like I will prove you something....

Now go back to google and search for DDR2 800MHz CL4 memory prices.
You will need 2 modules if you want your new AM2 to perform almost same as the s939 with DDR400 CL2.
April 10, 2006 10:33:33 PM

let me tell u more, might i add ur a dumbass


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E1682...


now u take me for a dumbass too obviously, you dont need DDR2 800Mhz to run an AM2 system, u can run am AM2 system off DDR2 533Mhz, so once again you are proven wrong and u should just shut ur trap because you have no clue what you're talking about

for a 20 dollar difference you will get alot faster RAM

when was 20 dollars as you said earlier "much more expencive memory"

you are stupid, let me rephrase that for your supposed brain which is actually a ganglia smaller than that of an earth worms' , you stupid, hopefully your "brain" can retain the 2 words i stated
April 11, 2006 12:54:11 AM

The problem is not someone trying to put DDR2 in a DDR slot, the problem is with the built in memory controller on the CPU. If the CPU is made for DDR2 then it wont work with a DDR motherboard and vise-versa.
April 11, 2006 7:06:09 AM

He probably fried a stick of SDR-SDRAM in a DDR socket when he forced it in with a hammer and pushed the ON button...

By the way, a good PC133 SDRAM stick with very tight timings could kick an original DDR stick's pants off. However, a good DDR400 stick has nothing in common with said original stick - runs twice as fast frequency-wise, and timings too. Give DDR2 some time to mature, it'll blow your face off.
April 11, 2006 10:55:39 AM

Quote:
let me tell u more, might i add ur a dumbass


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E1682...


now u take me for a dumbass too obviously, you dont need DDR2 800Mhz to run an AM2 system, u can run am AM2 system off DDR2 533Mhz, so once again you are proven wrong and u should just shut ur trap because you have no clue what you're talking about

for a 20 dollar difference you will get alot faster RAM

when was 20 dollars as you said earlier "much more expencive memory"

you are stupid, let me rephrase that for your supposed brain which is actually a ganglia smaller than that of an earth worms' , you stupid, hopefully your "brain" can retain the 2 words i stated

It is not enough to use bad language if you want to insult someone. The truth sometimes hurts, but you are far away from it.
You don't know anything about me and the way you are talking makes me think that you will need 2 more lives in order to understand some things about the life, to learn the things I know and to achive what I have achieved at my age of 24. But that is another discussion that shouldn't be a subject on public forum.
Tell me this:
1. What is the difference between SDRAM at 200MHz, DDR at 400MHz and DDR2 at 800MHz?
2. How K8 architecture performance benefits of the L1 and L2 cache size and latency and bandwidth, freqfency and latency of the used RAM?
3. What do you think, what OS will be most used at the end of this year and 2007. How much RAM it will need for fluent work on performance-desktop systems?

I found these prices using your source:
1. Kingston HyperX 1GB 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM Unbuffered DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) System Memory - Retail: 144.83$(289.66$ for two sticks. This is the less expencive DDR2-800CL4 I found)
2. Crucial Technology Ballistix 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM Unbuffered DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit System Memory - Retail: $340.00

3. OCZ 2GB (2 x 1GB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM Unbuffered DDR 400 (PC 3200) Dual Channel Platinum System Memory - Retail: 190.99$
4. G.SKILL Value Series 2GB (2 x 1GB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM Unbuffered DDR 400 (PC 3200) Dual Channel Kit System Memory - Retail: 182.99$

So, 340$ or 290$ is much more than 191$ or 183$.

My point was other, but I am afraid that you don't get it, Pengwin.
If you don't understand what you are buying, than you might be tricked and pay at least 100$ more for the same thing.


Have a nice day my friend
!