Jump on AM2?

[WGruener]

So, here we are. AMD has released AM2 processors top to bottom.

And, we hear, while 939 processors will still be able, the company "encourages" system builders to quickly transition to AM2.

Is it time time to buy an AM2 motherboard - or perhaps a completely new system? Or do you guys wait for the Core 2 Duos?

Looking forward to your posts.

Wolfgang

 

[dvdpiddy]

Nah i'd wait a bit.

 

[liquidpaper007]

pretty much the same stuff no need to change.

 

[SumDumGuy]

By the look of things, AM2 isn't quite the upgrade everyone was expecting. From a performance standpoint, it looks as though Conroe will indeed have the upper hand, at least for the time being.

If you plan on upgrading your PC and are intent on keeping it for the next 2-3 years, there's no real benefit by going to AM2. While the AM2 platform was designed with scalability in mind, I'm willing to bet that there will be a new socket interface by then.

This is disappointing in some ways on AMD's part, because more was expected with the AM2 launch, but I wouldn't be surprised to see AMD follow up with something better in the coming months.

Bottom line, if a socket 939 solution fits your needs, go for it.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

If people are out there looking for a brand new computer I say go for AM2. However, I currently own a Athlon 3200+ socket 939 rig. I do not plan to jump on AM2. I plan to snag a fast dual-core chip at the end of this year when prices will start to drop.

AM2 sounds exciting, I've been waiting for AMD to come out with some new hardware.

 

[Spikke]

I personally see no reason to upgrade to AM2 right now if you have a good rig. I am personally waiting for Core 2 Duo's release. However, I don't plan on building a new system till beginning of next year anyway, so I'll see what will happen by then, k8l by then? I can hope.

 

[dvdpiddy]

Thats what i'm saying.

 

[Blackadderames]

No point. Performance increase for the cost isn't there. If you are buying a new machine, sure take a hard look at it, but no need to upgrade from an existing AMD to get to the AM2. AMD's initial plan to bipass DDR2 was probably a good one. This just shows they are in Intel's wake. Meaning, Intel sets the standard, AMD executes better and improves upon the standard. AMD shines for a bit, then Intel comes back in with newer and better. I'm drunk - dont mind me.

 

[jaguarskx]

This is disappointing in some ways on AMD's part, because more was expected with the AM2 launch, but I wouldn't be surprised to see AMD follow up with something better in the coming months.

Why are you disappointed? AMD has stated there will not be any performance difference between AM2 and socket 939. They were not lying.

However, faster Athlon 64 X2 will only be released for socket AM2. For example the X2 5000+ and FX-62.

I am personally waiting for Conroe. I'll probably build a PC around within 2 or 3 month of its release for sale to the general public. I know I may run into some motherboard stability issues, but by then my PC will be nearly 5 years old.

 

[dvdpiddy]

This is disappointing in some ways on AMD's part, because more was expected with the AM2 launch, but I wouldn't be surprised to see AMD follow up with something better in the coming months.

Why are you disappointed? AMD has stated there will not be any performance difference between AM2 and socket 939. They were not lying.

However, faster Athlon 64 X2 will only be released for socket AM2. For example the X2 5000+ and FX-62.

I am personally waiting for Conroe. I'll probably build a PC around within 2 or 3 month of its release for sale to the general public. I know I may run into some motherboard stability issues, but by then my PC will be nearly 5 years old. Thats what i'm gonna do cause why should i buy am2 for no performance increase?

 

[Bluefinger]

Meh, looks like a socket revision rather than a big upgrade. However, this only makes me more keen on AMD's upcoming 65nm processors, since AM2 in theory provides better scalability and performance. All in all, I'm gonna keep my eye on AM2 whilst the other focuses on seeing how good Conroe really is and how expensive it will be.

 

[mat347]

I agree with the consensus, there is no speed improvement, so unless you are building a new CPU in the next few months there is no need to "upgrade". My next purchase will be in the GPU department anyway...G80/R600...chop chop!

Intel's new hardware shows promise, but I think I'll stick with AMD simply because they have people like me (who upgrades subsystems at a time) in mind. Intel seems to go thru sockets and chipsets like undies, very frustrating for the "todays hardware tomorrow" people.

 

[Muso]

Socket AM2 will be great once the next generation of processors come out.

 

[nottheking]

Well, for myself, since I already promised myself that my current system, which has just reached its 2-year-old point, will be what I use until 2008, or possibly late 2007; I've already sketched out that the processor I'll get next will be quad-core, not dual-core. So yes, that might be quite a ways to hold onto my (already ageing) A64 2800+/X800XT, but that's the way it is.

From the perspective I'd take if I was just about anyone else, I'm not positively thrilled by AM2. As AMD themselves seem to have mentioned, there's no real performance gain to be seen; you'd have to use DDR2-667 memory to equal the performance A64 users are used to with DDR-400.

In reality, I only see AM2 yielding performance gains when faster memory becomes standard; DDR2-800 does already exist, but it's out of the price range for many people. DDR2-1066 would be even better, but THG, as I believe, has shown that no brands live up to that promised speed.

In short, I'd have to say that for people out building a new system already, AM2 would likely be the better choice; it will definitely keep your upgrade options wider, and if you can afford a lot of money for RAM, you might see a bit of increase there. But for those of us with a system that's been doing fine for us already, this is a place to hold. Conroe does look intriguing, but personally, it isn't enough of a reason to scrap your current machine either, unless you've got a Prescott.

 

[unreal111]

i was reading the review for am2 on anandtech website...

and at the end they wrote this:

"... AMD does have one last trick up its sleeve before the end of the year, and you will hear about it in June. It's not K8L and it's not going to affect the majority of people, but it is an interesting stop gap solution for the high end in 2006..."

^ what do you guys think what is it??

 

[cooler_power]

If people are out there looking for a brand new computer I say go for AM2. However, I currently own a Athlon 3200+ socket 939 rig. I do not plan to jump on AM2. I plan to snag a fast dual-core chip at the end of this year when prices will start to drop.

AM2 sounds exciting, I've been waiting for AMD to come out with some new hardware.

Are you drunk or you didn't hear about Core 2 Duo :?: :lol:

 

[AmaruK]

core duo 2, no ifs ands or buts

 

[Cabletwitch]

Interesting.

AM2 hasnt been what everyone was expecting, but assuming AMD hold true to their word, and stick with AM2 for at least 2 or more years, then it could be a good idea to go for that platform if yu want to ensure long-term compatability. Intel seem to think that every processor revision needs a new chipset, but as we've seen from the 939 platform, thats not really needed.

The lower TDP of the AM2 platform is also welcome, and I can see this trend continuing, if all goes well. Smaller HSF's and quieter fans are ALWAYS welcome. The addition of DDR2 support is a bit of a gamble, seeing as it doesnt really provide much over existing DDR400 setups, but again, we can but wait.

Then again, seeing as I cant afford to upgrade, I'm going to have to stick with my aging 2800+ and nForce2 mobo for the time being. I know I'll be going for 939 when the prices drop, unless something amazing happens with AM2 by then. Also, Conroe might be the all-singing, all dancing proc currently, but its expensive, and even though it sounds good, I dont actually want one.

*Cue Flames from Intellian Fanboys*

 

[nottheking]

i was reading the review for am2 on anandtech website...

and at the end they wrote this:

"... AMD does have one last trick up its sleeve before the end of the year, and you will hear about it in June. It's not K8L and it's not going to affect the majority of people, but it is an interesting stop gap solution for the high end in 2006..."

^ what do you guys think what is it??

That is indeed puzzling, I'll have to admit. I wonder how it could possibly be a "high-end solution" of sorts if it "won't affect the majority of people." That would imply that it will be some sort of change that won't affect all AM2 chips.

To hazzard a guess, it might be yet another 90nm core modification. Or, possibly, they might try going to extremes with power efficiency, and then clock an FX chip yet higher; I've been wondering when they'd hit 3.0GHz, when 2.6GHz was possible through 130nm. (the Clawhammer FX-55)

 

[SumDumGuy]

This is disappointing in some ways on AMD's part, because more was expected with the AM2 launch, but I wouldn't be surprised to see AMD follow up with something better in the coming months.

Why are you disappointed? AMD has stated there will not be any performance difference between AM2 and socket 939. They were not lying.

However, faster Athlon 64 X2 will only be released for socket AM2. For example the X2 5000+ and FX-62.

I am personally waiting for Conroe. I'll probably build a PC around within 2 or 3 month of its release for sale to the general public. I know I may run into some motherboard stability issues, but by then my PC will be nearly 5 years old.

I realize that this is pretty much what AMD had promised, and I'm not knocking them for it. But with all the time and expense that has gone into the development of the AM2 platform, they should have just waited a bit longer to ensure they had a product that could compete with Conroe, then make the shift to AM2.

In the long run, yes, the switch to AM2 is a beneficial one, but as was speculated, AMD will be playing catch-up for the next little while.

Also, to touch on your point about the X2 5000 and the FX-62, this doesn't really matter to the mainstream market. To pay the premium for these 2 CPUs AND switching platforms for only a 7% performance increase is a waste for those looking to upgrade now. Why didn't they just take an X2 4800 and FX-60 and clock them even higher for the S939 platform, because that's all the 5000 and FX-62 essentially are?

Make no mistake, the move to AM2 is a good one, only the timing is off.

 

[FITCamaro]

I'm planning to build a new system in the next week or two. Not planning to go to AM2. DDR2-800 with 4-4-4-12 timings is $240-280 for 2 1GB sticks while I can get DDR500 for $180. The only thing I like is the new features of the NForce590. This EPP memory and bus accelerator feature for its graphics cards sounds interesting. Plus the 6 SATA channels (i like lots of hard drives).

I'm intrigued by Core 2 Duo I just don't want to wait until July. What is the supposed street date for Core 2 Duo for us mere mortals who buy parts at newegg.com? Is it in June or July? If its June 15th or so I might wait, otherwise its gonna be an Opteron 170 at 2.5GHz. Plus then again I'm affected by DDR2-800 prices.

 

[wsbsteven]

Interesting.

AM2 hasnt been what everyone was expecting, but assuming AMD hold true to their word, and stick with AM2 for at least 2 or more years, then it could be a good idea to go for that platform if yu want to ensure long-term compatability. Intel seem to think that every processor revision needs a new chipset, but as we've seen from the 939 platform, thats not really needed.

You compare a chipset with a socket set which is apples and oranges. AMD has used Socket A, Socket 775, Socket 939, and now a modified version of Socket 940 for AM2. Intel has used the short lived 423, 479, and 775. So AMD has changed the socket more times than Intel even though the P4 is older than the Athlon XP series.

Now yes, Intel has created new chipsets for products but the boards aren't proprietary to the cpus that caused their release. Just make sure you compare apples to oranges.

 

[wsbsteven]

Intel seems to go thru sockets and chipsets like undies, very frustrating for the "todays hardware tomorrow" people.

As I said in my above post, AMD has more sockets than Intel but Intel has released more chipsets but the chipsets allow for newer technology but still support older chips on the same socket.

 

[Panzerzero]

Like Tank from Mad TV says Paaaasss. No AM2 in my CPU thank you.

 

[SumDumGuy]

Like Tank from Mad TV says Paaaasss. No AM2 in my CPU thank you.

It's probably best to stay away from AM2 for the time being. It's a pity that AMD couldn't find a way to boost AM2 more in terms of speed, because HyperTransport had such great performance with first-gen DDR, and many expected that a similar feat could be accomplished with the move to DDR2.

Again, don't count AM2 out completely, it will just take some time until AMD makes the shift to 65nm and we start to see the real benefits of the new platform.

For those looking for an AMD-based upgrade today, stick to S939.