Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Another 4x4 topic...8-)

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 10, 2006 9:54:15 AM

Enlighten me, what's the difference between this, and just getting a multi cpu board and shoving some opterons on it? Obviously AMD will 'tweak' some things, or at least claim to.

There's an old saying, that goes "you can't polish a turd" the turd being the FX cpu's which are not going to match intel's core2's on raw speed.
I just can't figure out who 4x4 is aimed at...

More about : 4x4 topic

October 10, 2006 10:47:10 AM

We have an expert about 4x4 here on THG, its inventor, known as BaronMatrix. He'll explain everything you need to know about 4x4, also by listening to him you'll get extra discount and get the 4x4 setup for half price and get a his free CD of AMD country music.
October 10, 2006 11:36:24 AM

Basically there is no difference between 4x4 and any other server or workstation board. Programs and operating systems that can take advantage of four cores should see performance increases with a Socket 4x4 chipset system. The 4x4 socket is supposed to help AMD compete with Intel, which launched its new Conroe desktop microprocessors in late July 2006 and will launch its multi-chip module quad-core Kenstfield in early 2007 as the Intel QX6700.

In each socket will reside an AMD Athlon 64 FX CPU. Each socket will be connected using AMD's Direct Connect Architecture, which provides a dedicated channel between the CPU cores and from each CPU out to the system memory. Due to the nature of the Direct Connect architecture, each CPU can access the other's dedicated memory store.

All you are paying for is a board and CPU's that are aimed at gaming.



More heat, more power, same thing as the Kentsfield, with the exception that you can probably progress to octal cores. You essentailly buying a server system, that can game.
Hope this helps.
Ninja
October 10, 2006 12:03:45 PM

Quote:
We have an expert about 4x4 here on THG, its inventor, known as BaronMatrix. He'll explain everything you need to know about 4x4, also by listening to him you'll get extra discount and get the 4x4 setup for half price and get a his free CD of AMD country music.


ANd you'll also get instructions on how to make gojdos life revolve around your every word. Talk about a bargain.
October 10, 2006 12:07:32 PM

Quote:
We have an expert about 4x4 here on THG, its inventor, known as BaronMatrix. He'll explain everything you need to know about 4x4, also by listening to him you'll get extra discount and get the 4x4 setup for half price and get a his free CD of AMD country music.


ANd you'll also get instructions on how to make gojdos life revolve around your every word. Talk about a bargain.
Seriously, do the two of you ever turn it off? Not one time can the two of you be on one thread, and someone isn't saying something or flaming someone.

Don't give me the "he started it" crap either, because if you are as big of a man that you profess to be, you can ignore the comment and just add what you know.
a b à CPUs
October 10, 2006 4:36:11 PM

Quote:
Enlighten me, what's the difference between this, and just getting a multi cpu board and shoving some opterons on it? Obviously AMD will 'tweak' some things, or at least claim to.

There's an old saying, that goes "you can't polish a turd" the turd being the FX cpu's which are not going to match intel's core2's on raw speed.
I just can't figure out who 4x4 is aimed at...


It's aimed at AMD fans who refuse to switch to Intel no matter how superior Intel's offering is at the time. It allows AMD fans to claim to be running a Quad Core CPU and claim some level of eliteness.

Honestly.. 4x4 right now is sh!t. It will be good in time with the arrival of K8L, but as of right now.. it's total and utter crap. Useless crap, like a waste of hard earned cash.
October 10, 2006 4:49:35 PM

Quote:
Enlighten me, what's the difference between this, and just getting a multi cpu board and shoving some opterons on it? Obviously AMD will 'tweak' some things, or at least claim to.

There's an old saying, that goes "you can't polish a turd" the turd being the FX cpu's which are not going to match intel's core2's on raw speed.
I just can't figure out who 4x4 is aimed at...


It's aimed at AMD fans who refuse to switch to Intel no matter how superior Intel's offering is at the time. It allows AMD fans to claim to be running a Quad Core CPU and claim some level of eliteness.

Honestly.. 4x4 right now is sh!t. It will be good in time with the arrival of K8L, but as of right now.. it's total and utter crap. Useless crap, like a waste of hard earned cash.


So you're saying they've turned in to HeatBurst just because Core 2 is faster?

Right, AMD is naturally progressing the FX platform. They can't clock 1GHz higher so the thing to do is make FX dual socket. If the 80% reported at the demo is correct that means Intel will HAVE TO HAVE Kentsfield to keep the Extreme Gamer title.

X6800 would probably need to be clocked to 4.0GHz to beat out to FX70. FX74 has the potential to defeat kentsfield.

We all know FX IS NOT A JOKE CPU.

Just like nVidia could release a two card single slot GPU and be faster AMD can add a second socket to FX.

What's the problem. Should AMD lay down and die because Intel finally stopped melting cases and is really competitive with K8?

I don't think so.
October 10, 2006 5:16:13 PM

It's more like a great idea that's 2years late. If they had introduced a consumer level 2-way system when dual-cores weren't available, it would have been something...
October 10, 2006 5:58:50 PM

Quote:
Enlighten me, what's the difference between this, and just getting a multi cpu board and shoving some opterons on it? Obviously AMD will 'tweak' some things, or at least claim to.

There's an old saying, that goes "you can't polish a turd" the turd being the FX cpu's which are not going to match intel's core2's on raw speed.
I just can't figure out who 4x4 is aimed at...


It's aimed at AMD fans who refuse to switch to Intel no matter how superior Intel's offering is at the time. It allows AMD fans to claim to be running a Quad Core CPU and claim some level of eliteness.

Honestly.. 4x4 right now is sh!t. It will be good in time with the arrival of K8L, but as of right now.. it's total and utter crap. Useless crap, like a waste of hard earned cash.


So you're saying they've turned in to HeatBurst just because Core 2 is faster?

Right, AMD is naturally progressing the FX platform. They can't clock 1GHz higher so the thing to do is make FX dual socket. If the 80% reported at the demo is correct that means Intel will HAVE TO HAVE Kentsfield to keep the Extreme Gamer title.

X6800 would probably need to be clocked to 4.0GHz to beat out to FX70. FX74 has the potential to defeat kentsfield.

We all know FX IS NOT A JOKE CPU.

Just like nVidia could release a two card single slot GPU and be faster AMD can add a second socket to FX.

What's the problem. Should AMD lay down and die because Intel finally stopped melting cases and is really competitive with K8?

I don't think so.

so, in one breath you say "dont buy conroe for gameing because at high settings there is no advantage over a k8" then in another you say this crap.

question

Would you agree that a $1500 fx74 would be the same for a gamer as a e6300 (or within a few fps)?
October 10, 2006 6:39:23 PM

Quote:
Basically there is no difference between 4x4 and any other server or workstation board. Programs and operating systems that can take advantage of four cores should see performance increases with a Socket 4x4 chipset system. The 4x4 socket is supposed to help AMD compete with Intel, which launched its new Conroe desktop microprocessors in late July 2006 and will launch its multi-chip module quad-core Kenstfield in early 2007 as the Intel QX6700.

In each socket will reside an AMD Athlon 64 FX CPU. Each socket will be connected using AMD's Direct Connect Architecture, which provides a dedicated channel between the CPU cores and from each CPU out to the system memory. Due to the nature of the Direct Connect architecture, each CPU can access the other's dedicated memory store.

All you are paying for is a board and CPU's that are aimed at gaming.



More heat, more power, same thing as the Kentsfield, with the exception that you can probably progress to octal cores. You essentailly buying a server system, that can game.
Hope this helps.
Ninja


Basically what i thought. It's a load of rubbish! It's nothing new, just rebranding already available technology to make it look nice to the consumer.

I can't see why gamers would need it. If more cores in the way, why not get a 4 socket board. If more raw single core power is the way, get a Core2 processor.
As we know for gaming, single core power is more important than multiple cores and all the fancy effects are done on the graphics card.
a b à CPUs
October 10, 2006 7:00:02 PM

Quote:
Enlighten me, what's the difference between this, and just getting a multi cpu board and shoving some opterons on it? Obviously AMD will 'tweak' some things, or at least claim to.

There's an old saying, that goes "you can't polish a turd" the turd being the FX cpu's which are not going to match intel's core2's on raw speed.
I just can't figure out who 4x4 is aimed at...


It's aimed at AMD fans who refuse to switch to Intel no matter how superior Intel's offering is at the time. It allows AMD fans to claim to be running a Quad Core CPU and claim some level of eliteness.

Honestly.. 4x4 right now is sh!t. It will be good in time with the arrival of K8L, but as of right now.. it's total and utter crap. Useless crap, like a waste of hard earned cash.


So you're saying they've turned in to HeatBurst just because Core 2 is faster?

Right, AMD is naturally progressing the FX platform. They can't clock 1GHz higher so the thing to do is make FX dual socket. If the 80% reported at the demo is correct that means Intel will HAVE TO HAVE Kentsfield to keep the Extreme Gamer title.

X6800 would probably need to be clocked to 4.0GHz to beat out to FX70. FX74 has the potential to defeat kentsfield.

We all know FX IS NOT A JOKE CPU.

Just like nVidia could release a two card single slot GPU and be faster AMD can add a second socket to FX.

What's the problem. Should AMD lay down and die because Intel finally stopped melting cases and is really competitive with K8?

I don't think so.

Uh? What have you been smoking?

Where is this report of an 80% performance increase per clock over Core 2 Duo?

The initial 4x4, is nothing more then Two K8 Dual Core CPU's on a single motherboard. In heavy Multithreaded applications it will perform admirably yet noticeably slower then Kentsfield.

Under games and other apps it will lag behind a Core 2 Duo E6700 and maybe even E6600. It's all logical. No games out there, save for Quake 4, take advantage of more then two cores. Most that take advantage of Multiple Cores don't even get that large of an increase in performance. The proof is achieved when looking at how Kentsfield performs under the current crop of games.

4x4 K8 will be slower then Kentfield under all applications save for a few memory benchmarks and any applications (can't think of one though) that may be limited by Kentsfield's memory bandwidth. 4x4 K8 will be slower then Core 2 Duo under all games and the vast majority of applications.

So seriously.. why waste cash on something inferior?

I'm not saying AMD should roll over and die. I'm saying consumers should use there head when purchasing.

And also.. I think all AMD fanboys and/or Intel fanboys should roll over and die.

My 2 Cents.
October 10, 2006 7:45:57 PM

Quote:
Enlighten me, what's the difference between this, and just getting a multi cpu board and shoving some opterons on it? Obviously AMD will 'tweak' some things, or at least claim to.

There's an old saying, that goes "you can't polish a turd" the turd being the FX cpu's which are not going to match intel's core2's on raw speed.
I just can't figure out who 4x4 is aimed at...


It's aimed at AMD fans who refuse to switch to Intel no matter how superior Intel's offering is at the time. It allows AMD fans to claim to be running a Quad Core CPU and claim some level of eliteness.

Honestly.. 4x4 right now is sh!t. It will be good in time with the arrival of K8L, but as of right now.. it's total and utter crap. Useless crap, like a waste of hard earned cash.


So you're saying they've turned in to HeatBurst just because Core 2 is faster?

Right, AMD is naturally progressing the FX platform. They can't clock 1GHz higher so the thing to do is make FX dual socket. If the 80% reported at the demo is correct that means Intel will HAVE TO HAVE Kentsfield to keep the Extreme Gamer title.

X6800 would probably need to be clocked to 4.0GHz to beat out to FX70. FX74 has the potential to defeat kentsfield.

We all know FX IS NOT A JOKE CPU.

Just like nVidia could release a two card single slot GPU and be faster AMD can add a second socket to FX.

What's the problem. Should AMD lay down and die because Intel finally stopped melting cases and is really competitive with K8?

I don't think so.

so, in one breath you say "dont buy conroe for gameing because at high settings there is no advantage over a k8" then in another you say this crap.

question

Would you agree that a $1500 fx74 would be the same for a gamer as a e6300 (or within a few fps)?

Yet another Pnut gallery member. I have advised several people to go with Core 2. I would never tell anyone what to buy with their money. I would say and have said that any X2 or Core 2 will suit any user so it doesn't matter which one you get. That doesn't sound like "don't buy it" a-hole.

You can't tell if you're running at 70fps or 80fps.

Try getting a life.
October 10, 2006 7:58:21 PM

Quote:
Blah blah blah blah.......blah.....blah......blah.......blah........bla bla bla bla...........blah....blah......blah
October 10, 2006 8:14:26 PM

Quote:
Uh? What have you been smoking?

Usualy after taking the LSD therapy he smokes crack.

Quote:
Where is this report of an 80% performance increase per clock over Core 2 Duo?
In his stupid world of illusions.

Quote:
The initial 4x4, is nothing more then Two K8 Dual Core CPU's on a single motherboard...................................................................................................4x4 K8 will be slower then Core 2 Duo under all games and the vast majority of applications.
Try to explain this to the keyboard first. It is smarter than BaronBS.

Quote:
So seriously.. why waste cash on something inferior?
Because he is retarded moron.

Quote:
And also.. I think all AMD fanboys and/or Intel fanboys should roll over and die.
No.....trolls like BaronBS are fun, especialy when they get more frustrations while trolling on the forums.
October 10, 2006 8:23:40 PM

Quote:
Uh? What have you been smoking?

Usualy after taking the LSD therapy he smokes crack.

Quote:
Where is this report of an 80% performance increase per clock over Core 2 Duo?
In his stupid world of illusions.

Quote:
The initial 4x4, is nothing more then Two K8 Dual Core CPU's on a single motherboard...................................................................................................4x4 K8 will be slower then Core 2 Duo under all games and the vast majority of applications.
Try to explain this to the keyboard first. It is smarter than BaronBS.

Quote:
So seriously.. why waste cash on something inferior?
Because he is retarded moron.

Quote:
And also.. I think all AMD fanboys and/or Intel fanboys should roll over and die.
No.....trolls like BaronBS are fun, especialy when they get more frustrations while trolling on the forums.

WOW, remind me never to get on your bad side. Your worse than actionman lol. I love the pics though, keep em coming, i've saved them all. :wink:
a b à CPUs
October 10, 2006 8:27:01 PM

Quote:
Uh? What have you been smoking?

Usualy after taking the LSD therapy he smokes crack.

Quote:
Where is this report of an 80% performance increase per clock over Core 2 Duo?
In his stupid world of illusions.

Quote:
The initial 4x4, is nothing more then Two K8 Dual Core CPU's on a single motherboard...................................................................................................4x4 K8 will be slower then Core 2 Duo under all games and the vast majority of applications.
Try to explain this to the keyboard first. It is smarter than BaronBS.

Quote:
So seriously.. why waste cash on something inferior?
Becouse he is retarded moron.

Quote:
And also.. I think all AMD fanboys and/or Intel fanboys should roll over and die.
No.....trolls like BaronBS are fun, especialy when they get more frustrations while trolling on the forums.

LMAO, very entertaining post..

I must stress though that I don't hate BM. He's not as bad as some peeps I've encountered. Heck, some AMD fanboys whom I enjoy discussing with are MadModMike (I hear he goes by MrsBytch here) and my ex-co-worker Adam... he's an AMD nut. The only person I despise is Sharikou PHd. I hate that bastard... yes hate.

I don't like the extremism he oozes. Sadly some feel the only way you can counter extremism is with opposing extremism. I find a factual middle of the road approach works best.

BM needs to realize that he can't take what others say as factual information. It is an opinion. Especially not Sharikou PhD. If you don't discover it by yourself and are relying on someone else's interpretation then scrutinize every word of there interpretation and do more research into finding more sources.

My FTC link that I posted regarding HTT being an AMD innovation in name-only and that it is in fact just AMD taking an already existing working technology found on the Alpha EV7 and bringing it to the masses renaming it Hyper-transport. It is pretty clear that BaronMatrix get's overly excited from hearsay. Someone posts something about AMD and he jumps the gun without using rational judgment or doing a little bit of research. This has hurt his credibility.

To my credit I've been following semiconductor technology for well over a decade therefore I have had sort of a head start. Sorry if I'm a tad flamboyant in my presentation sometimes.. but mis-information infuriates me. Especially when I see a bunch of everyday consumers taking this sort of information as fact.
October 10, 2006 8:28:35 PM

You know something gives me the feeling that any discussion on this topic ended with the third post....
Ah what the hell, it'll be fun to sit back and watch this one for now... you want any popcorn? [/enjoys the show]
October 10, 2006 9:29:38 PM

Quote:
You know something gives me the feeling that any discussion on this topic ended with the third post....
Ah what the hell, it'll be fun to sit back and watch this one for now... you want any popcorn? [/enjoys the show]

Yeah, but you have to admit, the thread title is somewhat flamebait. No offense to the OP. :p 

Besides, we need a good flame war to get out the tensions every now and then.

No thanks, I've got kettle corn today. :D 
October 10, 2006 10:12:50 PM

Why don't we just wait until 4x4 and that Intel chipset is released then we can say "Ha I told you, you f*cking Intel fanboy". I say all of your information is inaccurate. Besides what's wrong with being an AMD fanboy, huh? In this great capitalist country I can buy whatever the f*ck I want, and I don't give a sh*t about what others have to say. :D 
October 10, 2006 10:44:40 PM

Someone said that 4x4 will be good in time with the launching of K8L. Wouldn't it be better to mature the technology a little bit so at least the drivers can be solid when Barcelona comes out? Don't get me wrong - I'll never slap two processors in a 4x4 board. However, Rahul Sood said that there will be other possibilities for the board. From everything I've heard of so far, both quad core offerings (AMD and Intel both) are going to be awesome, so putting two of those in a computer is excessive by any degree.
October 10, 2006 11:04:20 PM

Quote:
We have an expert about 4x4 here on THG, its inventor, known as BaronMatrix. He'll explain everything you need to know about 4x4, also by listening to him you'll get extra discount and get the 4x4 setup for half price and get a his free CD of AMD country music.


ANd you'll also get instructions on how to make gojdos life revolve around your every word. Talk about a bargain.
Seriously, do the two of you ever turn it off? Not one time can the two of you be on one thread, and someone isn't saying something or flaming someone.

Don't give me the "he started it" crap either, because if you are as big of a man that you profess to be, you can ignore the comment and just add what you know.

O cmon, you gotta admit...

Quote:

We have an expert about 4x4 here on THG, its inventor, known as BaronMatrix. He'll explain everything you need to know about 4x4, also by listening to him you'll get extra discount and get the 4x4 setup for half price and get a his free CD of AMD country music.

the non derogatory part had some good clean humor value to it. ...get a free CD of AMD country music---thats funny :lol: 
October 10, 2006 11:13:00 PM

Quote:
Why don't we just wait until 4x4 and that Intel chipset is released then we can say "Ha I told you, you f*cking Intel fanboy". I say all of your information is inaccurate. Besides what's wrong with being an AMD fanboy, huh? In this great capitalist country I can buy whatever the f*ck I want, and I don't give a sh*t about what others have to say. :D 


Weve tried that route....believe me. Its the only logical route.
Some people refuse to wait till a CPU even has legitimate ES benchmarks let alone hits retail before making proclamations such as "Sliced bread ---bah nothing in comparison to this" " The Hoover dam? Peanuts" (this next one's my personal favorite) "..the darkside of Conroe". That one still makes me laugh. So others of us will jump in (Im am a horrible offender about that) to counter those claims to prevent people who dont know better from being hoodwinked.
October 10, 2006 11:21:39 PM

Quote:
Why don't we just wait until 4x4 and that Intel chipset is released then we can say "Ha I told you, you f*cking Intel fanboy". I say all of your information is inaccurate. Besides what's wrong with being an AMD fanboy, huh? In this great capitalist country I can buy whatever the f*ck I want, and I don't give a sh*t about what others have to say. :D 


Weve tried that route....believe me. Its the only logical route.
Some people refuse to wait till a CPU even has legitimate ES benchmarks let alone hits retail before making proclamations such as "Sliced bread ---bah nothing in comparison to this" " The Hoover dam? Peanuts" (this next one's my personal favorite) "..the darkside of Conroe". That one still makes me laugh. So others of us will jump in (Im am a horrible offender about that) to counter those claims to prevent people who dont know better from being hoodwinked.

LOL, the darkside of conroe. What is that the back? 8)

Nevermind, stupid me. Its obviously relative to the light source. :roll:
October 11, 2006 12:35:51 AM

Quote:
Enlighten me, what's the difference between this, and just getting a multi cpu board and shoving some opterons on it? Obviously AMD will 'tweak' some things, or at least claim to.

There's an old saying, that goes "you can't polish a turd" the turd being the FX cpu's which are not going to match intel's core2's on raw speed.
I just can't figure out who 4x4 is aimed at...


It's aimed at AMD fans who refuse to switch to Intel no matter how superior Intel's offering is at the time. It allows AMD fans to claim to be running a Quad Core CPU and claim some level of eliteness.

Honestly.. 4x4 right now is sh!t. It will be good in time with the arrival of K8L, but as of right now.. it's total and utter crap. Useless crap, like a waste of hard earned cash.


So you're saying they've turned in to HeatBurst just because Core 2 is faster?

Right, AMD is naturally progressing the FX platform. They can't clock 1GHz higher so the thing to do is make FX dual socket. If the 80% reported at the demo is correct that means Intel will HAVE TO HAVE Kentsfield to keep the Extreme Gamer title.

X6800 would probably need to be clocked to 4.0GHz to beat out to FX70. FX74 has the potential to defeat kentsfield.

We all know FX IS NOT A JOKE CPU.

Just like nVidia could release a two card single slot GPU and be faster AMD can add a second socket to FX.

What's the problem. Should AMD lay down and die because Intel finally stopped melting cases and is really competitive with K8?

I don't think so.

Uh? What have you been smoking?

Where is this report of an 80% performance increase per clock over Core 2 Duo?

The initial 4x4, is nothing more then Two K8 Dual Core CPU's on a single motherboard. In heavy Multithreaded applications it will perform admirably yet noticeably slower then Kentsfield.

Under games and other apps it will lag behind a Core 2 Duo E6700 and maybe even E6600. It's all logical. No games out there, save for Quake 4, take advantage of more then two cores. Most that take advantage of Multiple Cores don't even get that large of an increase in performance. The proof is achieved when looking at how Kentsfield performs under the current crop of games.

4x4 K8 will be slower then Kentfield under all applications save for a few memory benchmarks and any applications (can't think of one though) that may be limited by Kentsfield's memory bandwidth. 4x4 K8 will be slower then Core 2 Duo under all games and the vast majority of applications.

So seriously.. why waste cash on something inferior?

I'm not saying AMD should roll over and die. I'm saying consumers should use there head when purchasing.

And also.. I think all AMD fanboys and/or Intel fanboys should roll over and die.

My 2 Cents.


Hopefully not what you've been smoking. I only compare AMD products to other AMD products so 4x4 is 80% faster THAN FX62.

Since 4x4 is SAID to be 80% faster in multithreading and allows you to shunt OS threads to two extra cores the beauty of it will be that it's much faster than FX62 and will carry twice as many active threads.

I would say that the 3.0GHz versions will get close to or pass Q6700 in certain FP applications like ScienceMark which means that engr's will be LOVING IT.

I'm sorry you hate AMD but that doesn't change the fact that if an FX62 system is $1700 and a 4x4 system is $2200 you are paying $500 for up to 80% more perf. That's a good deal. High end GPUs use up to 250W so I guess no one should buy those either.

Quote:
Power Consumption
Watts
X1950XTX X1900XT 256MB X1950 Pro

Idle
152
151
144

Load
285
279
225



Power consumption with the 80nm die shrink is quite impressive. Under load the Radeon X1950 Pro manages to consume a mere 225 watts—54 watts less than the Radeon X1900XT 256MB. While the Radeon X1900XT 256MB delivers more pixel shading power, the Radeon X1950 Pro offers slightly better performance-per-watt in gaming.


Linkage for the weak.

Xeon Dempsey uses enough power to run a refrigerator nearly.
Linkage for the weak

965 EE loses in lots of benchmarks to X2 3800+ and probably uses 3X the power.

Where is your indignation about that? Where was your outrage as more HeatBurst SKUs were added?

Get a life. AMD has one.
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2006 12:53:46 AM

Quote:
Enlighten me, what's the difference between this, and just getting a multi cpu board and shoving some opterons on it? Obviously AMD will 'tweak' some things, or at least claim to.

There's an old saying, that goes "you can't polish a turd" the turd being the FX cpu's which are not going to match intel's core2's on raw speed.
I just can't figure out who 4x4 is aimed at...


It's aimed at AMD fans who refuse to switch to Intel no matter how superior Intel's offering is at the time. It allows AMD fans to claim to be running a Quad Core CPU and claim some level of eliteness.

Honestly.. 4x4 right now is sh!t. It will be good in time with the arrival of K8L, but as of right now.. it's total and utter crap. Useless crap, like a waste of hard earned cash.


So you're saying they've turned in to HeatBurst just because Core 2 is faster?

Right, AMD is naturally progressing the FX platform. They can't clock 1GHz higher so the thing to do is make FX dual socket. If the 80% reported at the demo is correct that means Intel will HAVE TO HAVE Kentsfield to keep the Extreme Gamer title.

X6800 would probably need to be clocked to 4.0GHz to beat out to FX70. FX74 has the potential to defeat kentsfield.

We all know FX IS NOT A JOKE CPU.

Just like nVidia could release a two card single slot GPU and be faster AMD can add a second socket to FX.

What's the problem. Should AMD lay down and die because Intel finally stopped melting cases and is really competitive with K8?

I don't think so.

Uh? What have you been smoking?

Where is this report of an 80% performance increase per clock over Core 2 Duo?

The initial 4x4, is nothing more then Two K8 Dual Core CPU's on a single motherboard. In heavy Multithreaded applications it will perform admirably yet noticeably slower then Kentsfield.

Under games and other apps it will lag behind a Core 2 Duo E6700 and maybe even E6600. It's all logical. No games out there, save for Quake 4, take advantage of more then two cores. Most that take advantage of Multiple Cores don't even get that large of an increase in performance. The proof is achieved when looking at how Kentsfield performs under the current crop of games.

4x4 K8 will be slower then Kentfield under all applications save for a few memory benchmarks and any applications (can't think of one though) that may be limited by Kentsfield's memory bandwidth. 4x4 K8 will be slower then Core 2 Duo under all games and the vast majority of applications.

So seriously.. why waste cash on something inferior?

I'm not saying AMD should roll over and die. I'm saying consumers should use there head when purchasing.

And also.. I think all AMD fanboys and/or Intel fanboys should roll over and die.

My 2 Cents.


Hopefully not what you've been smoking. I only compare AMD products to other AMD products so 4x4 is 80% faster THAN FX62.

Since 4x4 is SAID to be 80% faster in multithreading and allows you to shunt OS threads to two extra cores the beauty of it will be that it's much faster than FX62 and will carry twice as many active threads.

I would say that the 3.0GHz versions will get close to or pass Q6700 in certain FP applications like ScienceMark which means that engr's will be LOVING IT.

I'm sorry you hate AMD but that doesn't change the fact that if an FX62 system is $1700 and a 4x4 system is $2200 you are paying $500 for up to 80% more perf. That's a good deal. High end GPUs use up to 250W so I guess no one should buy those either.

Quote:
Power Consumption
Watts
X1950XTX X1900XT 256MB X1950 Pro

Idle
152
151
144

Load
285
279
225



Power consumption with the 80nm die shrink is quite impressive. Under load the Radeon X1950 Pro manages to consume a mere 225 watts—54 watts less than the Radeon X1900XT 256MB. While the Radeon X1900XT 256MB delivers more pixel shading power, the Radeon X1950 Pro offers slightly better performance-per-watt in gaming.


Linkage for the weak.

Xeon Dempsey uses enough power to run a refrigerator nearly.
Linkage for the weak

965 EE loses in lots of benchmarks to X2 3800+ and probably uses 3X the power.

Where is your indignation about that? Where was your outrage as more HeatBurst SKUs were added?

Get a life. AMD has one.

UH? You sound like an even bigger idiot then before (if that's possible).

Why should I be outraged now about Netburst? It served it's purpose, and as far as i'm concerned died after the Pentium 4C. (yes idiot, Pentium 4C was an overall superior and more useful processor then the AthlonXP, Prescott was crap, I didn't buy one and I sure as hell have NEVER recommended one).

So 4x4 is up to 80% faster then an Athlon64 FX-62 according to you. Now could you kindly show us where you obtained this number?

Also I'd like to know under which applications. Now if it's 80% faster then an Athlon64 FX-62 when running Multithreaded applications, well no offense.. but umm NO SH!T! It's using two AMD Athlon64 FX level CPU's.. the same as having two Athlon64 FX-62 pretty much in SMP. So yes, it can now run 4 threads simultaneously and in applications sensitive to Multiple threads (like encoding) it could very well reach an 80% improvement.

But now, let's get something straight here. Per clock Core 2 Duo is 20-40% faster then AMD Athlon64 FX. Therefore if the 4x4 design gives you an 80% increase over a single AMD Athlon64 FX-62 then that would mean that Kentsfield would be around 100-120% faster then an AMD Athlon64 FX-62, thus still 20-40% faster per clock then 4x4.

Get my drift?

As for engineers loving a CPU that is faster under a single benchmarking program, I doubt it. Engineers use as many tweaks and tricks to get the best performance out of there software. Right now, Integer performance is more important then FPU performance. Even then, you're left with Core 2 Duo being faster per clock then Athlon64 FX-62 in sciencemark, therefore Kentsfield... you got it.. will be faster then 4x4 still.

Sisoft Memory Benchmark should be about just the only place 4x4 wins. :p  I don't hate AMD, I'm a realist.. and I don't take too kindly to liars.
October 11, 2006 9:42:34 AM

Barton XP loses to 965 EE.....
Relevance to topic: 0
Relavance to currently technology: 0

Quote:
965 EE loses in lots of benchmarks to X2 3800+

Relevance to topic: 0
Relevance to currently technology: 5 (the X2 3800 is pretty much the only AMD CPU worth buying)

I can't see the point thats trying to be made there tbh.
E6300 smokes anything AMD can throw at it.

Finally toms did a review (E6400, not a lot of difference though)
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/2006/10/10/cheap_thrills_...
October 11, 2006 3:27:17 PM

Quote:
Uh? What have you been smoking?

Usualy after taking the LSD therapy he smokes crack.

Quote:
Where is this report of an 80% performance increase per clock over Core 2 Duo?
In his stupid world of illusions.

Quote:
The initial 4x4, is nothing more then Two K8 Dual Core CPU's on a single motherboard...................................................................................................4x4 K8 will be slower then Core 2 Duo under all games and the vast majority of applications.
Try to explain this to the keyboard first. It is smarter than BaronBS.

Quote:
So seriously.. why waste cash on something inferior?
Becouse he is retarded moron.

Quote:
And also.. I think all AMD fanboys and/or Intel fanboys should roll over and die.
No.....trolls like BaronBS are fun, especialy when they get more frustrations while trolling on the forums.

LMAO, very entertaining post..

I must stress though that I don't hate BM. He's not as bad as some peeps I've encountered. Heck, some AMD fanboys whom I enjoy discussing with are MadModMike (I hear he goes by MrsBytch here) and my ex-co-worker Adam... he's an AMD nut. The only person I despise is Sharikou PHd. I hate that bastard... yes hate.

I don't like the extremism he oozes. Sadly some feel the only way you can counter extremism is with opposing extremism. I find a factual middle of the road approach works best.

BM needs to realize that he can't take what others say as factual information. It is an opinion. Especially not Sharikou PhD. If you don't discover it by yourself and are relying on someone else's interpretation then scrutinize every word of there interpretation and do more research into finding more sources.

My FTC link that I posted regarding HTT being an AMD innovation in name-only and that it is in fact just AMD taking an already existing working technology found on the Alpha EV7 and bringing it to the masses renaming it Hyper-transport. It is pretty clear that BaronMatrix get's overly excited from hearsay. Someone posts something about AMD and he jumps the gun without using rational judgment or doing a little bit of research. This has hurt his credibility.

To my credit I've been following semiconductor technology for well over a decade therefore I have had sort of a head start. Sorry if I'm a tad flamboyant in my presentation sometimes.. but mis-information infuriates me. Especially when I see a bunch of everyday consumers taking this sort of information as fact.


Oh really? Here is a quote from YOUR link.

Quote:
The need to modify the Order has been precipitated by AMD's decision not to license Alpha microprocessor technology according to the terms of Paragraph II. The Commission is satisfied that this decision was made unilaterally by AMD and was not the result of any failure of Compaq to comply with its obligations under the Order.

a b à CPUs
October 11, 2006 3:33:12 PM

Quote:
Uh? What have you been smoking?

Usualy after taking the LSD therapy he smokes crack.

Quote:
Where is this report of an 80% performance increase per clock over Core 2 Duo?
In his stupid world of illusions.

Quote:
The initial 4x4, is nothing more then Two K8 Dual Core CPU's on a single motherboard...................................................................................................4x4 K8 will be slower then Core 2 Duo under all games and the vast majority of applications.
Try to explain this to the keyboard first. It is smarter than BaronBS.

Quote:
So seriously.. why waste cash on something inferior?
Becouse he is retarded moron.

Quote:
And also.. I think all AMD fanboys and/or Intel fanboys should roll over and die.
No.....trolls like BaronBS are fun, especialy when they get more frustrations while trolling on the forums.

LMAO, very entertaining post..

I must stress though that I don't hate BM. He's not as bad as some peeps I've encountered. Heck, some AMD fanboys whom I enjoy discussing with are MadModMike (I hear he goes by MrsBytch here) and my ex-co-worker Adam... he's an AMD nut. The only person I despise is Sharikou PHd. I hate that bastard... yes hate.

I don't like the extremism he oozes. Sadly some feel the only way you can counter extremism is with opposing extremism. I find a factual middle of the road approach works best.

BM needs to realize that he can't take what others say as factual information. It is an opinion. Especially not Sharikou PhD. If you don't discover it by yourself and are relying on someone else's interpretation then scrutinize every word of there interpretation and do more research into finding more sources.

My FTC link that I posted regarding HTT being an AMD innovation in name-only and that it is in fact just AMD taking an already existing working technology found on the Alpha EV7 and bringing it to the masses renaming it Hyper-transport. It is pretty clear that BaronMatrix get's overly excited from hearsay. Someone posts something about AMD and he jumps the gun without using rational judgment or doing a little bit of research. This has hurt his credibility.

To my credit I've been following semiconductor technology for well over a decade therefore I have had sort of a head start. Sorry if I'm a tad flamboyant in my presentation sometimes.. but mis-information infuriates me. Especially when I see a bunch of everyday consumers taking this sort of information as fact.


Oh really? Here is a quote from YOUR link.

Quote:
The need to modify the Order has been precipitated by AMD's decision not to license Alpha microprocessor technology according to the terms of Paragraph II. The Commission is satisfied that this decision was made unilaterally by AMD and was not the result of any failure of Compaq to comply with its obligations under the Order.



Oh gawd.. do I have to hold your hand?

The Order is an order forcing Compaq to share Alpha microprocessor technology with AMD. AMD did not want to pay to license the technology, they argued that Intel who owned 90% of the Microprocessor market and who have access to this technology was acting as a monopoly.

In other words, Intel buying out part of DEC was unfair in a way as it grew Intel larger.

So AMD gained access to the Alpha Technology circumventing have to pay for a licence. They instead gained access by FTC order.

FTC stands for Federal Trade Commission. They monitor anti-trust breaches etc.

you really need to learn AMD history. Here is the original Order. As you can see it has been modified to give AMD access to Alpha patents in the other order I linked. Why? Because AMD complained to the FTC about Intel's unfair practices... which is bullsh!t. Intel bought DEC to settle a dispute that DEC filled claiming Intel Pentium processors used DEC technology.

Intel could not keep all of DEC, they had to share it with another party. Intel and Compaq both shared ownership of DEC thus circumventing Anti-trust laws... but this was not enough for AMD. You see the AMD team that designed the K8 were the old DEC Alpha engineers. In order for AMD to be able to use the Alpha EV7 technology they of course.. needed access to the patents. By filing with the FTC, the order with which I first posted, gives AMD access to these patents without needing to acquire a licence. In other words Intel and Compaq PAID for DEC and all of it's patents yet AMD gets to use them for free.

You put AMD on too high of a horse. On a pedestal so to speak.

Here.. i'll post this part of it..

Quote:

A. Respondent shall grant a license, by the date this Order becomes final, to Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. ("AMD"), or to a licensee that receives the prior approval of the Commission, and only in a manner that receives the prior approval of the Commission and is consistent with the framework of the Memorandum of Understanding entered into between Digital and AMD, dated March 30, 1998 (the "MOU"), which provides, inter alia:


1. under Digital Intellectual Property Rights, a non-exclusive, non-transferable, perpetual license, without the right to sublicense (except as otherwise provided herein) to design, develop, manufacture and have manufactured, and to market, distribute and sell worldwide AMD Licensed Products

2. under Digital Intellectual Property Rights, a non-exclusive, non-transferable, perpetual license, without the right to sublicense (except as otherwise provided herein), to use, modify, copy, and create derivative works of the Alpha Microprocessor Technology for the purpose of and to the extent required to enable AMD's exercise of the licenses to be granted pursuant to Paragraph II.A.1. of this Order;

3. the right to grant sublicenses (without the right to grant further sublicenses) to no more than two third parties (as agreed to by Digital and AMD in the MOU) under rights granted to AMD in Paragraph II.A.1. above, to manufacture, use and sell AMD 64-bit Microprocessors;

4. the right to provide Infrastructure Partners technology designed or developed by AMD, even if such technology incorporates certain Digital trade secrets or know-how contained in the Alpha Microprocessor Technology, and to grant sublicenses (without the right to grant further sublicenses) such third parties under such technology to make, have made, use or sell products (other than AMD 64-bit Microprocessors) based upon or incorporating such technology. "Infrastructure Partners" shall mean (subject to the terms of the MOU) chipset vendors, BIOS vendors, independent software vendors and other companies in the business of designing and selling products designed to operate with AMD Licensed Products;

5. under Digital Intellectual Property Rights, a non-exclusive, non-transferable, perpetual license (without the right to sublicense) to use the CAD Tools, in object code form, and CAD Tool Documentation, for the sole purpose of assisting AMD internally in the design, development and manufacture of AMD Licensed Products and to make copies of the CAD Tool Documentation solely to the extent necessary to enable AMD to implement the terms of internal use licenses. Digital shall also grant AMD a non-exclusive, non-transferable license (without the right to sublicense) to one copy of the source code for each licensed CAD Tool for evaluation purposes only;

6. under Digital Intellectual Property Rights, a non-exclusive, non-transferable, perpetual license (without the right to sublicense) to use internally the Software Products, in object code form, for the sole purpose of assisting AMD in the design, development and manufacture of Alpha Devices, AMD Devices and AMD Derivatives and in the generation and optimization of binary code for Alpha Devices, AMD Devices and AMD Derivatives;

7. under Digital Intellectual Property Rights, a non-exclusive, non-transferable, perpetual license (without the right to sublicense) to modify, copy and create derivative works of the Software Tools, in object code and source code form, for internal use only, for the sole purpose of the generation and optimization of software code for Alpha Devices, AMD Devices and AMD Derivatives. AMD shall have the further right to provide and sublicense the Software Tools and modified versions thereof, in object code form, to independent software vendors ("ISVs") for internal use only, for the sole purpose of generating and optimizing the ISVs' own binary code for operation on a computer system having an Alpha Device, AMD Device or AMD Derivative as a central processing unit. AMD and such ISVs will not have the right to market, distribute or sell any Software Tools, and shall not use the Software Tools to develop, market, distribute or sell a product similar to the Software Tools. Digital will also grant AMD a non-exclusive, non-transferable, perpetual license (without the right to sublicense) to one copy of the source code for each licensed Software Tool for evaluation purposes only;

8. under Digital Intellectual Property Rights, (i) a non-exclusive, non-transferable, perpetual license (without the right to sublicense) to modify, copy and create derivative works of FX!32 Software, in object code and source code form, for internal use only, and (ii) a non-exclusive, non-transferable, perpetual license to reproduce and distribute FX!32 Software, in object code form, either directly or through AMD's authorized distribution channels in conjunction with sales to third parties of Alpha branded products. Digital FX!32 Software Updates shall be furnished by Digital to AMD on a royalty-free basis. Any modification, enhancements or adaptations to FX!32 Software developed by AMD shall be furnished by AMD to Digital under a non-exclusive, perpetual, transferable, royalty-free license, with the right to sublicense in object code or source code form; and

9. under Digital Intellectual Property Rights, the right to modify or extend Digital's Alpha RISC Architecture, without approval from Digital, and to produce AMD Devices and AMD Derivatives implemented in accordance with such modified or extended architecture, if Digital fails to establish and implement a roadmap that advances the performance, as measured by speed, of then-current SPECint and/or then-current SPECfp, as appropriate, of the highest Alpha microprocessor by at least 25 percent every three years.


Basically Intel owns EV7 and thus owns the building blocks to Hypertransport. As Intel owns the DEC patent for EV7 but AMD is given exclusive use of these patents by anti-trust order of the FTC.

So before you go on bashing Intel and praising AMD, please note which of the two sounds like Rambus/SCO.

Both companies have there bad sides, Intel is a huge Monopolistic corporation and AMD are a company without any innovative talent who rely on lawsuits and the FTC to stay afloat.

Oh and here is the original complaint filled by AMD to the FTC.
AMD Complains to FTC

Now you've just learned history. The AMD Athlon64 (K8) is based on technology and innovations by DEC (Alpha) and many of which are owned patents of Intel's but forced to share by order of the FTC.

Do you still want to argue fanboy?
October 11, 2006 4:29:50 PM

That has nothing to do with who invented HyperTransport. That also has nothing to do with who put the IMC into K8.
EV6 is NOT HyperTransport. HT was originally called Lightning Data Transport and was AMDs, not DECs. They licensed the EV6 BUS for K7, not K8.

HyperTransport.org and everywhere else credits it to AMD (and others- none of whom is DEC or Compaq). I guess they're all spreading FUD too.
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2006 4:37:20 PM

Quote:
That has nothing to do with who invented HyperTransport. That also has nothing to do with who put the IMC into K8.
EV6 is NOT HyperTransport. HT was originally called Lightning Data Transport and was AMDs, not DECs. They licensed the EV6 BUS for K7, not K8.

HyperTransport.org and everywhere else credits it to AMD (and others- none of whom is DEC or Compaq). I guess they're all spreading FUD too.


EV6 is K7's DDR bus,

EV7 is K8's Hypertransport Bus.

These are facts. AMD have changed the marketing name twice.. big deal. Type EV7 + Hypertransport in google.

AMD just took the EV7 interconnect bus and intergrated it into there K8 design. They also improved the throughput. But it's not THEIR invention.

Oh and here's a PDF from Hypertransport.org

Quote:
AMD's Hypertransport, which is derived from the Alpha EV7 bus, has been an extremely successful technology for AMD, allowing it to have much better scaling multi-processor systems as well as higher performing single processor systems as in conjunction with the on-board memory controller it allowed for far greater total bandwidth for information flowing into and out of a processor.


Here's another source..
Top 500 SuperComputers: AMD Opteron
Quote:
This, together with a significantly enhanced memory bus can deliver up to 5.3 GB/s of bandwidth, an enormous improvement over the former memory system. This memory bus, called HyperTransport by AMD, is derived from licensed Compaq technology and similar to that employed in Compaq's EV7 processors (see the HP/Compaq Alpha EV7). It allows for "glueless" connection of several processors to form multi-processor systems with very low memory latencies.


They say Compaq Alpha as Compaq bought the rights to produce Alpha Microprocessors while Intel bought the patents. If you read the FTC ORDER you'll see that Compaq retained the right to produce Alpha Microprocessors using Samsung FABS.

Intel bought DEC back in 1997/1998.

This is similar to the whole IBM/SCO debacle. As IBM purchased Novell who owned the patents to Unix. SCO bought the rights to produce and sell the UNIX O/S from Novell but not the full owership of the source code. Therefore it was ruled that IBM has everyright to sell Linux software even if it does contain UNIX code seeing as IBM owns UNIX by having purchased Novell.

This is the same deal here. Compaq/AMD are both like SCO, Intel are IBM and DEC are Novell.

You see AMD was partnered with DEC before there demise. DEC's EV6 bus helped create the highly successful AMD K7. And both parties had come to an agreement regarding the EV7 bus, but before any real work could get done. Intel bought DEC. You see AMD is a crooked company. they hired all of the DEC Alpha engineers and then complained to the FTC. Claiming that this unfair business practice on Intel's part was limiting fair competition seeing as AMD now could no longer use EV7 (Hypertransport) and other DEC Alpha technologies (patents). Intel did not buy DEC to hurt AMD, they bought DEC to settle a claim by DEC (patent infrigment claim) that all Pentium based processors infringed on seom DEC patents. Intel and DEC opted to settle with Intel buying DEC.

So AMD gained access to technology and obtained the engineering talent to implement it into the x86 architecture. Intel, well they paid for it all.

History man.. it's your best friend.
October 11, 2006 5:03:46 PM

Crap I hate jumping in the middle of this... but in response to the "FX is not a joke CPU" comment by BM... of course it's not a joke, but the problem is that AMD's top-of-the-line CPU generally weighs in around $1000... and if you're going to need two of them?!? Well, that's just stupid. Just accept it... for this particular moment in time, the ball is in AMD's court and Intel is just waiting for the return. For the record my desktop is an AMD X2-4400 so don't think I'm some rabid Intel fanatic. If I had my choice I'd definitely have an Intel right now... and anyone who doesn't share that opinion, well they're just in a state of denial at this point.
October 11, 2006 5:07:41 PM

Quote:
Crap I hate jumping in the middle of this... but in response to the "FX is not a joke CPU" comment by BM... of course it's not a joke, but the problem is that AMD's top-of-the-line CPU generally weighs in around $1000... and if you're going to need two of them?!? Well, that's just stupid. Just accept it... for this particular moment in time, the ball is in AMD's court and Intel is just waiting for the return. For the record my desktop is an AMD X2-4400 so don't think I'm some rabid Intel fanatic. If I had my choice I'd definitely have an Intel right now... and anyone who doesn't share that opinion, well they're just in a state of denial at this point.


I have a 4400+ also and I wouldn't get a Core 2. Not because it's faster or slower but because I prefer AMD. It used to be the opposite.

FX was and is for the enthusiast not everyone. If they remove the server features, high-end systems with 2GB RAM should come in under $2000 at least for FX70. That's not too bad. My 4400+ system cost me that a year ago.
October 11, 2006 5:14:25 PM

Quote:
That has nothing to do with who invented HyperTransport. That also has nothing to do with who put the IMC into K8.
EV6 is NOT HyperTransport. HT was originally called Lightning Data Transport and was AMDs, not DECs. They licensed the EV6 BUS for K7, not K8.

HyperTransport.org and everywhere else credits it to AMD (and others- none of whom is DEC or Compaq). I guess they're all spreading FUD too.


EV6 is K7's DDR bus,

EV7 is K8's Hypertransport Bus.

These are facts. AMD have changed the marketing name twice.. big deal. Type EV7 + Hypertransport in google.

AMD just took the EV7 interconnect bus and intergrated it into there K8 design. They also improved the throughput. But it's not THEIR invention.

Oh and here's a PDF from Hypertransport.org

Quote:
AMD's Hypertransport, which is derived from the Alpha EV7 bus, has been an extremely successful technology for AMD, allowing it to have much better scaling multi-processor systems as well as higher performing single processor systems as in conjunction with the on-board memory controller it allowed for far greater total bandwidth for information flowing into and out of a processor.


Here's another source..
Top 500 SuperComputers: AMD Opteron
Quote:
This, together with a significantly enhanced memory bus can deliver up to 5.3 GB/s of bandwidth, an enormous improvement over the former memory system. This memory bus, called HyperTransport by AMD, is derived from licensed Compaq technology and similar to that employed in Compaq's EV7 processors (see the HP/Compaq Alpha EV7). It allows for "glueless" connection of several processors to form multi-processor systems with very low memory latencies.


They say Compaq Alpha as Compaq bought the rights to produce Alpha Microprocessors while Intel bought the patents. If you read the FTC ORDER you'll see that Compaq retained the right to produce Alpha Microprocessors using Samsung FABS.

Intel bought DEC back in 1997/1998.

This is similar to the whole IBM/SCO debacle. As IBM purchased Novell who owned the patents to Unix. SCO bought the rights to produce and sell the UNIX O/S from Novell but not the full owership of the source code. Therefore it was ruled that IBM has everyright to sell Linux software even if it does contain UNIX code seeing as IBM owns UNIX by having purchased Novell.

This is the same deal here. Compaq/AMD are both like SCO, Intel are IBM and DEC are Novell.

You see AMD was partnered with DEC before there demise. DEC's EV6 bus helped create the highly successful AMD K7. And both parties had come to an agreement regarding the EV7 bus, but before any real work could get done. Intel bought DEC. You see AMD is a crooked company. they hired all of the DEC Alpha engineers and then complained to the FTC. Claiming that this unfair business practice on Intel's part was limiting fair competition seeing as AMD now could no longer use EV7 (Hypertransport) and other DEC Alpha technologies (patents). Intel did not buy DEC to hurt AMD, they bought DEC to settle a claim by DEC (patent infrigment claim) that all Pentium based processors infringed on seom DEC patents. Intel and DEC opted to settle with Intel buying DEC.

So AMD gained access to technology and obtained the engineering talent to implement it into the x86 architecture. Intel, well they paid for it all.

History man.. it's your best friend.

As I said I have never heard it credited to DEC. It says derived from which means they had to change things. That means that they did create the particular incarnation known as X86 HyperTransport. They hired Dirk Meyer as their lead designer (responsible for the 21164).

As an example, if you license a carburetor design and create an electronic fuel injection system, you created the EFI. If they made no changes it would have to be called EV7.

An even better example is EMT64. It was created from a license of AMD64, but was created by Intel, not AMD.

I'm not arguing semantics with you, but think about it.
October 11, 2006 5:21:18 PM

I'm not going to argue any points here, because of the pointlessness of it, but could you just quote the parts of the post that you will be discussing and not the entire damn thing? It ain't that hard man, especailly if you are a "dev", just select and delete. Its getting freaking annoying scrolling thru pages of the same thing reposted.
October 11, 2006 5:22:40 PM

Quote:
Crap I hate jumping in the middle of this... but in response to the "FX is not a joke CPU" comment by BM... of course it's not a joke, but the problem is that AMD's top-of-the-line CPU generally weighs in around $1000... and if you're going to need two of them?!? Well, that's just stupid. Just accept it... for this particular moment in time, the ball is in AMD's court and Intel is just waiting for the return. For the record my desktop is an AMD X2-4400 so don't think I'm some rabid Intel fanatic. If I had my choice I'd definitely have an Intel right now... and anyone who doesn't share that opinion, well they're just in a state of denial at this point.


I have a 4400+ also and I wouldn't get a Core 2. Not because it's faster or slower but because I prefer AMD. It used to be the opposite.

FX was and is for the enthusiast not everyone. If they remove the server features, high-end systems with 2GB RAM should come in under $2000 at least for FX70. That's not too bad. My 4400+ system cost me that a year ago.

Although I appreciate the courteous response, I still must disagree. A C2D system is better in every way than my X2-4400... and if I could trade my X2 in for the C2D I would do it in a heartbeat. Because a new C2D system does cost a good bit (I'd need a new board, new memory to go with the processor) I'm holding off on the purchase. The performance gain just isn't great enough to justify the costs. However, I do not see how ANYONE... no matter how stubborn... could still cling to AMD... Intel just has too much of a lead at this point.

I am trying to do something that everyone else has failed at... Baron, please acknowledge that (for now) Intel does produce the best high-end processors... or provide evidence to the contrary.

And back to the 4X4 thing... do you really think those processors will cost $1000 each? That's just crazy.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2006 5:25:23 PM

It is exactly that semantic!

IF I license some technology and make no change, well I can market it with any name I want it's my right!

I beleive the credit should go to the compagny who developed the technology, not the one who tweaked it for their particular use, and I think that's the point Elmo is trying to do!

And the only difference between EMT64 and AMD64 is a small implementation difference. And the fact that marketing people had to find a name. I dont think ANY credit should go to Intel, and I am sure you agree with that, they never pushed x86-64, they adopted it when it was necessary because of the market!

@Elmo: I would say give it up but I learn all sort of interesting stuff so...well... good luck 8)
October 11, 2006 5:38:50 PM

Quote:
Crap I hate jumping in the middle of this... but in response to the "FX is not a joke CPU" comment by BM... of course it's not a joke, but the problem is that AMD's top-of-the-line CPU generally weighs in around $1000... and if you're going to need two of them?!? Well, that's just stupid. Just accept it... for this particular moment in time, the ball is in AMD's court and Intel is just waiting for the return. For the record my desktop is an AMD X2-4400 so don't think I'm some rabid Intel fanatic. If I had my choice I'd definitely have an Intel right now... and anyone who doesn't share that opinion, well they're just in a state of denial at this point.


I have a 4400+ also and I wouldn't get a Core 2. Not because it's faster or slower but because I prefer AMD. It used to be the opposite.

FX was and is for the enthusiast not everyone. If they remove the server features, high-end systems with 2GB RAM should come in under $2000 at least for FX70. That's not too bad. My 4400+ system cost me that a year ago.

Although I appreciate the courteous response, I still must disagree. A C2D system is better in every way than my X2-4400... and if I could trade my X2 in for the C2D I would do it in a heartbeat. Because a new C2D system does cost a good bit (I'd need a new board, new memory to go with the processor) I'm holding off on the purchase. The performance gain just isn't great enough to justify the costs. However, I do not see how ANYONE... no matter how stubborn... could still cling to AMD... Intel just has too much of a lead at this point.

I am trying to do something that everyone else has failed at... Baron, please acknowledge that (for now) Intel does produce the best high-end processors... or provide evidence to the contrary.

And back to the 4X4 thing... do you really think those processors will cost $1000 each? That's just crazy.

Core 2 is fastest right now. I don't deny that but AMD is running well enough to do anything with Windows or Linux that you need. This is not like the comparison between HeatBurst and K8.

The biggest improvements are in games where the GPU matters just as much as the CPU. I always say that if AM2 gives you 60fps, never dropping below 30fps and Core 2 gives you 70fps and never drops below 30fps how can you actually tell the difference?

As far as 4x4 they say a pair of FX70 will cost $999 MSRP but will probably end up slightly lower.

I am looking at overall system price not just the price of the chips.
October 11, 2006 6:01:06 PM

You are wasting your keyboard explaining to BaronBS. I told you, try to explain to your keyboard first. It will take a hint before BaronBS does.
October 11, 2006 6:02:59 PM

Quote:
I am looking at overall system price
Why don't you start looking for a brain and perhaps for a job. We'll be more happy than you.
October 11, 2006 6:07:09 PM

Quote:
It is exactly that semantic!

IF I license some technology and make no change, well I can market it with any name I want it's my right!

I beleive the credit should go to the compagny who developed the technology, not the one who tweaked it for their particular use, and I think that's the point Elmo is trying to do!

And the only difference between EMT64 and AMD64 is a small implementation difference. And the fact that marketing people had to find a name. I dont think ANY credit should go to Intel, and I am sure you agree with that, they never pushed x86-64, they adopted it when it was necessary because of the market!

@Elmo: I would say give it up but I learn all sort of interesting stuff so...well... good luck 8)



I would give Intel some credit. Adding the registers and instructions was done by Intel. Increasing the bus speed and "creating" cHT means AMD gets the credit.

I wouldn't credit Dell for building their machines because someone else does it. Let's just end with I never heard that LDT\HT was an EV7 license until today.

Like you said you learn something new everyday. Hopefully everywhere not just here.
October 11, 2006 6:13:21 PM

Quote:
I am looking at overall system price
Why don't you start looking for a brain and perhaps for a job. We'll be more happy than you.

I guess because I already have a job and it isn't Tom's forum. Having a "brain" is obviously not all it's cracked up to be considering that I went from a SW tester to an enterprise-level C# developer in less time than it takes to go to CSc school.

I always hope I remember things correctly that don't affect my salary but having read almost 100 C# books in two years means that I am not paying that much attention to CPU tech or to you.

So if I can get a n FX70 system for what I paid for my 4400+ that means it's a DAMN GOOD DEAL. It should be 100% faster for compiling and VMs.
October 11, 2006 6:44:07 PM

Quote:
Crap I hate jumping in the middle of this... but in response to the "FX is not a joke CPU" comment by BM... of course it's not a joke, but the problem is that AMD's top-of-the-line CPU generally weighs in around $1000... and if you're going to need two of them?!? Well, that's just stupid. Just accept it... for this particular moment in time, the ball is in AMD's court and Intel is just waiting for the return. For the record my desktop is an AMD X2-4400 so don't think I'm some rabid Intel fanatic. If I had my choice I'd definitely have an Intel right now... and anyone who doesn't share that opinion, well they're just in a state of denial at this point.


I have a 4400+ also and I wouldn't get a Core 2. Not because it's faster or slower but because I prefer AMD. It used to be the opposite.

FX was and is for the enthusiast not everyone. If they remove the server features, high-end systems with 2GB RAM should come in under $2000 at least for FX70. That's not too bad. My 4400+ system cost me that a year ago.

Although I appreciate the courteous response, I still must disagree. A C2D system is better in every way than my X2-4400... and if I could trade my X2 in for the C2D I would do it in a heartbeat. Because a new C2D system does cost a good bit (I'd need a new board, new memory to go with the processor) I'm holding off on the purchase. The performance gain just isn't great enough to justify the costs. However, I do not see how ANYONE... no matter how stubborn... could still cling to AMD... Intel just has too much of a lead at this point.

I am trying to do something that everyone else has failed at... Baron, please acknowledge that (for now) Intel does produce the best high-end processors... or provide evidence to the contrary.

And back to the 4X4 thing... do you really think those processors will cost $1000 each? That's just crazy.

Core 2 is fastest right now. I don't deny that but AMD is running well enough to do anything with Windows or Linux that you need. This is not like the comparison between HeatBurst and K8.

The biggest improvements are in games where the GPU matters just as much as the CPU. I always say that if AM2 gives you 60fps, never dropping below 30fps and Core 2 gives you 70fps and never drops below 30fps how can you actually tell the difference?

As far as 4x4 they say a pair of FX70 will cost $999 MSRP but will probably end up slightly lower.

I am looking at overall system price not just the price of the chips.

Well, $999 for a pair sounds perfectly reasonable... undoubtedly AMD's profit margin is going to be lower as Intel is using a smaller process to make one CPU where AMD will have to two separate physical chips... and that in and of itself will contribute to the AMD's total system cost... you'd need two heatsinks and fans or else two blocks for water cooling. That right there makes it unfriendly to overclockers. Definitely the Intel quadcore is gonna be the most convenient route if not the fastest initially.

Now on to the topic of Baron bashing... as you will see from the above responses, if every sentence out of your mouth is not "F Baron... he's a tard" and so on you will get an intelligent response.
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2006 6:44:36 PM

Quote:
I am looking at overall system price
Why don't you start looking for a brain and perhaps for a job. We'll be more happy than you.

I guess because I already have a job and it isn't Tom's forum. Having a "brain" is obviously not all it's cracked up to be considering that I went from a SW tester to an enterprise-level C# developer in less time than it takes to go to CSc school.

I always hope I remember things correctly that don't affect my salary but having read almost 100 C# books in two years means that I am not paying that much attention to CPU tech or to you.

So if I can get a n FX70 system for what I paid for my 4400+ that means it's a DAMN GOOD DEAL. It should be 100% faster for compiling and VMs.

Really.. who do you work for and could you take a picture of your employee hiring documents :wink:
October 11, 2006 7:10:51 PM

Quote:
Crap I hate jumping in the middle of this... but in response to the "FX is not a joke CPU" comment by BM... of course it's not a joke, but the problem is that AMD's top-of-the-line CPU generally weighs in around $1000... and if you're going to need two of them?!? Well, that's just stupid. Just accept it... for this particular moment in time, the ball is in AMD's court and Intel is just waiting for the return. For the record my desktop is an AMD X2-4400 so don't think I'm some rabid Intel fanatic. If I had my choice I'd definitely have an Intel right now... and anyone who doesn't share that opinion, well they're just in a state of denial at this point.


I have a 4400+ also and I wouldn't get a Core 2. Not because it's faster or slower but because I prefer AMD. It used to be the opposite.

FX was and is for the enthusiast not everyone. If they remove the server features, high-end systems with 2GB RAM should come in under $2000 at least for FX70. That's not too bad. My 4400+ system cost me that a year ago.

Although I appreciate the courteous response, I still must disagree. A C2D system is better in every way than my X2-4400... and if I could trade my X2 in for the C2D I would do it in a heartbeat. Because a new C2D system does cost a good bit (I'd need a new board, new memory to go with the processor) I'm holding off on the purchase. The performance gain just isn't great enough to justify the costs. However, I do not see how ANYONE... no matter how stubborn... could still cling to AMD... Intel just has too much of a lead at this point.

I am trying to do something that everyone else has failed at... Baron, please acknowledge that (for now) Intel does produce the best high-end processors... or provide evidence to the contrary.

And back to the 4X4 thing... do you really think those processors will cost $1000 each? That's just crazy.

Core 2 is fastest right now. I don't deny that but AMD is running well enough to do anything with Windows or Linux that you need. This is not like the comparison between HeatBurst and K8.

The biggest improvements are in games where the GPU matters just as much as the CPU. I always say that if AM2 gives you 60fps, never dropping below 30fps and Core 2 gives you 70fps and never drops below 30fps how can you actually tell the difference?

As far as 4x4 they say a pair of FX70 will cost $999 MSRP but will probably end up slightly lower.

I am looking at overall system price not just the price of the chips.

Well, $999 for a pair sounds perfectly reasonable... undoubtedly AMD's profit margin is going to be lower as Intel is using a smaller process to make one CPU where AMD will have to two separate physical chips... and that in and of itself will contribute to the AMD's total system cost... you'd need two heatsinks and fans or else two blocks for water cooling. That right there makes it unfriendly to overclockers. Definitely the Intel quadcore is gonna be the most convenient route if not the fastest initially.

Now on to the topic of Baron bashing... as you will see from the above responses, if every sentence out of your mouth is not "F Baron... he's a tard" and so on you will get an intelligent response.


I agree that Kentsfield will be cooler. I can't say about the price difference for the system, but C2Q will be $1200 and unless nVidia ramps their SLI designs quickly, the mobos for it will definitely be around the same price.

Because these will both be EXTREME systems, there is really no way to compare. I mean sure you can say that C2Q may get 150fps where 4x4 only gets 110fps so it's faster but the experience is exactly the same.

I favor AMDs (DECs\Intels\HPs\Compaqs) HyperTransport and the idea of getting an HTX slot is creamy.

ATi is already designing a 4 GPU chipset for it and I'm sure nVidia is right behind (well actually with 7950 they only need two slots for 4 GPUs).

I would actually hope to see GPUs go into HTX as physics procs. Even with PCi-e 2.0 almost spec'd HT3 will still be a lot better for interconnects.

ANyway, I hope to see 4x4 start out with non registered RAM but if it does I may just start with a cheaper 2xxx chip and wait for price drops. AMD should definitely do the right thing and move FX VERY QUICKLY to 65nm. That would offset the volume vs. cost to manuf ratio greatly.
October 11, 2006 7:15:25 PM

Quote:
Really.. who do you work for and could you take a picture of your employee hiring documents :wink:

No, he can't. He is a liar.
October 11, 2006 7:32:28 PM

Quote:
I guess because I already have a job and it isn't Tom's forum. Having a "brain" is obviously not all it's cracked up to be considering that I went from a SW tester to an enterprise-level C# developer in less time than it takes to go to CSc school.

I always hope I remember things correctly that don't affect my salary but having read almost 100 C# books in two years means that I am not paying that much attention to CPU tech or to you.

So if I can get a n FX70 system for what I paid for my 4400+ that means it's a DAMN GOOD DEAL. It should be 100% faster for compiling and VMs.

Man, you're a cocky bastard. You have more arrogance in one post than the other 326 members online have in all we've ever posted. I ask you this, are you sure you never got your ass kicked in for being such a wiseass?
October 11, 2006 8:33:37 PM

Quote:
I am looking at overall system price
Why don't you start looking for a brain and perhaps for a job. We'll be more happy than you.

I guess because I already have a job and it isn't Tom's forum. Having a "brain" is obviously not all it's cracked up to be considering that I went from a SW tester to an enterprise-level C# developer in less time than it takes to go to CSc school.

I always hope I remember things correctly that don't affect my salary but having read almost 100 C# books in two years means that I am not paying that much attention to CPU tech or to you.

So if I can get a n FX70 system for what I paid for my 4400+ that means it's a DAMN GOOD DEAL. It should be 100% faster for compiling and VMs.

Really.. who do you work for and could you take a picture of your employee hiring documents :wink:


I won't be posting anything else. We've been through this when I posted my Microsoft blue badge and my Windows XP Ship-It gift pics. As far as who I work for now that's none of your business. Where are your employment papers?
October 11, 2006 8:36:27 PM

Quote:
I guess because I already have a job and it isn't Tom's forum. Having a "brain" is obviously not all it's cracked up to be considering that I went from a SW tester to an enterprise-level C# developer in less time than it takes to go to CSc school.

I always hope I remember things correctly that don't affect my salary but having read almost 100 C# books in two years means that I am not paying that much attention to CPU tech or to you.

So if I can get a n FX70 system for what I paid for my 4400+ that means it's a DAMN GOOD DEAL. It should be 100% faster for compiling and VMs.

Man, you're a cocky bastard. You have more arrogance in one post than the other 326 members online have in all we've ever posted. I ask you this, are you sure you never got your ass kicked in for being such a wiseass?


Why cause I don't deny that I am a developer? I pat myself on the back for all of my hard work to get where I am. Everyone who works hard to be good at something should.
a b à CPUs
October 11, 2006 9:27:52 PM

Financial Adviser, Scotiabank.
October 11, 2006 10:02:06 PM

Quote:
I guess because I already have a job and it isn't Tom's forum. Having a "brain" is obviously not all it's cracked up to be considering that I went from a SW tester to an enterprise-level C# developer in less time than it takes to go to CSc school.

I always hope I remember things correctly that don't affect my salary but having read almost 100 C# books in two years means that I am not paying that much attention to CPU tech or to you.

So if I can get a n FX70 system for what I paid for my 4400+ that means it's a DAMN GOOD DEAL. It should be 100% faster for compiling and VMs.

Man, you're a cocky bastard. You have more arrogance in one post than the other 326 members online have in all we've ever posted. I ask you this, are you sure you never got your ass kicked in for being such a wiseass?

Speak for your self and leave the other 326 members! If you read the whole topic you’ll see that gOJDO’s arrogance is the issue not baron’s (at least he/she is on the topic).
!