Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

whats the verdict on quadfx and amd in 2007

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 3, 2006 9:38:47 PM

The more i read, the more i think intel is gonna rule the next two years, they are beating amd with their huge resourses and innovation as of late. I can only hope that amd has a bitching cpu up their sleeve, or they face loosing greater numbers of enthusiasts
December 3, 2006 9:59:07 PM

Quote:
The more i read, the more i think intel is gonna rule the next two years, they are beating amd with their huge resourses and innovation as of late. I can only hope that amd has a bitching cpu up their sleeve, or they face loosing greater numbers of enthusiasts


Going dual socket on teh desktop with non-ECC is not innovation but recreating PD(MCM-wise) is?

QFX will be fine for Vista. It seems liek ALienWare isn't even going to release their system until Vista comes out as well they shouldn't.

WHether or not it can use up to 700W (where C2Q uses alomst 600W) isn't the point. The point is that smart people knew what it would allow. It closed the gap tremendously between AMD and Intel high end at the SAME PRICE POINT.

Though most reviewers tried to up the HT speed, Legitreviews got up to 3.2GHz (sure, not amazing) by turning up the multiplier (FXs trademark).

I never wanted it for OC anyway. Most people would stick it in a corner and be amazed. Well-threaded apps show greater than 100% scaling. AGena ( the high end single socket quad) will do maybe even more over X2 so people can get decked out 5200+ now an dthen AGena or go with QFX in Feb and get AGena FX in Oct/Nov ( though I'd wait at least a year).


AMD will do fine as they always have. ANd now they have the relatively good ATi income (imagine paying on a loan with what you bought).
If MAD is smart they will get a new Rev out to try and lower power somewhat. EVen 10% per chip would be a marked improvement, Though a dual Xeon or Opteron with SLI will not be a joke for power either. That is th enature of the beast.

Anand got idle power down to 214W with an 8800GTX and Raptor RAID, so most times you will be using a similar amount as C2Q. Of course, load power is much greater but I don't get 100% load on my 4400+ when playing Q4 at UHQ 1280, so my gaming will not be a real power monster (3D Mark is designed to operate in peak). Looking at what ONE 8800GTX draws, it's so far-fetched. (225W+)
December 3, 2006 10:19:23 PM

I'd say that stating flat-out that Intel will rule over the next two years is a little silly, especially with AMD's revamped architecture right around the corner and QuadFX is tapping on the QX6700's shoulder in terms of all-out performance. Think QuadFX with Barcelona-based processors, an ATI-designed chipset that goes along with their upcoming DX10 compatible video cards running in Crossfire (triple or quad Crossfire in the future, maybe? 1.2Kw PSUs, plx) and you're talking about performance that would make even the highest end system today bow out, and that's in six or seven months. Theoretically, of course.

Intel assuredly won't be counting AMD out, so you shouldn't either.
Related resources
December 3, 2006 10:57:26 PM

Quote:
The more i read, the more i think intel is gonna rule the next two years, they are beating amd with their huge resourses and innovation as of late. I can only hope that amd has a bitching cpu up their sleeve, or they face loosing greater numbers of enthusiasts


I would add a poll to this thread. Would you buy a quadfx?
Will you buy a quadfx? Baron is the only one I know who talks
about buying it. Unless, deep down he is praying for a paper launch.

So stand-up and be counted - who's buying quadfx?
December 3, 2006 11:07:46 PM

Quote:
The more i read, the more i think intel is gonna rule the next two years, they are beating amd with their huge resourses and innovation as of late. I can only hope that amd has a bitching cpu up their sleeve, or they face loosing greater numbers of enthusiasts


Going dual socket on teh desktop with non-ECC is not innovation but recreating PD(MCM-wise) is?

QFX will be fine for Vista. It seems liek ALienWare isn't even going to release their system until Vista comes out as well they shouldn't.

WHether or not it can use up to 700W (where C2Q uses alomst 600W) isn't the point. The point is that smart people knew what it would allow. It closed the gap tremendously between AMD and Intel high end at the SAME PRICE POINT.

Though most reviewers tried to up the HT speed, Legitreviews got up to 3.2GHz (sure, not amazing) by turning up the multiplier (FXs trademark).

I never wanted it for OC anyway. Most people would stick it in a corner and be amazed. Well-threaded apps show greater than 100% scaling. AGena ( the high end single socket quad) will do maybe even more over X2 so people can get decked out 5200+ now an dthen AGena or go with QFX in Feb and get AGena FX in Oct/Nov ( though I'd wait at least a year).


AMD will do fine as they always have. ANd now they have the relatively good ATi income (imagine paying on a loan with what you bought).
If MAD is smart they will get a new Rev out to try and lower power somewhat. EVen 10% per chip would be a marked improvement, Though a dual Xeon or Opteron with SLI will not be a joke for power either. That is th enature of the beast.

Anand got idle power down to 214W with an 8800GTX and Raptor RAID, so most times you will be using a similar amount as C2Q. Of course, load power is much greater but I don't get 100% load on my 4400+ when playing Q4 at UHQ 1280, so my gaming will not be a real power monster (3D Mark is designed to operate in peak). Looking at what ONE 8800GTX draws, it's so far-fetched. (225W+)


WHether or not it can use up to 700W (where C2Q uses alomst 600W) isn't the point. The point is that smart people knew what it would allow. It closed the gap tremendously between AMD and Intel high end at the SAME PRICE POINT.

bull****.
December 3, 2006 11:16:06 PM

Going dual socket on teh desktop with non-ECC is not innovation but recreating PD(MCM-wise) is?

No. It's not an innovation at all. Does anyone remember the Abit BP6 motherboard back in 1999? That thing would hold dual Celeron 300A's and run 'em at 450mhz perfectly for years! :)  That was dual processing on the desktop, nearly eight years ago.
December 4, 2006 12:00:30 AM

I would probably still pay a good bit to get hold of a dual-1.4Ghz PIII system.

As to the topic, it really does close the performance gap at the high end, but doesn't quite surpass.
December 4, 2006 1:46:43 AM

Quote:
4x4 was an extraordinary dissappointment, 2007 will be a tough year for AMD but they will hang in there just fine. They have their work cut out for them....

The next tell tale sign is 65 nm, how well the clock up.... if they don't go much beyond the 90 nm CPUs, they are in some trouble. They will then be relying solely on the capability of Barcelona architecturally--if that flops, then it will be a little more than tough as they have a $2.5 billion loan to pay back.

Jack


So now you're claiming to be an industry analyst?
December 4, 2006 1:53:05 AM

I thought YOU were the one who claimed to be an industry analyst.
December 4, 2006 2:25:21 AM

Quote:
Nope, just my opinion.... you were the one who claimed to have downgraded both companies stock at one point, I knew that to be a lie.... as you can rarely be truthful, or even knowledgable enough to actual forumlate a conclusion remotely close to the correct one.



And you were the paranoid reactionary who ran off with a sarcastic statement. Major news sources are now reporting that the price war INTEL STARTED is more than likely affecting all CPU manufs' ASP.
December 4, 2006 2:35:52 AM

Quote:
Going dual socket on teh desktop with non-ECC is not innovation but recreating PD(MCM-wise) is?
Maybe because running dual socket/non-ECC really isn't? I had a couple P3 dual socket setups, never a single stick of reg/ecc in either of em. Even AMD's earlier dual socket chipset (MPX) could run with 2 sticks of non reg/ecc. Just because they revamp an old concept and slap buzzwords on it does not make it innovative.

Quote:
The point is that smart people knew what it would allow. It closed the gap tremendously between AMD and Intel high end at the SAME PRICE POINT.
No, I think the point is that smart people will go with what's faster at the "SAME PRICE POINT". Wow, maybe AMD should get an "Most Improved" award for what they've done. :roll:
December 4, 2006 2:41:33 AM

Quote:
Going dual socket on teh desktop with non-ECC is not innovation but recreating PD(MCM-wise) is?
Maybe because running dual socket/non-ECC really isn't? I had a couple P3 dual socket setups, never a single stick of reg/ecc in either of em. Even AMD's earlier dual socket chipset (MPX) could run with 2 sticks of non reg/ecc.

Quote:
The point is that smart people knew what it would allow. It closed the gap tremendously between AMD and Intel high end at the SAME PRICE POINT.
No, I think the point is that smart people will go with what's faster at a given price point. Wow, maybe AMD should get an "Most Improved" of the year award for what they've done. :roll:

This is just a preview. One Agena will do better than QFX as one chip at 65nm. Those old BPs couldn't edge on C2Q in anything yet QFX does. If Vista handles DX10 games better(NUMA-wise) we'll see relative increases over FX62.

For multicore games it already shows 100% scaling.
December 4, 2006 2:44:15 AM

I guess the rumor is that AMD's 65nm process is at the upper end of their expectations in terms of performance and quality. That's the rumor, anyway, you know how that goes.
December 4, 2006 3:02:14 AM

Quote:
I guess the rumor is that AMD's 65nm process is at the upper end of their expectations in terms of performance and quality. That's the rumor, anyway, you know how that goes.


It's a wait and see game, they have had a great deal of time to tweak it in.... let's hope it goes above 2.6 GHz, I have seen mixed reports of 2.6 or 2.8 GHz release speeds. 2.8 GHz would be about in line where AMD phases in a new process technology with respect to the older tech. 90 nm launched at nominal speeds about at the top bin, maybe 1 bin lower.

Charlie has been wrong before though, he is as well as Fuad are a little anxious to see the 65 nm parts.

Supposedly the second batch of 65nm processors are supposed to hit 2.9Ghz, so they're at least planning on that, and those are slated for early next year. One thing is for sure, within a few months we'll know for definitively.
December 4, 2006 3:06:03 AM

You guys keep forgetting one thing. Dual socket doesn't work with xp. That means vista. Home and premium versions of vista do NOT have support for dual socket. Only buisness, enterprise and ultimate will work with dual socket.

And only ultimate has gaming support as well.

So if you wanna play games and run a dual socket quad fx board, you are gonna have to pay 450$ for an OS.
December 4, 2006 3:11:07 AM

Quote:
You guys keep forgetting one thing. Dual socket doesn't work with xp. That means vista. Home and premium versions of vista do NOT have support for dual socket. Only buisness, enterprise and ultimate will work with dual socket.

And only ultimate has gaming support as well.

So if you wanna play games and run a dual socket quad fx board, you are gonna have to pay 450$ for an OS.


XP64 does, but not the 32-bit variety.
December 4, 2006 3:20:50 AM

Quote:
And only ultimate has gaming support as well.

So if you wanna play games and run a dual socket quad fx board, you are gonna have to pay 450$ for an OS.


I don't know about that, but I'm sure that Ultimate will be both the gamer's and pirate's OS of choice. Rest assured, anyone who buys a quad fx board will be using an OS that can take advantage of its multiple sockets.
December 4, 2006 6:51:33 AM

Quote:
The more i read, the more i think intel is gonna rule the next two years, they are beating amd with their huge resourses and innovation as of late. I can only hope that amd has a bitching cpu up their sleeve, or they face loosing greater numbers of enthusiasts


Going dual socket on teh desktop with non-ECC is not innovation but recreating PD(MCM-wise) is?

QFX will be fine for Vista. It seems liek ALienWare isn't even going to release their system until Vista comes out as well they shouldn't.

WHether or not it can use up to 700W (where C2Q uses alomst 600W) isn't the point. The point is that smart people knew what it would allow. It closed the gap tremendously between AMD and Intel high end at the SAME PRICE POINT.

Though most reviewers tried to up the HT speed, Legitreviews got up to 3.2GHz (sure, not amazing) by turning up the multiplier (FXs trademark).

I never wanted it for OC anyway. Most people would stick it in a corner and be amazed. Well-threaded apps show greater than 100% scaling. AGena ( the high end single socket quad) will do maybe even more over X2 so people can get decked out 5200+ now an dthen AGena or go with QFX in Feb and get AGena FX in Oct/Nov ( though I'd wait at least a year).


AMD will do fine as they always have. ANd now they have the relatively good ATi income (imagine paying on a loan with what you bought).
If MAD is smart they will get a new Rev out to try and lower power somewhat. EVen 10% per chip would be a marked improvement, Though a dual Xeon or Opteron with SLI will not be a joke for power either. That is th enature of the beast.

Anand got idle power down to 214W with an 8800GTX and Raptor RAID, so most times you will be using a similar amount as C2Q. Of course, load power is much greater but I don't get 100% load on my 4400+ when playing Q4 at UHQ 1280, so my gaming will not be a real power monster (3D Mark is designed to operate in peak). Looking at what ONE 8800GTX draws, it's so far-fetched. (225W+)

WHether or not it can use up to 700W (where C2Q uses alomst 600W) isn't the point.


wtf are you talking about, amd is the new old intel
December 4, 2006 3:34:39 PM

Quote:
Nope, just my opinion.... you were the one who claimed to have downgraded both companies stock at one point, I knew that to be a lie.... as you can rarely be truthful, or even knowledgable enough to actual forumlate a conclusion remotely close to the correct one.



And you were the paranoid reactionary who ran off with a sarcastic statement. Major news sources are now reporting that the price war INTEL STARTED is more than likely affecting all CPU manufs' ASP.
....Hold up, since both you and Shakirou are complaining about the price war I've got a general question to ask you, are you out of your mind?
December 4, 2006 4:22:00 PM

Quote:
The more i read, the more i think intel is gonna rule the next two years, they are beating amd with their huge resourses and innovation as of late. I can only hope that amd has a bitching cpu up their sleeve, or they face loosing greater numbers of enthusiasts


Architecturally, K8L may be better than Core Arch.
But Intel's dominance is achieved by capital but not architecture.
December 4, 2006 4:49:52 PM

Quote:
Going dual socket on teh desktop with non-ECC is not innovation but recreating PD(MCM-wise) is?
Maybe because running dual socket/non-ECC really isn't? I had a couple P3 dual socket setups, never a single stick of reg/ecc in either of em. Even AMD's earlier dual socket chipset (MPX) could run with 2 sticks of non reg/ecc.

Quote:
The point is that smart people knew what it would allow. It closed the gap tremendously between AMD and Intel high end at the SAME PRICE POINT.
No, I think the point is that smart people will go with what's faster at a given price point. Wow, maybe AMD should get an "Most Improved" of the year award for what they've done. :roll:

This is just a preview. One Agena will do better than QFX as one chip at 65nm. Those old BPs couldn't edge on C2Q in anything yet QFX does. If Vista handles DX10 games better(NUMA-wise) we'll see relative increases over FX62.

For multicore games it already shows 100% scaling.
I like chicken and beans. This one time I ate peanutbutter and didn't know I had an open bottle of soda!!! I came home later to find that my dog ate my lunch meat, I wanted to kill him. And I don't like using fabric softeners, they make me chafe.
December 4, 2006 10:30:59 PM

Quote:
4x4 was an extraordinary dissappointment, 2007 will be a tough year for AMD but they will hang in there just fine. They have their work cut out for them....

The next tell tale sign is 65 nm, how well the clock up.... if they don't go much beyond the 90 nm CPUs, they are in some trouble. They will then be relying solely on the capability of Barcelona architecturally--if that flops, then it will be a little more than tough as they have a $2.5 billion loan to pay back.

Jack


So now you're claiming to be an industry analyst?

Baron, the only people here to make false claims are you, MMM(aka MrsBytch) 9 Inch and sharimoron
December 4, 2006 10:38:22 PM

Quote:
Nope, just my opinion.... you were the one who claimed to have downgraded both companies stock at one point, I knew that to be a lie.... as you can rarely be truthful, or even knowledgable enough to actual forumlate a conclusion remotely close to the correct one.



And you were the paranoid reactionary who ran off with a sarcastic statement. Major news sources are now reporting that the price war INTEL STARTED is more than likely affecting all CPU manufs' ASP.

This is true, Intel's ASPs are $121 AMD's are $86 per Mercury Research.

This is down about 20% for Intel and about 35% for AMD from the start of the year.

However, could you direct me to my sarcastic statement I don't recall trying to be sarcastic today.

Jack

I was being sarcastic when I initially said that "I'm the analyst who had downgrade both companies." Ever since I have been quoted as saying I was an analyst. I knew this price war would hurt the industry because never has a new arch been priced less than the previous - especially when the new arch is 70% faster.

BTW, Brisbane is coming out at odd numbers and they have not announced higher than 5000+ which will run at 2.7GHz. It would be even better if the async'd the memory timing with a divisor cause the 5000+ still won't run at DDR2 800 unles you pump the bus a little.
December 4, 2006 10:41:54 PM

Quote:
You guys keep forgetting one thing. Dual socket doesn't work with xp. That means vista. Home and premium versions of vista do NOT have support for dual socket. Only buisness, enterprise and ultimate will work with dual socket.

And only ultimate has gaming support as well.

So if you wanna play games and run a dual socket quad fx board, you are gonna have to pay 450$ for an OS.



Dual socket does work with XP Pro, just not XP Home and if you know where the Registry setting is....
I think everyone knows that dual sockets require Pro.
December 4, 2006 10:46:32 PM

Quote:
Dual socket does work with XP Pro, just not XP Home and if you know where the Registry setting is....
I think everyone knows that dual sockets require Pro.

Nice mentioning that Baron,
4x4 can't run on other versions of Windows, except Professional. And Professional versions are more expencive than others. For example Windows Vista Pro is priced around $450.
Also, professional software licencing prices are based on the CPU count. 4x4 users will have to pay for 2 CPUs license.
December 4, 2006 10:59:06 PM

Quote:
Dual socket does work with XP Pro, just not XP Home and if you know where the Registry setting is....
I think everyone knows that dual sockets require Pro.

Nice mentioning that Baron,
4x4 can't run on other versions of Windows, except Professional. And Professional versions are more expencive than others. For example Windows Vista Pro is priced around $450.
Also, professional software licencing prices are based on the CPU count. 4x4 users will have to pay for 2 CPUs license.

No, Windows is per machine for Pro (2 sockets) and Server(2+ sockets) since a 16 server box would cost 16X Server 2003 price.

MS had to change their licensing because of multi-core. It's still just one machine after all.
December 4, 2006 11:00:13 PM

Quote:

QFX will be fine for Vista. It seems liek ALienWare isn't even going to release their system until Vista comes out as well they shouldn't.


Yet another one of the excuses you make for AMDs current level of performance. Recently it has been "4x4 will beat Intel", now that the system is available, and it fails, you new excuse is "Vista will solve all problems" WRONG Vista will help, to be sure, but to steal one of JJ's remarks, Vista will do little more than polish the turd that is 4x4.
And the sad thing is, you keep making excuses when no excuses are needed. AMD is a fine company with fine products. QFX is not a fine product. It was a shock induced fear reaction, and AMDs most significant mistake since K6.

Quote:

WHether or not it can use up to 700W (where C2Q uses alomst 600W) isn't the point. The point is that smart people knew what it would allow. It closed the gap tremendously between AMD and Intel high end at the SAME PRICE POINT.


Wrong. Yet another one of your galactically moronic statements. Developing a system to use 2 CPUs, twice the RAM, twice the FSB bandwidth and up to 4 times the GPUs to ALMOST catch up to a single socket design. Baron, you just need to stay in you little universe. You will never be ready for reality, and its simply not safe for your misplaced pride and false AMD-egocentricism.

Quote:

Though most reviewers tried to up the HT speed, Legitreviews got up to 3.2GHz (sure, not amazing) by turning up the multiplier (FXs trademark).

I never wanted it for OC anyway. Most people would stick it in a corner and be amazed. Well-threaded apps show greater than 100% scaling. AGena ( the high end single socket quad) will do maybe even more over X2 so people can get decked out 5200+ now an dthen AGena or go with QFX in Feb and get AGena FX in Oct/Nov ( though I'd wait at least a year).


Its amazing. You never want to overclock, you're not interested in speed, you dont care about benchmarks yada yada yada. For someone whos so ambivelent to the whole scene, you certainly seem to run you suck-hole quite a bit about how great one company is relative to another.

Quote:

AMD will do fine as they always have. ANd now they have the relatively good ATi income (imagine paying on a loan with what you bought).
If MAD is smart they will get a new Rev out to try and lower power somewhat. EVen 10% per chip would be a marked improvement, Though a dual Xeon or Opteron with SLI will not be a joke for power either. That is th enature of the beast.

Anand got idle power down to 214W with an 8800GTX and Raptor RAID, so most times you will be using a similar amount as C2Q. Of course, load power is much greater but I don't get 100% load on my 4400+ when playing Q4 at UHQ 1280, so my gaming will not be a real power monster (3D Mark is designed to operate in peak). Looking at what ONE 8800GTX draws, it's so far-fetched. (225W+)


Woo hoo. 214 watts at idle. Slightly less than my E6600 uses at load. What an accomplishment. AMDs twin dual core nighmare can use slightly less electrity doing nothing at all vs a single dual core working its ass off. Wow, lets get that stat to the PR people right away.
December 4, 2006 11:36:33 PM

Turpit, you do realize that the QuadFX platform does beat the QX6700 in a number of benchmarks and ties in others? Running XP64 or Vista is what it requires to get comparable performance, but it IS comparable. If you're calling it a turd, you're...wrong. I did a post a few days ago as to pros and cons of it, and as it turns out, when you actually use an OS that is NUMA capable, it performs rather well. It doesn't beat the QX6700 overall, but then no one really expected it to, and CLEARLY the energy consumption is higher. It doesn't win, but it closes the gap rather nicely, and CAN compete at the same high-end price point.

The future upgrade prospects for it make it not an entirely unwise buy, but the same could also be said for an Intel system. Except I expect a QuadFX by mid-next year to be the top dog in terms of overall performance. And I mean, slaughterous performance, as the K8 remains competitive in the current QuadFX and the Barcelona upgrades are substantial.

Such hate at this forum. Such hate....
December 4, 2006 11:40:44 PM

Yes it wins. In the 800 x 600 tests or by margins so marginal, they define the term marginal.
December 4, 2006 11:54:53 PM

Quote:
Yes it wins. In the 800 x 600 tests or by margins so marginal, they define the term marginal.


Where is the love man, the LOVE?

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/425/1/
Haven't you heard? I lack such emotions or concepts that are common in most people.
Nice link though, I haven't seen that in my searches. I was more in anticipation of the RD600 than failed tech.
December 4, 2006 11:57:14 PM

Quote:
Yes it wins. In the 800 x 600 tests or by margins so marginal, they define the term marginal.


Where is the love man, the LOVE?

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/425/1/
Haven't you heard? I lack such emotions or concepts that are common in most people.
Nice link though, I haven't seen that in my searches. I was more in anticipation of the RD600 than failed tech.

Actually it seems they've removed some benchmark results and/or changed some. Hmmm...maybe I just had too rough of a weekend (birthday) :roll: .

Ignore me.
December 5, 2006 12:02:14 AM

And just when you had my full attention. Happy belated birthday though.
December 5, 2006 12:21:46 AM

Quote:
And just when you had my full attention. Happy belated birthday though.


Thanks.

It seems they did take some down, including some memory intensive benchmarks, I think. I'll shoot them an email if I get the time tonight and ask just to make sure I'm not making things up.
December 5, 2006 3:35:46 AM

Quote:
What?

Quote:
Dumb.

You mean I'm not allowed to post random gibberish that has nothing to do with the post I'm quoting/replying to? Or does only Baron get to do that?
December 5, 2006 3:43:22 AM

Absolutely correct. One moron is enough.
December 5, 2006 4:10:54 AM

So, do we get rid of you or Baron?
December 5, 2006 4:11:30 AM

I have to agree... Verdict: Fail.

Before 4x4 came out, there was all this talk about how the cHT would provide high bandwidth low-latency intercommunication between the CPUs managing independent memory banks. So in theory you'd have a quad- or octo-core system with four channels of RAM and pretty close to the performance with an on-die 4-channel controller.

But since the actual release, we've seen that the cHT is a weak link that requires OS modification to work around... some single threaded applications are suffering substantially with 4x4. That's so disappointing to hear and a surprise to me. They need to resolve the cHT latency issue.

I believe an OS workaround such as that slated for Vista is only a compromised solution. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but doesn't NUMA awareness only salvage single-threaded performance if a thread can be made to work only on one of the two sets of RAM banks? So you'd need twice the RAM that a single thread would need at a time as well as possibly experience some latency while the OS tries to swap around RAM allocation to make room for a new thread (depending on how the OS handles NUMA). In addition, it seems that any one thread in 4x4 cannot make use of more than dual-channel RAM bandwidth because we aren't seeing the cHT bandwidth adding onto the base IMC bandwidth, meaning that one K8 cannot simultaneously receive data on the cHT and proprietary DRAM links.

The other requirement for a platform to take off, of course, is adequate performing CPUs. As I hinted before, 2 K8's don't currently outperform 2 E6700s, leaving memory performance as the only saving grace. We'll have to wait and see what AMD CPUs come out in 2007 and how they perform. AMD has a technical advantage in that heat dissipation is easier with two sockets, but Intel has the technical advantage in lowering power consumption with a smaller/more efficient manufacturing process.
December 5, 2006 7:25:11 AM

I'm no expert at NUMA, but while HT supports continued operation in processor failure scenarios (including under NUMA), AMD may not necessarily implement this on FX as they have with Opteron. 4x4 is barely out right now, so there isn't much information about its error handling support just yet.
December 5, 2006 9:04:36 AM

Am I the only one who would be interested in an AM2 FX76? Sounds like it could be a fairly nice piece of kit if they could keep the price to well under $500.
December 5, 2006 11:43:57 AM

Quote:
So, do we get rid of you or Baron?

Nice try but pretty lame. Pray tell, what makes me a moron? I'm waiting.....
December 5, 2006 11:54:27 AM

With the 45nm Penryn and Yorkfield in 2007 and Intel's new architecture, Nehalem around the corner, I don't see how AMD has a chance.

Let's hope AMD's patched up K8, "K8L" somehow closes the performance gap (which I doubt).
December 5, 2006 1:08:59 PM

Quote:
You guys keep forgetting one thing. Dual socket doesn't work with xp. That means vista. Home and premium versions of vista do NOT have support for dual socket. Only buisness, enterprise and ultimate will work with dual socket.

And only ultimate has gaming support as well.

So if you wanna play games and run a dual socket quad fx board, you are gonna have to pay 450$ for an OS.



Dual socket does work with XP Pro, just not XP Home and if you know where the Registry setting is....
I think everyone knows that dual sockets require Pro.

So? Last I checked, the only Windows O/S'es that were NUMA aware were Windows 2003 Server and it's flavors and Vista/Longhorn server. Even if you have WinXP Pro (be it 32 bit or 64 bit), 4x4 is going to run worse than the equivalent Intel based system. In order for 4x4 to even get remotely close to QX it requires a NUMA aware O/S and then ends up costing the purchaser more money for marginal performance for a single processor solution using a QX.

4x4 is a dead end for Enthusiasts and Gamers. 4x4 is in the realm of someone that will be doing things like CAD/CAM and/or Video Editting (and even then, the performance is marginal over QX6700). I would be dollars to donuts that the vast majority of people on these forums fall into either the Enthusiast camp or the Gamer camp with very few falling into either the CAD/CAM or Video Editting camps.

Simply put, 4x4 just does not have the price/performance of the QX line of processors. Unless something incredible happens for AMD, 4x4 will not take off with the Enthusiats and Gamers (maybe that's what AMD wants, but I doubt it).
December 5, 2006 4:10:28 PM

Quote:
With the 45nm Penryn and Yorkfield in 2007 and Intel's new architecture, Nehalem around the corner, I don't see how AMD has a chance.

Let's hope AMD's patched up K8, "K8L" somehow closes the performance gap (which I doubt).


Oh man, that statement absolutely wreaks of fanboyism. Patched-up K8, that's cute.

The Core architecture is just a patched-up PIII, after all. :roll:
December 5, 2006 4:13:26 PM

Quote:
With the 45nm Penryn and Yorkfield in 2007 and Intel's new architecture, Nehalem around the corner, I don't see how AMD has a chance.

Let's hope AMD's patched up K8, "K8L" somehow closes the performance gap (which I doubt).


Oh man, that statement absolutely wreaks of fanboyism. Patched-up K8, that's cute.

The Core architecture is just a patched-up PIII, after all. :roll:Two fanboys.....mono-a-mono.
December 5, 2006 4:15:57 PM

Quote:
With the 45nm Penryn and Yorkfield in 2007 and Intel's new architecture, Nehalem around the corner, I don't see how AMD has a chance.

Let's hope AMD's patched up K8, "K8L" somehow closes the performance gap (which I doubt).


Oh man, that statement absolutely wreaks of fanboyism. Patched-up K8, that's cute.

The Core architecture is just a patched-up PIII, after all. :roll:Two fanboys.....mono-a-mono.

:lol: 

I'm not quite a fanboy, though. There's a thing called logic, I like to use it. The PIII statement was a joke, I hope you know, :D 

All in good fun, all in good fun.
December 5, 2006 4:39:39 PM

DAAMIT people, why can't you see that all modern x86 processors are patched-up 8088s?
December 5, 2006 5:08:12 PM

Quote:
DAAMIT people, why can't you see that all modern x86 processors are patched-up 8088s?


Oh, I see, use the Inquirer's little thing for AMD/ATI. Who's the fanboi now? LOL. joking....

Patched up 8088s, I thought they were all patched up 4004? I guess I was pushing it too far into the past, eh?
!