Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

K10 and AM2

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 3, 2007 6:43:49 PM

Anyone care to speculate on how nicely K10 will play with AM2? I know the official line is that it will work, but will I see a performance hit, and if so, by how much? Is it reasonable to buy AM2 now with the view to add in K10 when it becomes available, or would I just be shooting myself in the foot?

From what I can tell, the main difference between AM2+ and AM2 will be that the HT link will be faster, is that correct? Any input greatly appreciated.. b/c it seems very tempting to build a cheap AM2/3600+ system right now and pop in K10 later

More about : k10 am2

May 3, 2007 7:15:32 PM

This is what i've been suggesting for a while now. The HT 3.0 spec should really only be useful in an MP server environment so performance won't really be affected. Hard to know for sure until actual products are out. The split power planes won't be supported on AM2, however CnQ is said to work as it is currently. This is information directly from AMD, so i'd tend to believe it.
That's what I would do if I were to build a system now or within the last 3 or 4 months for sure.
May 3, 2007 9:12:24 PM

Quote:
ht3 wont work.Aside from that I think it may do really well.

Another thing that won't work when plugging an AM2+ chip into an AM2 board will be the read/write burst synchronization; this IMO will harm performance more than HTT3 (up to 5% I'd speculate) .It's been proven that neither the K8s, nor C2Ds are not even near to saturating their I/O in any desktop use so I'd not be afraid of the HT link.
Related resources
May 3, 2007 9:22:26 PM

.. meaning that AM2 now with X23600+ now and K10 later is a good choice. What about mobos? Will voltage regulation on current mobos be up to the task? Or is there some other issue that might hold back the ability to plug K10 into current boards?
May 3, 2007 11:01:04 PM

Quote:
Anyone care to speculate on how nicely K10 will play with AM2? I know the official line is that it will work, but will I see a performance hit, and if so, by how much? Is it reasonable to buy AM2 now with the view to add in K10 when it becomes available, or would I just be shooting myself in the foot?

From what I can tell, the main difference between AM2+ and AM2 will be that the HT link will be faster, is that correct? Any input greatly appreciated.. b/c it seems very tempting to build a cheap AM2/3600+ system right now and pop in K10 later



There are a lot of differences. AM2+ has the ability to handle the split power plans that allow IMC and CPU clocks and voltage to be different. It also allows each core to be clocked separately.
May 3, 2007 11:09:38 PM

Are there more? So far I can only discern two differences - Split voltage planes and faster HT. One seems to be more oriented towards the thermals (ie not impacting performance) and the other to make little difference in desktop applications. And DDR3, judging by histroy alone, likely won't make an impact for some time. So AM2 now and K10 later still seems like a winner?
May 4, 2007 12:19:14 AM

Quote:
Are there more? So far I can only discern two differences - Split voltage planes and faster HT. One seems to be more oriented towards the thermals (ie not impacting performance) and the other to make little difference in desktop applications. And DDR3, judging by histroy alone, likely won't make an impact for some time. So AM2 now and K10 later still seems like a winner?


As far as I know, nope, AM2+ is just an incremental upgrade over AM2, hence the '+'. ;) 

AM2 + K10 sounds good, provided K10 lives up to its end of the bargain. ;) 
May 4, 2007 1:43:50 AM

Quote:
ht3 wont work.Aside from that I think it may do really well.

Another thing that won't work when plugging an AM2+ chip into an AM2 board will be the read/write burst synchronization; this IMO will harm performance more than HTT3 (up to 5% I'd speculate) .It's been proven that neither the K8s, nor C2Ds are not even near to saturating their I/O in any desktop use so I'd not be afraid of the HT link.

Ooh, good point m25.
May 4, 2007 1:47:10 AM

Can you explain this idea of read/write burst synchronization problems further? I don' t think I understand fully...
a b à CPUs
May 4, 2007 8:33:00 AM

with the cancellation and change of all these plans who knows if amd will even use the same boards, sockets or even exist long enough to do it...
May 4, 2007 8:33:06 AM

Quote:
ht3 wont work.Aside from that I think it may do really well.

Another thing that won't work when plugging an AM2+ chip into an AM2 board will be the read/write burst synchronization; this IMO will harm performance more than HTT3 (up to 5% I'd speculate) .It's been proven that neither the K8s, nor C2Ds are not even near to saturating their I/O in any desktop use so I'd not be afraid of the HT link.

what the FSB is slower on intel chips! but wait why does the intel C2D FSB out perform the IMC on amd chips?
It's the CPU core itself that outperforms K8s, however, I/O performance is not only about frequency; other features and optimizations are also related and not always they have to do with bandwidth (like the read/write synchronization).
May 4, 2007 8:44:54 AM

Quote:
with the cancellation and change of all these plans who knows if amd will even use the same boards, sockets or even exist long enough to do it...

What are you referring to?! It's true that they're delaying their benchmarks and we're all going crazy about that but they've not changed anything about the transition from AM2 to AM2+,it's called AM2+ to denote the upgradeability from AM2 platforms; it was meant to be this way and they have only confirmed this up to now. VRM's on existing boards already support voltages of 0.70 or 0.60V so only a bios flashing is required.
a b à CPUs
May 8, 2007 10:27:37 AM

Quote:
with the cancellation and change of all these plans who knows if amd will even use the same boards, sockets or even exist long enough to do it...

What are you referring to?! It's true that they're delaying their benchmarks and we're all going crazy about that but they've not changed anything about the transition from AM2 to AM2+,it's called AM2+ to denote the upgradeability from AM2 platforms; it was meant to be this way and they have only confirmed this up to now. VRM's on existing boards already support voltages of 0.70 or 0.60V so only a bios flashing is required.

K8L?
May 8, 2007 11:04:43 AM

Wasn't that name just made up by the Inq?

Funny, most of what we know about K10 usually starts from there.
May 8, 2007 11:36:10 AM

Quote:
Wasn't that name just made up by the Inq?

Funny, most of what we know about K10 usually starts from there.
This is basically where I've gotten all my info of K10. Mostly from Jack but alot of the other regulars contributed a whole lot too.
May 8, 2007 2:52:18 PM

Quote:
Anyone care to speculate on how nicely K10 will play with AM2? I know the official line is that it will work, but will I see a performance hit, and if so, by how much? Is it reasonable to buy AM2 now with the view to add in K10 when it becomes available, or would I just be shooting myself in the foot?

From what I can tell, the main difference between AM2+ and AM2 will be that the HT link will be faster, is that correct? Any input greatly appreciated.. b/c it seems very tempting to build a cheap AM2/3600+ system right now and pop in K10 later


The biggest hit will be in power as AM2 doesn't support the split power planes. It may support the dual 64bit memory path they talk about but I'm not sure. Also, the HT speed will not be above 2000Mhz (effective).

Am2+ will support up 3600MHz HT3. This will be more of an issue with quad core than dual though. But since you will be ale to use 1066DDR2 it may make up for the lower HT speed. Either way though it will be faster than anything K8.
May 8, 2007 3:16:33 PM

with the first batch of phenom processors i wouldnt be surprised if you dont see any performance hits since HT2 already provides excellent bandwidth to current processors. In the future however i can see processors taking minor to medium performance hits depending on how high end the processor is. Its like running a core2duo on an 800mhz fsb instead of a 1066 fsb
May 8, 2007 6:46:54 PM

In practical terms, considering that even expert users have trouble percieving a difference in cpu performance that is less than a 10% difference, it's bigger jumps in performance (greater than 20%) that matter enough to make things worthwhile. The difference between a 50% improvement and a 45% improvement isn't enough to matter. Ergo, getting an AM2 board is OK. I'd want to switch once, from AM2 to AM3, myself, if I went that route.
May 8, 2007 7:19:34 PM

Quote:
Are there more? So far I can only discern two differences - Split voltage planes and faster HT. One seems to be more oriented towards the thermals (ie not impacting performance) and the other to make little difference in desktop applications. And DDR3, judging by histroy alone, likely won't make an impact for some time. So AM2 now and K10 later still seems like a winner?



Definitely. I will probably end up with Agena as two 125W chips is a bit much even for quad core. Who knows though maybe I'll get two 1.9 chips for Agena FX. I'm on hold right now until the DX10 issue is settled.

Then I'll buy a new PC.
May 8, 2007 7:34:08 PM

Quote:
Wont it be worth it to get the Am2+ processor then go ahead and get a Am2+ Mb with it, instead of having some issues that dont work just spend the extra $150 - $200 or whatever the cost of the motherboard to go with it...I just upgraded myself but If im going to upgrade to a Am2+ chip then why cut yourself short on performance...just a thought


That's my plan since I'm still on 939, but you could get the AM2+ CPU and then later get the mobo. Then you have an extra barebones.
May 8, 2007 7:40:33 PM

I hope AM2+ and definitively Intel 45nm compatible boards hit the market well before the launches of their respective processors.
!