Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

am2 phenom upgradability? FORGET IT!!!

Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 26, 2007 1:14:10 PM

gigabyte said they will not be giving bios updates for its am2 boards (atleast ones based on the n-force550 chipset) to allow us to upgrade to phenom!

last year i spent £150 on an amd processor and a gigabyte am2 motherboard knowing intels core architecture was capable of gigving me more processing power.

i did this because i was lead to belive by amd that ALL current AM2 boards will support a phenom drop in upgrade so my plan was buy a cheapish dual core athlon and upgrade to quad core when the phenoms come out and become cheap.

however i emailed gigabyte to see when they will be doing a bios update for phenom and they said NEVER!

to make matters worse they lied saying that the n-force 550 chipset doesnt support phenom. i know it does... it just wont be able to clock cores up & down individualy.

i am angry at both amd and gigabyte for this, amd promised upgradability... gigabyte refused to deliver it and they lied to me. amd also kind of lied claiming that you WILL be able to upgrade. all this would have been avoided if amd had made it known that the upgrade is dependent on mobo manufactures not being cum rags.

i will not be buying gigabyte mobos again and amd can forget it unless they bring a processor to market wich rapes intel core quads and costs pennies (unlikely for the next 1/2 years i think)

ahh... feel better after getting that off my chest, hope you enjoyed my rant lol
November 26, 2007 2:25:55 PM

lol...I feel for you.
November 26, 2007 4:35:09 PM


i will not be buying gigabyte mobos again and amd can forget it unless they bring a processor to market wich rapes intel core quads and costs pennies


I think you're asking for too much. That's like saying Intel should charge less for chips that are faster than Q6600.
Related resources
November 26, 2007 5:56:54 PM

I got the same feedback from Giga-byte for my AM2 based board as well....so much for backwards compatability indeed...I think I'll just upgrade my desktop quad to a Penryn in Jan and put the Q6600 in my VMWare server...I'll be able to get a decent board for it by then for <$100 I'm sure, and my existing P35 board that holds my Q6600 is already certified for 45nm procs...
a c 99 à CPUs
November 26, 2007 5:59:50 PM

psymanproductions said:
gigabyte said they will not be giving bios updates for its am2 boards (atleast ones based on the n-force550 chipset) to allow us to upgrade to phenom!

last year i spent £150 on an amd processor and a gigabyte am2 motherboard knowing intels core architecture was capable of gigving me more processing power.

i did this because i was lead to belive by amd that ALL current AM2 boards will support a phenom drop in upgrade so my plan was buy a cheapish dual core athlon and upgrade to quad core when the phenoms come out and become cheap.

however i emailed gigabyte to see when they will be doing a bios update for phenom and they said NEVER!

to make matters worse they lied saying that the n-force 550 chipset doesnt support phenom. i know it does... it just wont be able to clock cores up & down individualy.

i am angry at both amd and gigabyte for this, amd promised upgradability... gigabyte refused to deliver it and they lied to me. amd also kind of lied claiming that you WILL be able to upgrade. all this would have been avoided if amd had made it known that the upgrade is dependent on mobo manufactures not being cum rags.

i will not be buying gigabyte mobos again and amd can forget it unless they bring a processor to market wich rapes intel core quads and costs pennies (unlikely for the next 1/2 years i think)

ahh... feel better after getting that off my chest, hope you enjoyed my rant lol


That sucks. Perhaps somebody will hack the BIOS to support the Phenoms- it will take some work but it may be possible.
November 26, 2007 6:00:49 PM

Damn, that sucks.

I hope other mobo manufacturers don't follow suit...
November 26, 2007 6:08:58 PM

I'm general after the battle. I always said - don't buy gigabyte and asus mobos! he, he
Buy ABIT
November 26, 2007 6:13:11 PM

torcida_kutina said:
I'm general after the battle. I always said - don't buy gigabyte and asus mobos! he, he
Buy ABIT


What's wrong with Asus mobos? They seem pretty good to me, especially in terms of releasing BIOS updates for older chipsets to run the newer chips.

I'm currently running a P965 based P5B Deluxe and it will support 45nm via a BIOS update, so I'm pretty happy about that.
November 26, 2007 6:13:21 PM

According to Anand, the 550 isn't even designed for a dualcore - let alone a quad.


the nForce 550 is recommended for Athlon 64 (single core) and Sempron users.


said:

the nForce 550 is recommended for Athlon 64 (single core) and Sempron users.




http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=276...
November 26, 2007 6:40:38 PM

Quote:
Dont feel bad, the new EE Intel quads wont work on the new X38's or P35's. Thats the way it goes with technology.


Just because it is not officially supported does not mean it won't WORK. Guess what the QX9770 previews were run on? That's right, X38 boards! Owned. :whistle: 

Also, I love how you fail to mention any of the the other 45nm quads? Like the Q9300/Q9450/Q9550/QX9650 which all on P35/X38 and EVEN my 1.5 year old P965 P5B Deluxe!

November 26, 2007 6:51:15 PM

To quote (thank you exit2dos) that review:
"Rounding out the chipset offerings, the nForce 550 is the "value mainstream" product, taking over from the nForce4 4X. Several of the higher end options have been dropped from the 550 chipset... Whereas the other three chipsets are recommended for Athlon 64/FX/X2 users, the nForce 550 is recommended for Athlon 64 (single core) and Sempron users."
So this was an inexpensive mobo, even 18 months ago...
Don't worry friend - you don't want to put a Phenom in it, anyway.
Regards
a b à CPUs
November 26, 2007 7:07:10 PM

Well, I would never buy gigabyte mobos to beign with, but in this case, you really only have yourself to blame.

While Phenoms are backwards compatible with the socket AM2 mobos, AMD did not hide the fact that they were really socket AM2+ and would need a newer chipset to take full advantage of the proc.

It's really up to the mobo maker's discretion whether to ultimately decide if they are going to offer BIOS updates to their products. Case in point, gigabyte offers a BIOS update for their 520LE mobos to accept phenom but not their (your) 550 mobos.

I would also refer you to your mobos and gigabytes OFFICIAL cpu compatibility chart.
November 26, 2007 7:34:01 PM

I just bought a new gigabyte AM2+ motherboard I hope AM2+ mobo will support AM3 chips.
November 26, 2007 7:36:58 PM

Quote:
Dont feel bad, the new EE Intel quads wont work on the new X38's or P35's. Thats the way it goes with technology.


This guy has said this on a bunch of threads. For the last time this is not true stop spreading F.U.D
November 26, 2007 7:45:54 PM

Quote:
Dont feel bad, the new EE Intel quads wont work on the new X38's or P35's. Thats the way it goes with technology.


You have mentioned this on numerous threads, but you are wrong.
November 26, 2007 7:54:30 PM

Quote:
Are you really dumb enough to think that someone who starts there screen name with MRS is a guy?? LOL.
Its not fud bud, there is currently no chipset in the market that (officially) supports FSB1600.


Yes and No. Intel does not officially support the QX9770 on the X38 chipset. However both Asus and Gigabyte *DO* offer manufacturer support on their X38 boards for the 1600 MHz FSB QX9770.
November 26, 2007 7:58:27 PM

I hate to say it............

But that is life in the big city.........................

Stop your griping. Some people are born without legs, or arms. You hear them bitching (Booooo! Hoooo!) I want my money back I got ripped off........no they deal with it and move on.........

You make your own bed.......so lay in it.

No one owes you anything.



November 26, 2007 8:01:08 PM

chunkymonster said:
Well, I would never buy gigabyte mobos to beign with, but in this case, you really only have yourself to blame.

While Phenoms are backwards compatible with the socket AM2 mobos, AMD did not hide the fact that they were really socket AM2+ and would need a newer chipset to take full advantage of the proc.

It's really up to the mobo maker's discretion whether to ultimately decide if they are going to offer BIOS updates to their products. Case in point, gigabyte offers a BIOS update for their 520LE mobos to accept phenom but not their (your) 550 mobos.

I would also refer you to your mobos and gigabytes OFFICIAL cpu compatibility chart.


Thats quite true, AMD didnt hide that fact, but then, they havent exactly come out and publically expounded on the limitations of using an AM2+/AM3 cpu in an AM2 board.

On the other hand, we have the fanboys and certain sites hyping the interchangability to the point that I worry poeple dont understand that there are limitations.
November 26, 2007 8:03:57 PM

Quote:
Dont feel bad, the new EE Intel quads wont work on the new X38's or P35's.

The new EE Intel quad model QX9650 is the only one available and it works on X38 and P35 and even some P965s, though not officially supported by Intel. You don't know if an unreleased product will or will not work.

What do you do if you have one of those P965s and the board manufacturer gets Penryn to work on it? You don't buy X38/P35. Simple?
a c 126 à CPUs
a b À AMD
November 26, 2007 8:54:09 PM

Quote:
Are you really dumb enough to think that someone who starts there screen name with MRS is a guy?? LOL.
Its not fud bud, there is currently no chipset in the market that (officially) supports FSB1600.

Quote:
Just because it is not officially supported does not mean it won't WORK. Guess what the QX9770 previews were run on? That's right, X38 boards! Owned.


Yeah thats right, but the X38 is not officially supported. Wanna guess why? hmmmm....? Because they want you to buy another one of their outrageously prices mobos at $250+ just like they did for C2D. Then in 2 months it wont be upgradeable either like the 975.


Ok you need to stop spreading false info. I for one am getting sick of it really. All Penryns(Yorkfeild for the Quad version) will work on P35/X38 and even Asus will have them running on P965. The P35 does not officially support the FSB of 1333 but is very capable and the X38 is not an official supporter of 1600 FSB but can. The only reason Intel is "suggesting" the use of the X48 is due to its higher thermal envelope but we all know that the QX9650 even when Oc'ed to 3.8GHz didn't hit near the 130watt TDP. Check Asus website and look at the CPU support for the Commando which is a P965 chipset mobo.

BTW Intel doesn't price the mobos its the manufactuer. I wounder what you will be saying once Nehalem comes out and there is a IMC instead. Right now I have a P35 mobo and can plug anything from a Celeron 420 all the way up to a QX9650 into it without a problem.

Now just to fill you in you cannot pop a Phenom into a older AM2 mobo and expect better performance. In order to get the best performance, latest technology and features you need a newer mobo with guess waht... the newest chipset to support it. Its the same. The IMC does change the memory frequency but still everything else in still on a chipset.

Just give it up really. You are so wrong its getting funny now.

As for this guy I feel sorry for you. Just like how the 680i was set to support the Penryn chips and they are having issues. Well mainly Gigabyte. I guess they aren't that good.
November 26, 2007 9:33:22 PM

I bought my 975x board had a 6600 dual, then bought the q6600 dropped it in no problems thats another reason why i won't go back to amd.

I have had an amd up to the point where core 2 duo was released, i bought the 6600 and found its performance better than all amd cpu's out there.

Now that the true quad cores are out and i have witnessed 1st hand that the q6600 still outperforms it , the q6600 is the starter quad core if amd can't beat it without resorting to dual cpu motherboards they might as well give up.

Amd is going in wrong direction people don't want to buy a mother board with 2 or 4 cpu scockets, having to buy cpu's in pairs ,the price point gets out of control, they need a FAST chip, this spider thing is silly , i run a computer store nobody is remotely interested in buying one.

November 26, 2007 10:38:24 PM

HA HA!!!
November 26, 2007 11:00:32 PM

jimmysmitty said:


BTW Intel doesn't price the mobos its the manufactuer. I wounder what you will be saying once Nehalem comes out and there is a IMC instead. Right now I have a P35 mobo and can plug anything from a Celeron 420 all the way up to a QX9650 into it without a problem.


do you really think Intel give out those P965, P975, P35, X38 and X48 to the manufacturers for free? why would the manufacturers making Intel chipset based motherboards more expensive than those of AMD/ATI and NVIDIA chipset based?

AnandTech have a review on the X48, Intel is charging $20 more for the chipset (i could be wrong but the figure is on the review) for practically the same chipset except for FBS1666 and tri-SLI or some minor improvements.

Not saying these chipsets are crap, but they are pricy and certainly not free.
a c 99 à CPUs
November 27, 2007 12:32:03 AM

techguy911 said:
I bought my 975x board had a 6600 dual, then bought the q6600 dropped it in no problems thats another reason why i won't go back to amd.


You can upgrade CPUs in AMD motherboards as well. In fact, it's usually much more foolproof than on an Intel setup. The rule is pretty much that if the chip fits, it'll run. AMD also guarantees that you can put any AM2/AM2+/AM3 chip in an AM2 motherboard and it will run. There are exceptions, such as some Gigabyte NF550-based AM2 boards not getting the needed BIOS update to run Phenoms. But if you get the right BIOS, it'll run them. This is not true for Intel setups, where the chipset and VRMs often prevent newer chips from working.

Quote:
I have had an amd up to the point where core 2 duo was released, i bought the 6600 and found its performance better than all amd cpu's out there.


That was true when the C2D was released, but an X2 6400+ is faster in most tests. And you don't mean *all* AMD CPUs as an E6600 or Q6600 would be handed its rear by a dual, quad, or 8-way Opteron setup in most things that are not games.

Quote:
Now that the true quad cores are out and i have witnessed 1st hand that the q6600 still outperforms it , the q6600 is the starter quad core if amd can't beat it without resorting to dual cpu motherboards they might as well give up.


That's a pretty poor attitude. Just like sports teams, IC manufacturers will "win" some and "lose" some. If you use that line of reasoning, the Intel should have given up when the Athlon debuted and showed the PIII Coppermine taillights, not to mention beating it to the 1 GHz milestone. They also should have give up when their new P4 Willamette was beaten not only by the Athlon XP but by the PIII Tualatins. And if those were too minor, then the quadruple whammy of Prescott, Smithfield, Cedar Mill, and Presler should have had Intel give up. Not to mention Intel's big Itanium plans sinking like the ship the chip is nicknamed after. But Intel succeeded almost in spite of itself to bring the Core architecture chips to the market and regain the performance crown. I am sure that AMD will do the same.

Quote:
Amd is going in wrong direction people don't want to buy a mother board with 2 or 4 cpu scockets, having to buy cpu's in pairs ,the price point gets out of control, they need a FAST chip, this spider thing is silly , i run a computer store nobody is remotely interested in buying one.


It depends on what your market is. If it's primarily gamers- and many mom-and-pop stores' clientele is- you'll see people going for whatever has the absolute highest performance in a single socket. Right now, that's Intel. However, most people want a decent buy for a moderate amount of money. AMD has been fulfilling that portion of the market rather well recently and has sold a *ton* of chips. They can do very well as a company by selling chips to that market, as long as they can do so profitably.

The Spider platform is actually rather interesting and sounds like it could be a real winner for AMD. The chipset and platform has about as much to do with the functionality of a system as the CPU does, perhaps even more. A wonderful CPU with a mediocre chipset isn't as effective as a mediocre CPU with a wonderful chipset, especially if you are an enthusiast and run several HDDs, overclock, or use multiple GPUs.

I seem to remember Intel pulling such a platform stunt a while back for notebooks. They called it something like Cantrino, Centrina, or something like that...too bad that didn't pan out for them :lol: 
November 27, 2007 1:35:04 AM

Also, to whoever started this thread, dude, blame gigabyte. Not AMD. How did AMD lie to you? As people here said, AMD said you might need updates, etc. If gigabyte will not provide those updates, that's their fault, not AMD's. Also, if the board was inexpensive to begin with, do you expect them to make updates and take away from future product development? If it's that big a deal, wait till AM2+ board prices come down to the level of AM2 boards, and buy one for 50 bucks, and that new chip, and reuse everything else.

As for me, man you can go intel. I'd rather buy AMD, why? Because I spend less on the board and on the chip than you do on the intel board and chip, so I have more money to spend on memory or video, etc. That means that even if I have a slower chip, big deal, my system might end up more balanced, which means better overall performance.

You should be after gigabyte, and not AMD. Maybe you should email their customer service department with a GOOD attitude, and see if they will work with you.
November 27, 2007 2:03:40 AM

...

What's wrong with Gigabyte? Why the hate towards them? Please, enlighten me. After all I just went and got one...
November 27, 2007 2:27:02 AM

I'm not sure where the gigabyte hate is from, either. I have owned a number of their products and read reviews on many, many others, and in my opinion they are relatively innovative. Their products seem to perform very well, and the ones that I own have exhibited flawless stability and performance.

November 27, 2007 2:30:33 AM

Quote:
Are you really dumb enough to think that someone who starts there screen name with MRS is a guy?? LOL.
Its not fud bud, there is currently no chipset in the market that (officially) supports FSB1600.

Quote:
Just because it is not officially supported does not mean it won't WORK. Guess what the QX9770 previews were run on? That's right, X38 boards! Owned.




wow there's girlly nerds here too... gee what has the world come to? :heink: 

Unofficially I got a slot 1 pentium to work on P35 mobo.

I call him er her frankenstein... mmmwhahahaha

/sarcasm

I really find it amusing what y'all fight about sometimes. :lol: 
November 27, 2007 3:58:16 AM

MU_Engineer said:
You can upgrade CPUs in AMD motherboards as well. In fact, it's usually much more foolproof than on an Intel setup. The rule is pretty much that if the chip fits, it'll run. AMD also guarantees that you can put any AM2/AM2+/AM3 chip in an AM2 motherboard and it will run. There are exceptions, such as some Gigabyte NF550-based AM2 boards not getting the needed BIOS update to run Phenoms. But if you get the right BIOS, it'll run them. This is not true for Intel setups, where the chipset and VRMs often prevent newer chips from working.


True with current AMD systems, but not even remotely so with the socket A Athlons. Socket A is now history, but there is a point in digging it up. The Socket A (the Athon series) was worse than the 775s IRT chipset/upgrades, more often requiring a new mobo(chipset) for a later version of the same series CPU. While many older 775 chipsets (945 and prior) wont support C2D or later, most current 775 chipsets support not just different versions of the same family(Core2), but different families(Core, Core2, Core2Quad), and now, even the different nodes. So what is the point to raising the spectre of Socket A from the dead? Simple: All the chipset manufacturers have been showing progress in product longevity, for both AMD and Intel products. The garbage about.."...but Intel needs a new chipset for every new CPU.." while true in the past is nowadays just....garbage. And people forget that it was equally true for AMD. And I know you know that.

And you know full well the socket 'AMx' scheme has its own set of limitations. The AM2 mobos will not support the full capabilities of the AM2+ or AM3 CPUs, with any kind of BIOS update...making it a gimped upgrade path. Given the Phenoms less than stellar clock performance improvement over K8, coupled with its clockspeed limitations, theres little point to plugging a Phenom into an AM2 motherboard.....until the Phenoms hit at least 3.0Ghz. That of course is considering Phenoms less than 10% improvement over K8 and that the fastest X2, the 6400 currently runs at 3.2Ghz. Given the state of multithreaded software (contrary to the Crysis kiddies who believe everything being written now is optimized for quad core) to replace anything faster than a X2 5600 with a Phenom is a downgrade...unless you are running one of those rare processes that actually will use all 4 cores...i.e video encoding/editing.

You know better then to bite on the socket upgradability crap, and I know you already know everything I just wrote, so why are you trying to sell it? Its suprising and very unlike you.

As an aside, interestingly, one of the earliest 'mainstream' chipsets to demonstrate cross family support was for the sockets As. It wasnt an Nvidia, ATI, SiS or Intel..it was the VIA KT880. Appearing at the end of sockets As lifespan(doing that socket little good), it also supported 939s and can still be found on NOS 939 mobos.

MU_Engineer said:

That was true when the C2D was released, but an X2 6400+ is faster in most tests. And you don't mean *all* AMD CPUs as an E6600 or Q6600 would be handed its rear by a dual, quad, or 8-way Opteron setup in most things that are not games.


Good point, however, I dont think most people (as in the vast, vast majority)are going to be buying quad or 8 way Opterons for gaming, conversly, I dont think most companies are looking at replacing or upgrading their servers with E6600s, Q6600s, or X2 6400s.

MU_Engineer said:

That's a pretty poor attitude. Just like sports teams, IC manufacturers will "win" some and "lose" some. If you use that line of reasoning, the Intel should have given up when the Athlon debuted and showed the PIII Coppermine taillights, not to mention beating it to the 1 GHz milestone. They also should have give up when their new P4 Willamette was beaten not only by the Athlon XP but by the PIII Tualatins. And if those were too minor, then the quadruple whammy of Prescott, Smithfield, Cedar Mill, and Presler should have had Intel give up. Not to mention Intel's big Itanium plans sinking like the ship the chip is nicknamed after. But Intel succeeded almost in spite of itself to bring the Core architecture chips to the market and regain the performance crown. I am sure that AMD will do the same.


Oh cmon, I know you know AMD is not even in remotely the same situation as Intel was. While performance leadership may have exchanged hands several times, and value leadership has changed hands frequently, at some points on an almost daily basis, the financial situation has never been the same. Even though AMD was well on their way to success, taking marketshare from Intel while maintaining good margins, they were still capacity constrained and financially shaky. Assuming they maintained performance/value leadership, they would still have needed several years to open new fabs (or for TMSC to expand) to progress much further IRT to market share. And all the while that AMD was handing Intel its behind on value and performance, Intel was still viable finacially. Intel was able to survive their 'still born' and handicapped products courtesy of a financial position AMD has never enjoyed. AMD does not have the same luxury of time that Intel had. Had AMD actually posessed enough manufacturing capacity to take 50% or more of the market from Intel and had they posessed the wisdom to price their products in such a manner to do so, Intel might have indeed felt a painful pinch and walked further down the path AMD is currently on, but thats not the situation, and given the current and near future offerings by both competitors, the situation doesnt look likey to improve for AMD. It may, IF at some point between B3 and B5687 AMD can actually get Phenom to settle out and/or IF the new ATIs can gain and hold a lead over Nvidias offerings and/or IF the 790FX and follow ons can make the most of the Phenoms and/or IF AMD can actually, sucessfully get to 45nm and/or IF etc......thats a whole lotta IFs. Phenom has not and by all accounts will not regain AMD the perfromance crown. While AMD can use Phenom to gain a value crown (why would they bother when they already have it with X2?) Intel is in a position to take that away at will if they so choose. For AMD to undercut themselves now, at 65nm with monolythic quads of questionable yield and margin is, frankly reposterous. Which brings us back full circle...AMD needed to regain the performance crown, so they could steer the market and increase their margins, so they could start paying off their debt (rather than digging the hole deeper) and better fund the next gen R&D. They didnt. And now, with thin margins, over $5Bill in debt and thinning stock prices, they may not have the where with all to ever regain the perfromance crown....a deteriorating cycle which they lack the finances to reverse or survive. The cycle they needed to break with Phenom, before the cycle solidified.

MU_Engineer said:

It depends on what your market is. If it's primarily gamers- and many mom-and-pop stores' clientele is- you'll see people going for whatever has the absolute highest performance in a single socket. Right now, that's Intel. However, most people want a decent buy for a moderate amount of money. AMD has been fulfilling that portion of the market rather well recently and has sold a *ton* of chips. They can do very well as a company by selling chips to that market, as long as they can do so profitably.

A good point, but one that has been run to the end here, hasent it? We all know AMD has retaken much of the marketshare it lost, but at the expense of its margins. Good long term stratedgy for expanding into the low income market as well as keeping sockets active in the market, setting the stage for return customers via upgrades. IF those return customers have a viable upgrade path and if they can make the low income market profitable. At this time, Phenom is not particularly viable in terms of price, performance or reliability. Newer steppings and better pricing may help this, but I highly doubt newer steppings of a re-hashed K8 are going to provide the 20~30% gain Baron 'hopes' for (which AMD needs) and we all know (at least those of us who understand the difference between market share and margins)that AMD can not afford to shrink their margins much farther. While the 'investments' have helped AMD in the past, sooner or later they need to deliver another strong performer. They are well past later and it appears they may now be past 'sooner' as well. That $5+bil in debt (I still laugh at the individuals who think the senior notes 'eliminated' that debt) is still on the books, and the due date gets a little closer every month.

MU_Engineer said:

The Spider platform is actually rather interesting and sounds like it could be a real winner for AMD. The chipset and platform has about as much to do with the functionality of a system as the CPU does, perhaps even more. A wonderful CPU with a mediocre chipset isn't as effective as a mediocre CPU with a wonderful chipset, especially if you are an enthusiast and run several HDDs, overclock, or use multiple GPUs.

Yes.

MU_Engineer said:

I seem to remember Intel pulling such a platform stunt a while back for notebooks. They called it something like Cantrino, Centrina, or something like that...too bad that didn't pan out for them :lol: 

MU, Im suprised at you. This comment sounds AMND fanboyish, and I know youre not a fanboy of either Intel of AMD.

The"Centrino" platform is still around, and seems to work well enough. Whether or not 'Spider' will yield positive results will remain to be seen....but its a double edged sword for AMD. If AMD works to optimize the performance of its components when they are used in concert and they can show a legitimate performance gain, it may or may not work favorably....depending on what market they target, how they price it, and how far they take the concept. In the value market, the physical realization of the concept could work very well, but there, no one is going to care about something called a 'platform'. In that case the marketing benefits of advertising a platform are nil....those folks just want to get the most for the least, and catchy terms arent going to sway them if they can get a better bang for the buck from someone else. In the performance/enthusiast market, AMD stands to potentially disenfranchish some of its customer base by limiting choices. In enterprise, 'spider' could go a long way, but AMD still has a long way to go with spider there.. a mobo, chipset and graphics solution that perform well together are fine and dandy, but in enterprise the physical assembly and reliability are just as important....components that can withstand varied and crappy environments, high heat/poor cooling or cold environments, varying humidity, dust, dirt, physical abuse, etc, Not only must these systems be reliable, they must also be easy and cheap to service. Systems that are modularized into assemblies for easy component replacement...tool-less cases, single point component retention, not 58000 cables all over the case (clean design), that can be swapped by cheap (uneducated) labor, etc. AMD is treading into profitable waters with the 'platform', but they are dangerous waters as well...The 'platform' money at this moment is in enterprise and if AMD starts making claims and then fails to deliver in enterprise....(hmmm...sounds familiar, doesnt it?)...well, Im sure you know well, enterprice is not nearly as forgiving at the fanboy segment of the desktop enthusiast market.


November 27, 2007 5:22:46 AM

i got a gigabyte m57sli-s4 rev 2.0 and i tryed to update the bios to support quad core.. i updated the bios the safest way...(floppy disk) and then i got no boot.... had to RMA,, be warned guys!!
November 27, 2007 6:04:37 AM

Quote:
Are you really dumb enough to think that someone who starts there screen name with MRS is a guy?? LOL.
Its not fud bud, there is currently no chipset in the market that (officially) supports FSB1600.

Quote:
Just because it is not officially supported does not mean it won't WORK. Guess what the QX9770 previews were run on? That's right, X38 boards! Owned.


Yeah thats right, but the X38 is not officially supported. Wanna guess why? hmmmm....? Because they want you to buy another one of their outrageously prices mobos at $250+ just like they did for C2D. Then in 2 months it wont be upgradeable either like the 975.


We have two X38 motherboards and they both work at 1600 click this link at look at the right side of all of the boards listed.

http://usa.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=11&l3=572
a b à CPUs
November 27, 2007 7:03:36 AM

Quote:
Dont feel bad, the new EE Intel quads wont work on the new X38's or P35's. Thats the way it goes with technology.


yeah officially, on the other hand iv been running a E6600 @ FSB1600 for over a year now - no big deal.

EE's are for idiots that cant overclock and want braging rights to show how cool there stock system is - let em be, if it wasnt for idiots, intel wouldnt be as rich ;) 
November 27, 2007 7:33:05 AM

apache_lives said:
http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/Less_Than_Rosy_140W_TDP...

things aren't looking good for AMD all round.



If Intel were AMD they would be printing a book called "quadcore for dummies" right about now.

Mess with the bull and you will get the horn. It's too bad AMD decided that when they were ahead instead of spending their effort on the next step they would just prod the bull to see if he would rollover.
November 27, 2007 8:06:26 AM

apache_lives said:
http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/Less_Than_Rosy_140W_TDP...

things aren't looking good for AMD all round.


That was....curious...The publish date was 24 Nov, but the article stated
Quote:
Industry watchers have high hopes on Phenom as AMD 's hidden ace, yet difficult fabrication issues coupled with external pressure has forced AMD to release Phenom early (possibly without the full possible optimisations). Given that Phenom could possibly debut at just 2.3GHz, disappointment could ensue.
Hmm wierd...the Phenom debut was the 19, but the article was published the 24th and it states "...could possibly debut at 2.3GHz.."

Ahh, but there it is....This was taken from HKPEC and reposted by VR-zone, which explains both the syntax and dates. ;) 


Meh....140watts isnt too bad....hell, just compare it to the 4x4.
November 27, 2007 10:21:02 AM

turpit said:
Thats quite true, AMD didnt hide that fact, but then, they havent exactly come out and publically expounded on the limitations of using an AM2+/AM3 cpu in an AM2 board.

On the other hand, we have the fanboys and certain sites hyping the interchangability to the point that I worry poeple dont understand that there are limitations.


Actualy they have stated the limitations of using a am2+ on a am2 not that they needed to a little common sense is all thats really needed in that respect.

The only thing i have read about it is the chip is socket compatable and should work on most am2 boards with a simple bios upgrade. Gigabyte didnt want to do it thats hardly AMD's fault and thats why i dont buy thier boards.

Serioulsy alot of this can be avoided by using some common sense.
November 27, 2007 11:49:08 AM

enforcer22 said:

Serioulsy alot of this can be avoided by using some common sense.


Which is, in the age of radical fanboism, a very rare commodity.
November 27, 2007 12:33:13 PM

To me, this all sounds like owning a agp, and condemning nVidia for not letting the 8800GT PCI work in their board. How stupid. If I bought agp, and wanted pci, when no one has ever claimed you can run agp on pci, then Id just buy a pci. No one lied here, lets not forget this little, but important fact. To the OP, if you knew you owned a board that supported single cpus only, dont blame anyone here but yourself for not recognizing this. And if you didnt know this, then you have to take the blame
a c 99 à CPUs
November 27, 2007 1:00:35 PM

turpit said:


MU, Im suprised at you. This comment sounds AMND fanboyish, and I know youre not a fanboy of either Intel of AMD.


There were <sarcasm> tags in there. The Centrino platform worked out very well for Intel- I was trying to make a joke.

Hmmm...I didnt see any...but glad to here it...I was hoping your response was "flavored"..It didnt seem like your normal approach.
November 27, 2007 1:01:40 PM

Why are their so many phenom posts about???

Can we not just stick to one...
November 27, 2007 1:59:00 PM

enforcer22 said:
Actualy they have stated the limitations of using a am2+ on a am2 not that they needed to a little common sense is all thats really needed in that respect.


There is a difference between a 6 pitch text notification buried on AMDs wbesite, and "expounding" as in sending sites press releases, retailers advertising materials, marking boxes, etc. Now, I havent seen a Phenom box, but I doubt AMD places disclaimers regarding AM2 perfromance limitations on them....they may, but given their current situation I doubt it and I certainly havent seen any such disclaimers at the few (7 according to AMDzone) etailers stocking Phenoms.

enforcer22 said:

The only thing i have read about it is the chip is socket compatable and should work on most am2 boards with a simple bios upgrade. Gigabyte didnt want to do it thats hardly AMD's fault and thats why i dont buy thier boards.

Serioulsy alot of this can be avoided by using some common sense.


Well, which is it, "..they have stated the limitations of using a am2+ on a am2 ", or "the only thing you have read is its socket compatable.."??? You were saying about common sense?

IRT the OP, had you read the thread, you would have found that its not a matter of the manufacture doesnt want to support it, but the chipset is too old"


November 27, 2007 2:30:27 PM

apache_lives said:

EE's are for idiots that cant overclock and want braging rights to show how cool there stock system is - let em be, if it wasnt for idiots, intel wouldnt be as rich ;) 


Extreme editions have unlocked multipliers, which could mean higher overclocks ;) 

November 27, 2007 3:03:25 PM

So AMD has nothing to do with your problem its gigabyte. Lucky for me I am using MSI and they put processor support table (updated frequently) page for my mobo and it includes Phenom currently under test. I am using MSI with 6100 chipset.

http://asia.msi.com.tw/index.php?func=prodcpusupport&pr...
November 27, 2007 5:53:06 PM

pogsnet said:
So AMD has nothing to do with your problem its gigabyte. Lucky for me I am using MSI and they put processor support table (updated frequently) page for my mobo and it includes Phenom currently under test. I am using MSI with 6100 chipset.

http://asia.msi.com.tw/index.php?func=prodcpusupport&pr...


amd does have something to do with my problem... they have stuff allover the place saying phenom will be am2 compatible *with bios update.

they should have made it clear that the bios update is dependent on your motherboard manufacturer not being a cum rag..... but i guess thats debatable. i agree that i was a bit foolish to belive ALL board would get the necessary updates. i suppose i can forgive amd for this.

gigabyte are **** up though, they told me in their email that the n-force550 chipset is NOT compatable... IT IS!! MSI have a nf550 based board under testing now

http://global.msi.com.tw/index.php?func=prodcpusupport&...

i would have accepted it if they had just told me the truth but now i am going to give them a piece of my mind when the MSI board does get phenom support
a b à CPUs
November 27, 2007 8:24:17 PM

psymanproductions said:
amd does have something to do with my problem... they have stuff allover the place saying phenom will be am2 compatible *with bios update.

they should have made it clear that the bios update is dependent on your motherboard manufacturer not being a cum rag..... but i guess thats debatable. i agree that i was a bit foolish to belive ALL board would get the necessary updates. i suppose i can forgive amd for this.

gigabyte are **** up though, they told me in their email that the n-force550 chipset is NOT compatable... IT IS!! MSI have a nf550 based board under testing now

http://global.msi.com.tw/index.php?func=prodcpusupport&...

i would have accepted it if they had just told me the truth but now i am going to give them a piece of my mind when the MSI board does get phenom support
Are you even paying attention to this thread?! Are you even aware of how things work. For fv*k sake this thread is killing me!

It is up to the mobo manufacturer to ultimately decide if they will offer a BIOS update for their products. AMD stated that Phenom is AM2 compatible (and it is) but cannot control what the mobo maker does or does not do with their products.

I agree with Turpit that AMD could have been more forthcoming with compatibility details, but you truly have to be a n00b to NOT KNOW IT IS UP TO THE MOBO MAKER AND NOT AMD!

Puh-leez, enough with this already.
November 27, 2007 9:06:09 PM

I have an older Gigabyte board, GA-M57SLI-S4, They have had a bios update up for a week now to support Phenom. Dont blame Gigabyte, its probably chipset limited like has been mentioned. Been done in the past, I remember I had a Intel Socket 478 with the 865pe chipset, then I got the same board with the 775 socket and same chipset, the chipset wasnt made for 775 but it worked anyway. probably similiar here.
November 27, 2007 9:43:51 PM

So what's bad about Gigabyte? Aside from crappy support some of you claim?
!