First let me tell you that the difference between the 940 & 939pin versions, is that the first one will need registered ECC memory while the second will be able to accept normal DDR PC3200 memory. So the 939pin version will also have the advantage of using CAS 2 memory, getting this way more performance out of the processor.
I was pretty aware of it, I just asked it that way since it just is ridiculous.
Look, tests lately on memory, have revealed CAS 2 no longer gives you much benefits due to the high memory clock speeds.
Furthermore ECC can't give back more than 5% ideally.
In an ideal situation, the FX and the 939-pin one are pretty much neck and neck. The max I expect the 939 version to yeild back is 5%. The 940-pin has Dual-Channel but apparently is stripped from cache. That puts it roughly the same as some 754-pin, perhaps slightly better.
Recent tests on the Opteron with and without dual-channel have revealed minor differences. Proving indeed AMD need not focus on bandwidth like P4s do. Last I checked, they don't fetch as much cacheline strides as the P4, so the bandwidth request is actually lower but still as efficient.
This price is for the 2.2GHz model, which will probably be called FX-51. If you take into account that as we've seen from AMDZone's review, this processor can beat Pentium 4 3.2c or be equal to it at the worst case, then the price is justified since that's how much the 3.2c costs. Moreover the A64 has the extra advantage of 64bit support.
I really don't trust AMDZone THAT much, given that the test used a lot of Scientific benches where AMD was a clear winner. It probably will compete, just that, it won't make the 3.2 climb up a tree while the A64 barks at it! So I still see the price as just marketting pricing. I bet the 754-pin one will overclock better and have better value. It's sad to see the 3400+ delayed till October. This proves too, that the 2GHZ 3200+ is a lie once more, and will likely lose to the 3.2, given that it's a much too low clock speed and we've seen some results already.
I think the PR A64s are a mess, and follow on AMD's dishonest PR tradition. The FX is an interesting product, but I wish its price will go down. (very likely as stores often go lower than the MSRP with AMDs)
So, as you can see, Dual-Channel is just NOT that much. I am sure of it. It's not asking for big cache requests, and there is no Dual-CPU in there to even want to use that much. Plus, since the K8 resembles K7, it's safe to guess how effective dual-channel is really.
Oh and I almost forgot:
Let me know what you think
I have a sudden urge to kill you.
--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=green><b>A sexual experience like never before seen</font color=green></b></A>
Site has now even more sexy members, for your pleasure.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Eden on 08/21/03 04:52 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
<font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram