Already dissapointed in Athlon64

[BlackLoTuS]

I know it's not coming out 'till Sept 03, but I'm sure I know what the story is going to be.

I was really rooting for AMD on the A64, but then I found out it was only going to be single channel DDR. IMHO that is a stupid mistake for them to make espesially when they already have a dual channel design in the Opteron.

Even if the latency will help out in a lot of apps it will still never compete where outright bandwidth counts ie VIDEO. If they want to be seriously viewed as a good media platform they can't just do games well. The biggest reason the current Athlon can't do as well in media apps even with dual channel DDR is because the CPU can't make use of it all through the FSB. Now theyre going to give us a direct link to the memory and castrate it right off the bat by only using one channel? How is AMD really going to support their argument of total platform performance over outright CPU speed when Intel will have the speed AND the bandwidth! In order to make waves AMD will really have to make a jump in performance over Intel, and that doesn't seem like it's what they're is trying to do. When the benchmarks come out I am sure its going to be pretty close between the two with AMD winning on some and Intel on others.

I know you could say "Just buy the Opteron!", but you know since its got the Server Label it carries a premium price tag. PLUS desktop chipset makers most likely won't touch it keeping prices high and the features down. Why not take the Opteron and give it only 2 HT links, decrease L2 cache and call it the A64? That would make the most sense. Why settle for being around the same speed at a lower price than Intel? People that like Intel products don't really have much of a reason to make a change right now and the P4 IS a moving target. By the time Sept rolls around they will be faster than they are now.

Basically I think if AMD keeps the A64 at one channel DDR they are blowing a good oppurtunity to have a product that wouldn't force enthusiasts to compromise in any one aspect and risk losing those sales to Intel.

Ok, enough ranting...

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by BlackLoTuS on 04/21/03 09:04 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[juin]

wait a bit driver otimization and bios can add a good 5% right there just look on Winstone bench with canterwood, slower that I850E there IAA driver are not made yet for ICH-5 so perf is lower dont BASH the platfrom before you see a bunch of mothersboards out, driver to have at lease a version that is not write BETA on it.

[-peep-] french

 

[BlackLoTuS]

I'm not compalining about the Opteron, I'm complaining about the Athlon64 (coming out in Sept) that we'll be able to afford.

 

[reever2]

amd has 7 months to optimize drivers the cpu and chipset based on the date on the cpu, thats more than enough time.

 

[juin]

Opteron Athlon Athlon 64 all the same core with some change across the CPU.

For those who think that the CPU can be change now forget it it too late for that.

[-peep-] french

 

[reever2]

Theres more things outside the cpu that can be changed, and the cpu can still be changed, intel and amd produce different steppings and versions all the time

 

[juin]

Opteron as been launch final spec is there to see and test.Nothing else can be change

[-peep-] french

 

[rain_king_uk]

"Next stop, the desktop version of Hammer, the Athlon 64 with Dual DDR333 or even DDR400 interface. And then Prescott."

From the last paragraph of the THG Opteron Review. Unless this is a mistake then it will have dual DDR interface. I am under the impression it will only have single channel Hyper-Transport though - is this the same thing? This memory controller on-chip thing is confusing me

 

[bikeman]

To help you out of your confusion:

HyperTransport is the technology AMD uses for interfacing the CPU with the other components of the computer. It is a little bit comparable to the former FSB of athlons. The on-die memory controller can be looked at as the northbridge of current chipsets moved to the CPU itself. The interface from that memory controller to the memory itself, is totally independent of those HyperTransport interfaces.

To reply to the general topic of this thread: Don't be too disapointed yet about that single channel memory-solution. First of all, as might be hinted in that quote above, a double channel solution might be in the final stages of developement (and if you look at the Opteron, it already exists) and will be brought to the market as needed. Also bear inmind that if the Athlon64 is competetive enough in a single channel configuration, there is no real need for a (more complex and thus more expensive) double channel solution. Third point I'd like to say, is that you might have to look at the performance gain that the P4 had withgoing from single to dual channel: Compare the performance of a i845pe-homed P4 to a i875p-homed one, and you'll see that the difference is not that big, actually. And keep in mind that the FSB of the P4 does allow the double channel solution to be utilized as it should. So yes, it would give the A64 another performance boost, but don't expect too much from it.

Greetz,
Bikeman

<i>Then again, that's just my opinion</i>

 

[rcj187]

its a mistake.. athlon64 will only be single channel DDR

 

[JimStapleton]

nForce3 chipset, isn't that to be for the Opteron, and wouldn't be dual channel?

Athlon XP 1600+, MSI K7T PRO2 RU (POS), 2x256 MB CRUCIAL PC2100 CL2.5 memory, Asus V6800 DDR Delux (GF 256) video card, 6.4GB+27GB WD HD, 40GB IBM HD (all 7200RPM). My computer is an acronym

 

[JimStapleton]

hmm, Dual channel could be fudged if the chipset on the board had a secondary memory controller, couldn't it?

Athlon XP 1600+, MSI K7T PRO2 RU (POS), 2x256 MB CRUCIAL PC2100 CL2.5 memory, Asus V6800 DDR Delux (GF 256) video card, 6.4GB+27GB WD HD, 40GB IBM HD (all 7200RPM). My computer is an acronym

 

[reever2]

I really doubt they would make that kind of mistake

 

[reever2]

And juin, how can you possibly say that there is no time for AMD to work on Athlon 64 and it is already done because opteron is out. If they are in fact are both so similar in design that if one was ready the other one must be, how can you explain the opteron being released and reviewed before it, and how can you explain the opterons being reviewed/sold which have fab dates just 4 weeks after the engineering sample was made? The engy sample i believe was made in 0301 or 0302, yet 2cpu.com has an opteron 240 which will be reviewed with a date of 0305?

 

[xxsk8er101xx]

dude whoa whoa whoa there ... new technology... remember williamette pentium 4? did horrible! remember? now the p4 is the dominating platform. Same will happen with the athlon 64 in 2004. I would gamble on AMD right now. Next year these processors will be the dominating platform in 2004.

New technology - always give it 6 months before purchase.

Life is irrelivent and irrational.

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=9933" target="_new"> My Rig </A>

 

[phial]

exactly what i am thinking

the P4 SUXXd when it first came out. it was almost funny how bad a 1.2Ghz p4 performed

-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-

<A HREF="http://www.xgr.com" target="_new">XGR-Game Reviews</A>

My friends Gaming Review Site. Check it out.
"You change the channel, and you change our minds..." - System of a Down

 

[juin]

Stepping change is not affecting feature at all exception to Nvidia.

A64 opteron have the same core so the core optimization is made between Game and HPC that dont really fit well but AMD cannot do 2 different core.

Opteron is out they cannot change any feature now if they do a total rework as to be done or a others version L3 ???
DDR-2 this may just come in Q4 2004 when 90 nm is ready.

For now is just little steeping change for improve headroom for clock speed to reach the claim 2.4GHZ.

[-peep-] french

 

[phsstpok]

Doesn't seem to be the memory subsystem limiting performance.

Haven't you seen the preview of the Athlon 64 (Clawhammer) at Xbitlabs.com?

<A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64.html" target="_new">http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64.html</A>

They have a real chip, Athlon 64 2800+ (Pre-production, 1.6 Ghz) with a real VIA reference K8T400M mobo and real benchmarks (32-bit only) including gaming!

So far it doesn't look that good, underpeforming XP2800+ much of the time.

Hopefully things will improve closer toward the release date.

The memory benchmarks are very impressive for single channel DDR so it's something else holding back Athlon 64.

<b>99% is great, unless you are talking about system stability</b>

 

[JimStapleton]

can anyone say "Itanium I"?

Athlon XP 1600+, MSI K7T PRO2 RU (POS), 2x256 MB CRUCIAL PC2100 CL2.5 memory, Asus V6800 DDR Delux (GF 256) video card, 6.4GB+27GB WD HD, 40GB IBM HD (all 7200RPM). My computer is an acronym