Until recently i was under the impression that there would be two major differences between the 754 pin Athlon 64 and the 940/939 Athlon 64 FX.These two (so i thought) were that the FX supported dual channel memory as opposed to the 64s single channel (ECC blah aside)...and that the 64 would only have 512Kb L2 cache to the FX's 1MB.However, it seems that those 754pin 64 samples that have slipped out had 1MB L2 cache and the 64s are being advertised for preorder now with 1MB L2, as <A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11622" target="_new">this Inquirer article</A> says.
So, will there be no 512Kb version of the 754 Athlon 64 and will it only be available as 1MB?If this is so, while the opteron benchmarks have shown that the dual channel offers a great improvement in real bandwidth over single channel with AMD64 cpus, is this enough to merit the huge price disparity between the FX and the 754pin A64, if indeed they have the same L2 cache?This seems especially odd if you also budget in the necessity for registered memory with the 940 pin FXs (and look at the price difference between the 940 and 754 pin mobos).
no matter how hard you try, you can't polish a turd. :]<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by ad_rach on 09/18/03 10:47 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
So, will there be no 512Kb version of the 754 Athlon 64 and will it only be available as 1MB?If this is so, while the opteron benchmarks have shown that the dual channel offers a great improvement in real bandwidth over single channel with AMD64 cpus, is this enough to merit the huge price disparity between the FX and the 754pin A64, if indeed they have the same L2 cache?This seems especially odd if you also budget in the necessity for registered memory with the 940 pin FXs (and look at the price difference between the 940 and 754 pin mobos).
no matter how hard you try, you can't polish a turd. :]<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by ad_rach on 09/18/03 10:47 AM.</EM></FONT></P>