Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

A64 4000+ and FX-55! (both 130nm)

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Processors
Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 10, 2004 2:21:13 AM

<A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20040909172101..." target="_new">Here,</A> but 4000+ is still 2.4Ghz. It takes the exact same specs the FX-53 had. It's kind of ridiculous that every new processor we get actually costs 800+ or something, in EE or FX category, before it falls to the more "mortal" prices...

But hey, the good news is FX-55, with whatever scary price it will have, will be a <i>2.6Ghz A64!</i>

More about : a64 4000 130nm

September 10, 2004 2:37:42 AM

Wicked. I sure would like to be able to afford a top-of-the-line system one day, but I just don't think it's worth it.

--
"There's more to life than profits."
<font color=red>"Like what?"</font color=red>
"Like, you know, Slurpees and stuff."
<A HREF="http://images.southparkstudios.com/media/video/707/slur..." target="_new">South Park</A>
September 10, 2004 3:00:18 AM

Agreed.

And I don't think it's you. No AMD or Intel 32-bit processors (except Opterons or MP Xeons) should cost over US$500 or so. The prices that exist now in the market are senseless. Heck, I think only maybe Montecitos or dual-core Opterons (MPs) should be allowed to go above US$1000 at all! (server, heavy workstation, heavy computing niches)

Personally, I have a hard time even to go too much above a US$250 processor. That's because I'm not from the US, and the import taxes double all prices... and that's added to the bad currency exchange rates... :frown:
Related resources
September 10, 2004 3:20:17 AM

God, I don't think I've spent more than $100 on a chip any time soon. I bought a Duron 700 when it came out, which MIGHT have been around $100 I think, and my last purchase was a $75 XP 2500+. My next chip will probably be another sub-$100 chip just to make my livingroom computer a bit faster than the TBird 1333 I have in order to play Half-Life 2 on it. It will probably be a 266 mHz bus Barton 2600+ or something, as my motherboard only supports 266 mHz max bus speed, which goes for about $75. I'll probably spend about $200 on a GeForce 6600 GT though.

The way I see it, is that I won't notice the differnece really between the $75 chip and the $200 chip, considering I usually only play games and in most cases it's the video card holding the system back.

--
"There's more to life than profits."
<font color=red>"Like what?"</font color=red>
"Like, you know, Slurpees and stuff."
<A HREF="http://images.southparkstudios.com/media/video/707/slur..." target="_new">South Park</A>
September 10, 2004 4:27:52 AM

That 4000+ is a dissapointment. The 3200+ can oc to 2.5, and with a fsb over 225, it will easily outperform the 4000+. Oh well, If Intel can get a scotty to 4 gigs, they get the crown back. Personnally I cant see calling that chip a 3750+, but it's all a numbers game.
September 10, 2004 7:59:23 AM

prescott to 4ghz lol, taht will get the crown back? where do you draw that from?

anyway, i dont agree with the 4000+ numbering either, but i guess until they push 90nm out, they had to have somehting sitting there. amd hasnt relaly had to release higher speed bins, intel has been quiet, nothing has been released to change where amd excels, so there is no need for a 4000+ or even fx 55 at this point. but cant let the market get stagnet, have to kepe it exciting with new high end chips. but there is a good side ot this. wiht those rleases, that 3200+ will be cheaper, so will all of the s939 chips.

its plain to see that amd had headroom to spare, pushing 2.6 on 130nm, perhaps SS is thereason or maybe thats before its addition. once 90nm takes off, amd might retweak its numbering scheme. possibly offering a new 4000+ model, 2.6ghz but with only 512 cache like the rest of the s939, maybe let the fx 55 stay on as 2.6 and 1mb cache, then just let it die with fx 57 and 2.8 on 90 nm
September 10, 2004 3:15:18 PM

is AMD the new Intel?

------
A64 3400+ Newcastle
1GB PC 4000 Kingston HyperX
Asus K8V basic Bios 1004
PNY Geforce 6800 GT 256MB DDR3
63,524 Aquamarks
September 10, 2004 3:41:02 PM

I hope so. But without the crap / delayed products. Bad scaling, thermal leakage and what ever Intel bashings stuff you want to add :lol: 

_______________
STFU
September 10, 2004 6:03:50 PM

but what is the differents between the fx and ee??

I like to build up one of my computer.
September 10, 2004 6:23:49 PM

The <i>new</i> Intel?

What is the point of <i>that</i> statement?
September 10, 2004 11:22:47 PM

Quote:
but what is the differents between the fx and ee??

About $240 at newegg. The cheaper FX is better at games, as well.
It is also nice that the socket 939 boards will support faster FX chips, while 478 probably will not.
September 10, 2004 11:44:25 PM

AMD is releasing new products on time, something that we are accustomed to seeing with Intel. Have the sides changed? <A HREF="http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/08/27/35FEamd_1.htm..." target="_new">AMD the new Intel?</A>


Now, AMD is outselling Intel too!

<A HREF="http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto...tc_cmp/46802761" target="_new">Link</A>

------
A64 3400+ Newcastle
1GB PC 4000 Kingston HyperX
Asus K8V basic Bios 1004
PNY Geforce 6800 GT 256MB DDR3
63,524 Aquamarks
September 10, 2004 11:55:26 PM

I know what you are saying, and to Amd, it is a great compliment. Truth is, they are bothe just companies. They bothe have good periods, and bad periods. I want bothe of them to have lots of good periods, that way we get the best.
September 10, 2004 11:56:32 PM

OMG, kanavit just switched sides...

he <i>was</i> a senseless Intel fanboy...

he is <i>now</i> a senseless AMD fanboy.

Incredible. Look, he changed his config again. I think he's either lying in his sig or he indeed is the richest s.o.a.b. who doesn't know what to do with his money I've ever seen!!!
September 11, 2004 1:04:48 AM

You sure they're just companies? Here's the begining of that article he linked to...

<i>You just gotta love a Cinderella story. Advanced Micro Devices is the hardscrabble kid who came to Silicon Valley with a dollar and a pack of Luckies and ended up in a building with its name on top. AMD?s rapid rise from startup to $5 billion semiconductor powerhouse is, as Humphrey Bogart?s English teacher once said, the stuff of which dreams are made.</i>

This is how sports writers write about athletes. I now blame the media for fanboyism. And for a whole bunch of other things not related to technology. :) 

<i>Dual Opteron 248s, 5900nu, 4gig ram, dual 36gb raptor, 80gb hd, 550w Enermax, Suse64 9.1, and a bunch of other crap.</i>
September 11, 2004 2:10:38 AM

AMD can stand their ground and intel too. We are now up for some mad competition...the next few years are going to be interesting.

Click <font color=blue><A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">HERE</A></font color=blue> if you realy are an <font color=red>idiot</font color=red>.
September 11, 2004 3:25:31 AM

OK kanavit what's up? what is with the sig did you really buy amd? or did you best friend hack your thg account. I really did not see you comming over to the dark side so soon if ever.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.
September 11, 2004 3:42:18 AM

It's all your fault you know. He used to be a perfectly abusable intel fanboy. You had to go on telling him the A64s were better for gaming. It's not all bad though. We still have the petertoy, if we can find him.
September 11, 2004 3:58:06 AM

My fault . Well I'm not so sure about that. whatever so long as people see things for what they are. I guess petertoy is next on my list, wish me luck

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.
September 11, 2004 3:59:36 AM

Luck.
September 11, 2004 4:25:46 AM

Ok I accept. This just might be fun.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.
September 12, 2004 4:01:19 PM

Truer words were never spoken. They're both just companies. They'll have their ups and downs. It's just that some of us love the underdog and hate the favorite as a matter of course.

Da Worfster

If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything.
September 12, 2004 4:36:08 PM

Rooting for the underdog (or even rooting for the big guy, for that matter), in whatever form, is biasing. It is not justified to support a company just because it's small, even if it might "feel" good. It is a very primitive emotional and passionate reaction that many people cannot avoid... And most are not aware of it. Even those who are don't do anything to avoid it, too...

Heck, why doesn't anyone root for Cyrix?
September 12, 2004 4:46:07 PM

I used to favour AMD because they were a small company fighting against the large corporation of Intel.. but you are right, thats stupid, and you should support the company that provides the best value IMO

-------
<A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">please dont click here! </A>
Brand name whores are stupid!
September 12, 2004 6:33:44 PM

You shouldn't worry about supporting a company, as far as I'm concerned, you should simply get the product <i>you</i> want, regardless of the company.

For most of us, that means getting a good enough processor for a small enough price. That's it. You shouldn't even think about "hey, it's from Intel" or "it's from AMD"...... Theoretically.
September 12, 2004 7:48:04 PM

now tell that to the enitre enthusaist community lol
September 12, 2004 7:52:37 PM

:eek: 

Well, ... erm... You're right, but hey, I was just saying how things <i>should</i> be... I guess... And even if we never reach that as a goal, I hope that our efforts to do so will yield their own rewards.
September 12, 2004 11:29:20 PM

<i>Heck, why doesn't anyone root for Cyrix?</i>

I've taken that burden upon myself.

<i>Official Cyrix fanboy. Cyrix Instead!</i>
September 12, 2004 11:53:30 PM

ROFL!!!

Hey, has anyone considered that AMD too might be having problems with 90nm? I mean, A64 4000+ @2.4Ghz with 130nm? FX-55, 2.6Ghz, still at 130nm? I'd expect 90nm products by now... Many roadmaps indicated the switch to take place by now. It's not easy going beyond 2.4Ghz (2.6Ghz and above) with the current 90nm...

I wonder if AMD is stalled with the 130nm because it's just waiting for Intel to catch up or because they simply haven't got such a bright 90nm transition as they'd like. Personally, I think it's the second of the alternatives, and for a very good reason: the 90nm process should be embraced by AMD ASAP, because it helps their ability to deliver more at less cost, in theory. That is an ability they need in order to meet A64 demand!...

What do you guys think?
September 12, 2004 11:56:57 PM

<i>You shouldn't worry about supporting a company, as far as I'm concerned, you should simply get the product you want, regardless of the company.</i>

The way I see it, there are fans and there are fanboys. The difference for me is a fan likes a company or a companies products because of real things that company has brought to the table. A fanboy exercises religious adherence to a company and will often argue out of emotion.

It really used to irritate me a lot more. When I first came to this board a year ago, it took a while to figure out who to listen to. The fan boys will memorize all the buzzwords and at first sound like they know what they're talking about. The fans can explain the technical advantage behind a given product, can cut through the buzzword nonsense and will still sound like they know what they're talking about even after you've followed their posts for a while.

I have no problems with fans, it's the fanboys that make meaningful conversation pointless. It's a religion with them, nothing more than that. They mislead people, evangelize brands instead of technology, and are very difficult to reason with.

<i>Official Cyrix fanboy. Cyrix Instead!</i>
September 13, 2004 12:46:01 AM

<i>I think it's the second of the alternatives, and for a very good reason: the 90nm process should be embraced by AMD ASAP, because it helps their ability to deliver more at less cost, in theory.</i>

In theory. In practice with a new process, AT FIRST, it is substantially more expensive. It takes time to tweak the process to get yields up. So for that reason, they may well be having problems with their process in getting good yields. But it's all theory on my part.

<i>Official Cyrix fanboy. Cyrix Instead!</i>
September 13, 2004 3:50:51 AM

why do you automatically assume the more plausible option is that amd is having such problems with 90nm that it would cause them to hold it back? there isnt any evidence at all, in fact not even any rumors, that would subsantiate that. If it was even possilbe, usually youd start to hear rumors, but your nto hearing aynthing. In fact all we have ehard is taht amd si on track sending out parts as we speak. So what delay are you talking about exactly? You excpet 90nm parts, well they are here as far as we know, they just arent in the retail channel.

one thing i think that has happned is everyone has been axiously awaiting 90nm desktop chips, and even before the 3rd quarter ends, people are getting ancy and tend to fall back on an assumption that there must be problems. When did amd say they would have desktop retail 90nm parts at this time? For quite a while ive been hearing that amd would push 90nm into the server and mobile areas first, then transition into the desktop line. Now of course that means there would be a gap of time whne there would be no speed bumps if amd waited to push anymore till they had the volume for desktop chips. so instead they fall back on 130nm and retool to hold them.

I do belive the rollout was planned in such increments becuase amd cant just ramp up volume like intel could, they have much less to work with and have to delegate between lines. I tend to think that it seems they havnt had any technical problems with 90nm at this point, but are purposely slowing the release to allow them to ramp up parts and of course fine tune to get higher speed grades out of 90nm. They may even start 90nm pushes by replacing 130nm parts, so the s939 3500 would go to 90nm. There may not be a top end 90nm at first, but rather the lower end ones.
September 13, 2004 4:13:01 AM

Personaly I think Mephistophelesis correct amd 90nm will be usefull cost saving and offer some increase in performance but not like the old days. Seems to me there is a problem with shrinking at the current time. I don't think amd will have the problems as bad as intel but they won't get the performance boosts like from 180nm to 130nm either.

Strictly a guess here but I'd be suprized to see amd 90nm push 3.2 over the next couple of years. and I personaly doubt the prescott will ever pass 4 giz. maybe things will change at 65nm who really knows. looks like dual core will play a bigger role in future performance although software needs to be written to utalize that effectivaly.

Time will tell and i'm only guessing.


If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.
September 13, 2004 12:36:57 PM

I switched to AMD, because i don't believe in LGA 775 socket, PCIe(slower than 8xagp), or DDR2(slower than DDR1). Its all BS. Prescotts run too hot, and now it looks like there gonna be worse than before. I also am a big doom3 fan, and according to HardOC review, the AMD64 was the best chip for doom3 because of hypertrasnport technology. AMD seems to have direction, while Intel is confused and following. That's why i switched. Here is my Aquamark3 score; <A HREF="http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=818880705" target="_new">70261</A>. Putting pins on the motherboard was the worst idea i have ever seen. plus, the Xeon nocona don't even use LGA 775, so Intel stating that the new socket was needed was also a lie.

And now to new news: <A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/display/200409130505..." target="_new">AMD Outsells Intel in Retail Desktops</A>

the new intel?

------
A64 3400+ Newcastle
1GB PC 4000 Kingston HyperX
Asus K8V basic Bios 1004
PNY Geforce 6800 GT 256MB DDR3
70,261 Aquamarks <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Kanavit on 09/13/04 08:40 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
September 13, 2004 4:33:23 PM

What? My god, you might switch sides, but if there is a constant in the universe is that you speak only complete nonsense, man!
Quote:
i don't believe in LGA 775 socket, PCIe(slower than 8xagp), or DDR2(slower than DDR1). Its all BS.

While current LGA775 processors aren't truly competitive, the platform itself is probably quite acceptable. PCIe <i>isn't</i> slower than AGP 8x and it is simply technically the way to go; it's much, much superior to standard PCI, Kanavit. Also, DDR2 might not show its potential until DDR2-667, but believe me, times will come in which DDR2 will replace DDR.
Quote:
I also am a big doom3 fan, and according to HardOC review, the AMD64 was the best chip for doom3 because of hypertrasnport technology.

Nossir, that has probably very, very little to do with hypertransport. It has much, much more to do with the ODMC! Stop spewing buzzwords from marketing without understanding jack about what you're talking about!
Quote:
Putting pins on the motherboard was the worst idea i have ever seen. plus, the Xeon nocona don't even use LGA 775, so Intel stating that the new socket was needed was also a lie.

What? Noone in their righteous mind complained about that. There were some initial rumors about fragility, but noone complained about that in reviews, once they noticed you could plug a processor in and out some 15-20 times without any problems, if done with a minimal amount of care! Also, let's ask a stupid question: would you rather break a pin of your $100 mobo or of your $350 processor?
Quote:

the new intel?

What does Intel mean to you? Good? Is it an adjective? Does it make your heart beat stronger? So the new Intel = the new "the best"? You've got to be kidding, you have the most infantile reasoning I've ever seen in a hardware forum. It's impressive, quite frankly.
September 13, 2004 5:29:48 PM

i dont know, i wouldnt be so quick to get all lovey lovey with ddr2. yes its the big thing right now. but evne today its liek pulling teeth getting adoption of it, whihc will make memeory manufacturers uneasy and quick to drop support if a better solution shows up, I.E. ddr3, fb-dimm. memory manufacturers tend to eb skiddish, especially whne ti comes to intel. you are right that until ddr2 667-800, there is no reason to buy into lg755, but how long will that take to become mainstream? at least a year as far as i see it. now also next year your goign to see ddr3 and possibly fb-dimm, so thing sare very up in the air.

amd's hesitation seems to be another sign of the slow adoption, i dont think its just becuase amd wont do soemthing intel wants to do, its very possible that they are also wanting to wait and see. besides, look at ddr makers, they are sitll focused pretty squarely on ddr, did you here about the recent ddr 600 ram released?

you say the platform is acceptable yet its not competitive, well if its not competitive then its not acceptable imo lol. what i do think lg755 is, is a place holder. intle had to come out with some great new socket and technologies to drum up momentum for prescott in light of amd moves. lg755 could have been so much more, but with ddr2 delays and near non existant pci-e availability, you oculd say the socket is before tis time. You got to think intel knew this, knew the performance problems with ddr2 533 and the pci-e situation, so it seems pretty feasible that they did it to hold the market till they got relaly competitive products. its just ntoa good buy at all at this point, and i relaly dont see it getting much better next year. Unfortunately, as s478 gets phased out, people will be forced into it, forced into paying more for ddr2 ram and possibly more for pci-e grpahics, unless they are getting the lower end 915 chipsets.

also, while i agree with you that hypertransport is nto the reason the athlon 64 does ebtter in gaming, it is one part of it. without a proper link to the chipset to give the ODMC the speed to show its potential.
September 13, 2004 8:50:20 PM

Mephistopheles, if you read the hardocp review . They indeed proved that AMD's 64 hypetrasnport technology help make it faster than Prescott / northwood because Doom3 loves a lot of cache to perform. Doom3 sees A64's DDR ram as cache because with onboard memory controller, it runs at same speed as fsb. so it sees system ram as cache , on A64 systems.

if pinless cpu was so good, why were many mobo manufactureres reluctant to switch over to LGA?

------
A64 3400+ Newcastle
1GB PC 4000 Kingston HyperX
Asus K8V basic Bios 1004
PNY Geforce 6800 GT 256MB DDR3
70,261 Aquamarks
September 13, 2004 9:41:26 PM

No, Kanavit, I'm afraid you're not right.

See this <A HREF="http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/Additional..." target="_new">diagram</A> from AMD: Hypertransport is NOT that which connects system memory to CPU. Hypertransport is a technology that is used for the CPU to communicate with everything else in the computer, <i>except</i> memory! It is the on-die memory controller that greatly reduces latency and has a dedicated communication channel. Hypertransport has nothing to do with the memory controller in the A64 architecture!
Quote:


if pinless cpu was so good, why were many mobo manufactureres reluctant to switch over to LGA?

Lack of good processors. If prescott had advantages in comparison to northwood, LGA775 might get a much better acceptance. If a performance premium was involved in the added costs for this new platform, I wouldn't see any problems. As of yet, though, there is no such premium, and therefore there is little or no reason to look forward to an LGA775 upgrade over other competing solutions. And the main responsible for that is not the slightly lackluster DDR2 performance or PCIe; it's the LGA775 processors themselves which lack appeal!
September 13, 2004 9:47:33 PM

Quote:

also, while i agree with you that hypertransport is nto the reason the athlon 64 does ebtter in gaming, it is one part of it. without a proper link to the chipset to give the ODMC the speed to show its potential.

Oh yes, but then, you're seeing the ODMC's potential unleashed, not hypertransport. So the real performer isn't hypertransport, it's the ODMC. Any way you cut it, Kanavit's reasoning was off focus.

Oh, and if you're still not convinced, just think of this: which of these facts is more performance boosting: the fact that the memory controller has a dedicated, non-shared bus or the fact that it is on-die?

So I guess Hypertransport still frees up a little performance, of course, but it is by far not the most relevant factor at all.

Also, I just saw hardocp's review, and as I suspected, they don't even mention hypertransport anywhere as being responsible for A64's lead in Doom 3. That must have been something kanavit pulled out of thin air, then.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Mephistopheles on 09/13/04 08:51 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
September 13, 2004 10:33:00 PM

Yeah great another overpriced CPU on the market

<i><font color=red>Only an overclocker can make a computer into a convectional oven.</i></font color=red>
!