Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Tell me something about AMD CPU

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 25, 2001 5:37:38 AM

I went to AMD website already, but I didn't like the way they explain the CPU. So, can someone please tell me something about AMD CPU, the Duron, Althlon, Althlon TB, Althlon XP. The cacah, FSB, etc. Thank You.

More about : amd cpu

November 25, 2001 6:52:04 AM

Well, you can always ask for the free technical CD-ROM or download the manuals.

Here is the summary:
<b>Duron:</b>
Interface: SocketA (462 pin)
Core/Codename: Spitfire (upto 1.0 Ghz), Morgan (1.1 GHz and above)
L1 cache: 128k
L2 cache: 64k
FSB: 200 MHz DDR (Alpha EV6 bus)
- A value processor, subset of the Athlon just like Celeron is to PentiumII/III/4

<b>Athlon:</b>
Interface: SlotA (282 pin SEC) for K7/K75 and some thundirbird versions)
SocketA (462 pin) for rest of the line.
Core/Codename: K7/K75(upto 950 Mhz), Thundirbird (800 MHz to 1.4 GHz), Palomino (1.2 GHz and above)
L1 cache: 128k
L2 cache: 256k
FSB: 200 MHz DDR (Alpha EV6 bus)
Introduced to compete with the Intel P-III
<b>AthlonXP:</b>
Interface: SocketA (462 pin)
Core/Codename: Palomino (1.33 GHz and above, uses model numbering to indicate relative P4 performance)
L1 cache: 128k
L2 cache: 256k
FSB: 200 MHz DDR (Alpha EV6 bus)
Competes with P4.

<b>AthlonMP:</b>
Interface: SocketA (462 pin)
Core/Codename: Thundirbird/Palomino
L1 cache: 128k
L2 cache: 256k
FSB: 200 MHz DDR (Alpha EV6 bus)
Capable of Dual SMP, AthlonXP is supposed to be MP capable but isnt officially validated for the operation.

Hope its enough.

girish

<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
November 25, 2001 8:21:41 AM

Summed it up pretty well.


A few sidenotes.

Right now no one buys a duron, the tbird is nearly always cheaper and faster (for sure if you go one speed bin higher like 1250tbird versus 1200duron).
The xp1600 is the best price/performance cpu right now.
Most socket a motherboards with 133/266fsb can support the athlon xp, but all socket a mobos can run duron/tbird.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
Related resources
November 25, 2001 9:18:52 AM

yes, but I for one just got a couple of Durons for my new office machines. The 750 MHz chip cost less than half the Tbird 1.1G! The idea was to invest the savings in a better board - I got the Asus A7A266 (but dint get either rev B or C) with PC133 SDRAM (I will OC it to 133 MHz FSB just liek my home machine - 600@800!)

Anyway, I might add that unlike the socket370 platform, socketA is here to stay! The next core Thoroughbred as well as later on Barton will be socketA. Most boards will just need a BIOS update. Thoroughberd in particular that will turn 0.13u will be the most interesting processor since it will run at higehr clock as well as it could be unofficially clocked higher, going by AMD tradition!

girish

<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
November 25, 2001 5:34:47 PM

dude, let me tell you about AMD cpu's stuff that no one here wants to tell you.

1. AMD cpu run hot, if they don't fry themselves they will usually cause software problems over a period of time and will cause you to buy additional fans, making a very noisy enviroment.

2. AMD has been trying to reduce the fryage(I made new a word!) by going the cheap route and putting 4 little pads on the cpu. now they have the XP PR-/+ 300 you need a special mobo and attachment to keep it from frying.

3. the AMD platform is full of bugs incompatibilities, glitches, errant IRQ's, weekly 4-n-1 driver downloads, bios patches praying, worry, aggravation.

4. to this day I've not heard of a mainboard(retail) that will take advantage of the XP's faux thermal diode.

these points will be debated but, remember this: everytime an AMD user presses the pwr button on their system, they usually say a prayer.


"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
November 25, 2001 5:57:27 PM

Dude?! Take your Ritalin.

A one sided, biased argument will sway only the weakest Lemmings.

Go put a 2x AGP card in your 845.
November 25, 2001 6:20:22 PM

1) It's a known fact that P4's consume more power than Athlons. Intel fans at [H]ardOCP have admitted that the P4 actually runs hotter than any AMD CPU. Oops. :tongue:

2) No you don't, you just need a decent, $10, AMD-approved HSF (or a retail Athlon) and free health-monitor software.

3) Funny, I installed a 3-in-1 only once, and I never had any of these problems. I even have an SB Live!, and I still have none of these problems.

4) Not all that necessary, though it would be nice to have. See #2.

Kelledin
<A HREF="http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/" target="_new">LFS</A>: "You don't eat or sleep or mow the lawn; you just hack your distro all day long."
November 25, 2001 7:21:47 PM

I'm not going to say anything except that AMDMeltdown is an unrespected member of these forums who is irrational and downright liar. I have found that 99.9% of the time AMDMeltdown lies or says half-truths with a twisted meaning.


AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
November 25, 2001 8:24:06 PM

) It's a known fact that P4's consume more power than Athlons. Intel fans at [H]ardOCP have admitted that the P4 actually runs hotter than any AMD CPU. Oops.

I still want a link for that.

Wisdom dont come with time
Meilleur chance la prochaine fois
November 25, 2001 8:40:14 PM

We cleared up the whole power consumption issue <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/modules.php?name=Forums&..." target="_new">here</A>. The relevant facts are documented by Intel and AMD and are linked therein.

I already provided <A HREF="http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=246..." target="_new">linkage</A> for you on the [H]ardOCP comments.

Kelledin
<A HREF="http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/" target="_new">LFS</A>: "You don't eat or sleep or mow the lawn; you just hack your distro all day long."
November 25, 2001 8:53:37 PM

hey... did we ever find out what the P4 heat spreader was made out of? was it steel or aluminium?

Excuse me for a moment. I need to drive my ergonomic wheely chair over a sheet of bubble wrap!
November 25, 2001 8:59:42 PM

What do you mean by putting 4 little pads on the cpu?

<font color=blue>Another waste of bandwidth on the web. :tongue: </font color=blue>
November 25, 2001 9:01:08 PM

I wish they used copper instead.

<font color=blue>Another waste of bandwidth on the web. :tongue: </font color=blue>
November 25, 2001 9:13:55 PM

Umm, NeGaverse23, since when does AMDMeltdown make any sense? Everything he says is either a lie or complete nonsense.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
November 25, 2001 9:22:43 PM

I was asking Meltdown the question.

<font color=blue>Another waste of bandwidth on the web. :tongue: </font color=blue>
November 25, 2001 9:40:28 PM

copper too soft (for those with an extremly caviler attitude to the p4's indestructability) and probably too costly.
P4's allready cost a ton.

nice idea though.


Excuse me for a moment. I need to drive my ergonomic wheely chair over a sheet of bubble wrap!
November 25, 2001 9:54:31 PM

Poobah, I had compeltely forgot about that discussuion. I heard the heatspreader was steel somewhere, but others heard aluminim, does anyone know for sure?

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
November 25, 2001 10:33:25 PM

Amd has its flaws, and so does intel, you will get the about equal performance with both, just that amd is cheeper. i had the same issues about a year ago when i switched from pentium to athlon, the athlon never let me down, as a matter of fact i just got my 2nd athlon , a 1800+ and that thing rocks.
November 25, 2001 10:45:20 PM

That only comment and personal opinion.

Wisdom dont come with time
Meilleur chance la prochaine fois
November 25, 2001 11:54:20 PM

yeah... thats the thing... soone seems to know...
have u emailed Raystonn yet? he would know.

and i would HOPE it would be aluminium...

and ive been thinking about hammer and such... with tiny 64mm^2 dies, i owuld think that heat spreaders would become manditory (and for the anti moron anti crush feature)



Excuse me for a moment. I need to drive my ergonomic wheely chair over a sheet of bubble wrap!
November 26, 2001 12:45:18 AM

It's personal experience from P4 owners--people loyal to the Intel brand name. Otherwise, you would have been justified claiming the opinions were skewed in favor of AMD. If they're skewed at all, they're probably skewed in favor of Intel. :tongue:

Kelledin
<A HREF="http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/" target="_new">LFS</A>: "You don't eat or sleep or mow the lawn; you just hack your distro all day long."
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 26, 2001 3:17:56 AM

I always thought loyalty was a little !@#$%. I'm in for the best performance there is and still have money in my pocket for other things.... Why would I spend more for an Intel and get lower performance than I could with a faster/cheaper AMD? Now if Intel actually put their PIII engineers back to work and produced a good processor like the PIII was and at a good price, you wouldn't see me going to AMD. AMD/Intel aren't what they used to be back in the k6-2/P2 days. Loyalty to one or the other is complete ignorance.
November 26, 2001 3:50:24 AM

My own article on the issue - <A HREF="http://www.64bits.org/cpuheat/cpuheat3.htm" target="_new">here</A>.

All data is authentic and obtained from the respective datasheets, which are also linked. P4 is documented to consume 72W, but in reality it could be much more, about 105W. I will find the link for you (probably <A HREF="http://www.vanshardware.com" target="_new">http://www.vanshardware.com&lt;/A>) that says its about 25% too low than the actual! They say Intel took advantage of superior thermal management built into it, and documented it to be less for two reasons:

1. The competing platform consumes less than half the power, it would be a shame to admit their processor will consume twice as much power and perform about half as much the AMD Athlon!
2. By giving smaller power consumption figures, Heat Sink designers will make smaller and cheaper fans that will make the platform cheaper. they wanted all the people to put money buying P4 rather than the heatsink! And still they will get away with inferior cooling thanks to the better thermal managenet in P4!

Sorry if it looks a troll, but its true! Maybe intel dint intend that but this is how the things stand!!

girish

<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
November 26, 2001 3:54:38 AM

the four pads are in the four corners on the CPU - used to prevent crushed core syndrome. these pads help reduce the pressure and align the heatsink during installation.

<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
November 26, 2001 4:19:54 AM

The latest news is that P3 will be phased out and P4 will be the intel flagship! Current P4 becomes Celeron4 and P4 goes 533 GSB/512k cache!

Insane! they are dumping their best performing platform for nothing! They just introduced the FCPGA2 with differential clock promising 200 MHz FSB, 0.13u processor adding more MHz potential to the core and now they re letting it off!! I just cant understand why!?

Probably Intel has more marketing personnel than the engineers. And AMD has more engineers than the salesmen!!

girish

<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
November 26, 2001 4:35:30 AM

remember its alot cheaper producing just one chip...

the crappy slow ones become cellerons, the good ones become P4's... thats the way intel ahs always done it.


Excuse me for a moment. I need to drive my ergonomic wheely chair over a sheet of bubble wrap!
November 26, 2001 6:19:53 AM

Just look at the Intel Itanium's electrical specs on the page Lhgpoobaa linked here earlier: 130W @ 800Mhz with max temp. 66C.. and some manufacturers made 1U dual-Itanium servers ?
November 26, 2001 6:33:07 AM

yes, Compaq and Appro have made a 1U Itanium server.

We discussed how the heat produced could be put to some useful purpose. Depending on the server complexity, we can have a coffee vending machine, a room heater, a boiler or something on top of the server. In fact, a 16-32 way server could even run a small steam generator plant for outdoor lighting.

Suggestions are welcome.

girish

<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
November 26, 2001 2:11:52 PM

dude, on a AMD cpu you don't see 4 lil' (round)pads?

kelledin, the guy asked about the AMD cpu and I post all what is know about it, it's all fact and documented.

your post referring to the P4 is bs, the P4 has better thermal management then the XP will ever have.

the P4 cooling is far more efficient than that of anything AMD can put out.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by AmDmElTdOwN on 11/26/01 11:13 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
November 26, 2001 3:56:12 PM

The spacers? What does that have to do with reducing "fryage".

<font color=blue>Another waste of bandwidth on the web. :tongue: </font color=blue>
November 26, 2001 5:40:00 PM

meltdown, what is the problem with the rubber spacers? They're there to help support the heatsink because the core is so small. What does it have to do with frying processors????

"There's no such thing as gravity, the Earth just sucks"
November 26, 2001 5:40:06 PM

It's all fact and documented that the P4 consumes <i>more</i> power than the Athlon. It's in AMD and Intel datasheets. It's also a fact that more watts consumed == more heat generated. But I guess you can't handle facts all that well. :tongue:

Plus, the testimony of [H]ardcore Intel fans is that P4's run hotter. Are you saying Intel fans would lie for the sake of AMD? :lol: 

AMD's datasheet is <A HREF="http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/white_pape..." target="_new">here.</A>
Intel's documents are <A HREF="http://developer.intel.com/design/pentium4/datashts/249..." target="_new">here</A> and <A HREF="http://developer.intel.com/design/pentium4/guides/24988..." target="_new">here.</A>
Further documentation is <A HREF="http://users.erols.com/chare/elec.htm" target="_new">here</A> for all CPUs.

Note that Wattage = Voltage x Amperage; ask any electrical engineer about this formula. 2V x 57A = <b>OVER 100 W OF POWER</b> consumed at maximum by the P4. 75W is only the <b>average!</b>

Official documents effectively prove that the fastest P4 CPU consumes more power <i>on average</i> than the fastest Athlon CPU consumes <i>at maximum</i>. Face it, you are proven wrong on this point.

The Athlon doesn't have quite as effective a thermal management solution, but <b>it doesn't need one as badly as the P4.</b>

You have no proof that the "AMD platform" requires the weekly 4-in-1's, or has the errant IRQs, or needs BIOS patches. I never "patched" my BIOS, my IRQs are all fine, and I only applied motherboard drivers once. Too many people have been successful with their AMD platform for your claim on this point to be anything but pure BS.

W00t, so much for your credibility. I guess today is just your bad day. :wink:

Kelledin
<A HREF="http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/" target="_new">LFS</A>: "You don't eat or sleep or mow the lawn; you just hack your distro all day long."
November 26, 2001 8:53:03 PM

dont forget though that thermal output is dependent on die size, with the large P4 heat spreader reducing the watts per square mm energy output.

even so the total thermal output still has to go somewhere, thus the reason for the huge P4 stock heatsink!


actually. ive a quesition for any P4 owners out there...
do u use the stock HSF? if not, what do u use?
and do u overclock your P4?


Excuse me for a moment. I need to drive my ergonomic wheely chair over a sheet of bubble wrap!
November 27, 2001 2:22:32 AM

hey guys, nice argument..
I only wanted to mention that i believe the Duron was Morgan from the 1.0 GHz and up, not the 1.1 GHz like Girish said.

otherwise,, hey don't stop fighting on my account.. **backs away smiling**
hehe

"I spilled coffee all over my wife's nighty... ...serves me right for wearing it?!?"
November 27, 2001 2:37:15 AM

gets lame quick...
i just type around the flames.



Excuse me for a moment. I need to drive my ergonomic wheely chair over a sheet of bubble wrap!
November 27, 2001 3:19:45 AM

Quote:
the P4 cooling is far more efficient than that of anything AMD can put out.

P4 cooling??? People learn something new everyday!

The P4 does not cool itself, its the massive HSFs that needed to cool it, and P4 just runs slower to save its skin. That better thermal management rather than cooling. And as bad as a fried CPU since a fried P4 will cost you much more than a fried Athlon! You can always have a spare Athlon if at its fried, but a P4 2000 running at 125 would suck!

Its high time you get your CPUs insured!!!

girish

<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
November 27, 2001 3:43:26 AM

Thanks for the correction, I had read the Morgan 1GHz launch report on 2nd Oct but wasnt sure, so just put 1.1 so that I dont get the facts wrong.

BTW its interesting to see how do we land up again and again in the same argument no matter what subject we start from!

girish

<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
November 27, 2001 4:39:19 AM

Does this contribute to global warming????

<font color=blue>Remember. You get what you pay for. :smile: All advice here is free.</font color=blue> :wink:
November 27, 2001 3:36:24 PM

actually the P4 would cool itself, running without a hsf it will throttle down, by doing that it is in fact cooling itself. it's the same as when you're jogging, when you stop you begin to cool off(you don't need a hsf on your head to cool off!).

a P4 running at 125? that would be surely be temporary, a fried AXP is permanent.

now I know you or kelledin is gonna come back with a stupid comment, I don't expect anything more from you dogpoochompingchimps.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
November 27, 2001 5:03:36 PM

I dont think Kellidin or girish have even seen a x-way xeon let alone know how hot they get... I have a 4 way next to my desk atm, its as cool and quiet as a regular PC.

What benchmark would you like to see from it, im sure you want to call me a liar.

Ok, for all the geniuses out there who think AMD consumes less power. then explain the need for 350~450watt PSU and your 110F+ temps at idle... alot of AMD problems are due to PSU's that are at spec, but you still need a better one. go figure...

Why AMD didn't make it into the X-box?
1 stability
2 Heat
3 Power consumtion

Basicly the same reasons we do not use AMD processors, hence we dont want a failing product to blemish our spotless reputation for dependable machines, for the problems associated with AMD its not worth the time/effort.

Even with an attractive price, those problems outweigh the lower price. just think of the money microsoft could have saved with AMD CPU's, then again look at the high fail rate of AMD chips... Microsoft didnt want market a product destine to fail at a high ratio, like many other giants in the industry.

Just playback THG new AMD video, notice 6+ of the 17 Athlons with blast area. thats not a good ratio. Dont even try to say thats white thermal compound that ran from the core w/ over 1inch diameter spread.

consume more power = need for better PSU = overheats and dies = AMD

AMD lies on its power consumption. even in laptops w/ 15 minutes of battery life (PRESARIO 1215US, PRESARIO 705US) if you watch a dvd... unacceptable.

<A HREF="http://athome.compaq.com/default.asp?ProductLineId=440&..." target="_new"> Sad, soo sad.. Compaq + AMD </A>
November 27, 2001 5:05:00 PM

For what it's worth, Meltdown is right. The P4 thermal management is very impressive. I have heard of a fried P4, but that would take some talent.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
November 27, 2001 5:29:19 PM

Quote:
I dont think Kellidin or girish have even seen a x-way xeon let alone know how hot they get... I have a 4 way next to my desk atm, its as cool and quiet as a regular PC.

I've seen 4-way P3 xeons. I don't care about P4 xeons, because they're currently a joke. :tongue:

Quote:
Ok, for all the geniuses out there who think AMD consumes less power.

It does. Do you suppose the official AMD/Intel datasheets lie?

Tell you what, since you think you know more about the P4 than the engineers who designed it and documented its operational specs, why don't you work for Intel? :tongue:

Quote:
then explain the need for 350~450watt PSU and your 110F+ temps at idle...

Explain all the people on [H]ardOCP's "Strictly Intel" forum with P4's running even hotter.

You have your supposed personal experiences; we have facts and official documentation. Intel may have better thermal protection, but P4's still run hotter and consume more power. :lol: 

Kelledin
<A HREF="http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/" target="_new">LFS</A>: "You don't eat or sleep or mow the lawn; you just hack your distro all day long."
November 27, 2001 5:30:49 PM

Also, 900Mhz Xeon has once been recalled due to heating issues:


http://www.theinquirer.net/12080101.htm
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by priit on 11/27/01 02:37 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
November 28, 2001 4:18:58 AM

Here is FUGGER again!

Well I dont have any n-way Xeons or P3s in my closet but I build computers, workstations, servers. I havent built more than a 2-way server yet, but do have worked in labs having 4-way and 8-way servers. And have also seen how the cooling system is arranged in there - air ducts, 2n fans for n CPUs..., actually thats expected, even intel or AMD servers would have similar cooling strategies, dunno why these guys repeatedly bring it up and say the same things either in favor of Intel or against AMD!

BTW I thought you use a 8-way server as your desk!

I wonder how these chimps measure power consumpion of the CPU, by the PS wattage??? The fact is, all systems would do fine with even a 265W generic power supply. But with increasing power consumption from other components, greater number of drives and attatchments it makes sense to have a buffer capacity. It applies to both Intel and AMD, and almost everybody recommends a 300+ W PS for either of them. Whats the difference?

Well, they seem to go to a different math school teaching negative logic that says 72 is less than 54! Of course this power consumption is not a direct measure of heat generation, so a P4 with the larger die size and integrated IHS will definitely be slightly cooler than the smaller bare Athlon. Whats the big deal? P4 is cooler because of it is made so, not because it comsumes lesser power and needs yes, a larger <b>Power supply with extra leads to provide extra current</b>! Intel revised the ATX spec to 2.03 just for P4! AMD dint need to do that.

Yes, personal experience counts only when people derive rational inferences from them. We have the datasheets, a lab in which we do our tests and the web to tell it all others. If we have facts that can enlighten the others (except a adamant few) why dont we tell them?

Facts are sometimes hard to digest.

girish

<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 28, 2001 5:39:23 AM

Nimble knuckle? More like knuckle head!
November 28, 2001 10:33:44 AM

Again, Intel_inside, AMDMeltdown and Fugger are all idiotic liars. Please leave us!

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
November 28, 2001 12:28:53 PM

There is no problem with AMD's cpu. I built a new pc with Athlon XP1500 3 weeks ago. I met some problem, but it resulted from the mainboard. My mobo is MSI K7T266 Pro2. After I installed all the hardware, I could not install Windows because my Cherry keyboard was locked when you tried to boost from my CD-ROM. I couln't choose boost from CD-ROM at all although I could do anything when entering the Bios setting, so my pc always attempted to boot from my totally empty harddisk. The problem was solved by changing a keyboard. The newer version Bios has already corrected this problem.
The other problem is that after I installed all the 4 in 1 drivers the CD-ROM(Aopen 52x) dissappeared. The problem could be solved by skipping one of the driver, probably apati driver if I still remembered the name of that driver.
My conclusion is that AMD's product is very nice. If you meet any problem it ussually result from some bug from driver or Bios.
I hope what I experienced can save your some trouble.
Good Luck.
November 28, 2001 6:39:35 PM

>Nimble knuckle? More like knuckle head!

hey dude, long time no see! just noticed you still have less than adequate debating skills.

now run along little troll. ;-)

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
!