Athlon MPs to support 166 FSB & AMD cutting prices

[blue_heart]

<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/25050201.htm" target="_new"> read it here</A>

wish if there was UnDo in the life

 

[Crashman]

Thanks

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

 

[Kelledin]

It's about time, really. We've known the Palominos could go beyond 166FSB easily.

Interestingly enough, this probably means that a <i>new</i> AMD762 northbridge will be released with support for the higher FSB speeds.

Regarding the SMP-locking, AthlonXP's are currently already locked by a simple burned bridge, same as the multiplier lock. Is AMD planning to go even further with the SMP locking?

<pre>We now <b>return</b>(<font color=blue>-1</font color=blue>) to an irregular program scheduler.</pre><p>

 

[johnnyx]

Sounds great! Looks like its about time for me to buy!

If an orange was driving a racecar would it peel out? www.jxfiles.com

 

[mbetea]

i think they will go further with smp locking on the tbreds and bartons. just look at hammer, they went and completely changed the socket for duals. i would doubt that mp chips running at 166fsb is true. the tbred and barton chips as of now would be compatible with current mp/mpx boards. why would they go and screw all those people out by putting another revision of the chipset out? yes, the chips could still run in these boards, but certainly not at stock speeds, no mp/mpx board support 166fsb. and especially seeing what's around the corner. i don't buy it.

[insert philosophical statement here]

 

[Kelledin]

why would they go and screw all those people out by putting another revision of the chipset out?

For the same reason that Intel semi-screwed people in the same way: FSB speed must advance sooner or later to match increasing clockspeed. AMD might also be doing it to further distinguish AthlonMP's from AthlonXP's, as you suggest they might do with harder SMP locking.

As it is, the 760MP/MPX might be about the same as the i850--most yields of the chipset part could go to higher FSB easily, they just haven't had their testing taken that far yet.

<pre>We now <b>return</b>(<font color=blue>-1</font color=blue>) to an irregular program scheduler.</pre><p>

 

[lhgpoobaa]

a logical step... seperating the MP from the XP further untill we get the different socket hammers.

not sure if i like that idea though.


:lol: Whats better, <font color=blue>Intel</font color=blue> or <font color=green>AMD?</font color=green> :lol:

 

[Matisaro]

think they will go further with smp locking on the tbreds and bartons. just look at hammer, they went and completely changed the socket for duals. i would doubt that mp chips running at 166fsb is true.

The sledge is an entierly different chip(it has dual memory controler on board) of course it has a different socket.

The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark