Tom's Hardware Forums » CPU & Components » CPUs » The Ultimate Hardware Guide [Last Update: 4-14-06]
 

The Ultimate Hardware Guide [Last Update: 4-14-06]

Add a reply



 Word :   Username :  
 
 Page :   1  2  3  4  5
Author
 Thread : The Ultimate Hardware Guide [Last Update: 4-14-06]
 
Profile: enthusiast
More Information

Last message on previous page:

Quote :

so then when the fx-52 comes out will the larger cache even help it?

dont you mean the fx-62? and hash i think that they will introduce the fx-64 on 65nm process dont you think so too?
 
Oh yeah, and FX62 (Windsor) will have 125W TDP.

Related Pr oduct
Register or log in to remove.

Profile: nimble knuckle
More Information

Quote :

MadModMike  
 
I believe it was a Xeon 3.4GHz OC'd to 3.9GHz (Single CPU) w/ 1MB Cache vs. a Pentium 4 3.4 GHz w/ 1MB Cache on Socket 478 and the P4 was still faster by about 8%. I wouldn't really blame the cache, since they're the same.  
 
Atol: I don't care about the "Core Duo".

 
 
Well a few things you cant do with your computer Madmodmike
 
1 Take your case or Monitor while your wife driving and play games? NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
Where me I Can take eather laptop with me and play it.  Oh by the way My 3.4 ee L3 2mb cache Northwood with 17 monitor Laptop. I dont have to worrie about overclocking why waste battery life. Or my intel duo 1.66ghz run games on one cpu.  While the other cpu running the windows task and running on low power.
 
So shove your remark up your rear.

Profile: enthusiast
More Information

Quote :

Ahhh... RDRAM.  RDRAM was even available for Pentium 3's for a while.  Ironic that AMD might just be using XDR RAM in future chips.
 
Who would have thought?


 
Me... I knew that Rambus has the potential, it was just the damned DRAM cartel who screwed them in order to sell us overpriced slow crap. Yes, check how much CPU speed has gone up. Well, guess what? They are both being made from the same sand.

Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information

Quote :

MadModMike  
 
I believe it was a Xeon 3.4GHz OC'd to 3.9GHz (Single CPU) w/ 1MB Cache vs. a Pentium 4 3.4 GHz w/ 1MB Cache on Socket 478 and the P4 was still faster by about 8%. I wouldn't really blame the cache, since they're the same.  
 
Atol: I don't care about the "Core Duo".

 
 
Well a few things you cant do with your computer Madmodmike
 
1 Take your case or Monitor while your wife driving and play games? NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
Where me I Can take eather laptop with me and play it.  Oh by the way My 3.4 ee L3 2mb cache Northwood with 17 monitor Laptop. I dont have to worrie about overclocking why waste battery life. Or my intel duo 1.66ghz run games on one cpu.  While the other cpu running the windows task and running on low power.
 
So shove your remark up your rear.
 
There happens to be such thing as an AMD laptop chief and that is what I buy. I don't need a Dual-Core laptop, that is just retarded. BTW: My 3700+ pwns ur P4 EE 3.4.
 
~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

Profile: enthusiast
More Information

Quote :

My rig is an absolute bitch to OC.  I can't get above 2.34Ghz.  I've narrowed the problem down to 2 things:
 
1.  my PSU is underpowered.  it's a 485w enermax and i'm running 2x GTX's in SLI.  I think by OC'ing i'm asking too much of it in terms of voltages.


 
If that ener is not single-rail one, you can try with one that is. I have heard that both SLI and Crossfire have problems with dual-rail PSUs. Makes one wonder why did they made ATX 2.0 spec at all if it doesn't do any good?

Profile: nimble knuckle
More Information

Big deal Fact remains.  Anything you buy today will be out dated In a month or so. I m waiting for the Newer Amd chip.  See you dont understand somepeople are on the road vers sitting on there rear at home.

Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information

Hmm...Okay?
 
~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information

Update. Review 1st post for changes.
 
~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information

Update 2. Review 1st post for changes.
 
~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

Profile: Forum Resident
More Information

Mike and I pretty much determined it's the PSU (it's by no means bad, it just doesn't have enough wattage).  I'm ordering a new one tonight actually.
 
-mpjesse

Profile: Forum Resident
More Information

FYI... i just bought this whore of a PSU.
 
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6817194004
 
/me luvs enermax.  ;-)
 
I'll let you know how it turns out... if you'd like.
 
-mpjesse

Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information

Yea, for sure tell me how it went. BTW, that is a slick PSU.
 
~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information

Update. Review 1st post for changes.
 
~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information

Update. Check 1st post for changes.
 
~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

Profile: member
More Information

Mike , can you tell me about the perofrmance gain of supporting 64-bit on any processor ...I mean how does this benefits normal 32-bit applications ..why they are called 32-bit app ?  
 
also when I say that a certain bus is 128-bit (eg, GPU cores which is 256-bit ) what does it mean ? ..does it mean that it can recieve larger amount of data ? yes ? but how ?.
 
sorry if I asked too questions , I hope you answer them simply ...

Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information

Quote :

Mike , can you tell me about the perofrmance gain of supporting 64-bit on any processor ...I mean how does this benefits normal 32-bit applications ..why they are called 32-bit app ?  
 
also when I say that a certain bus is 128-bit (eg, GPU cores which is 256-bit ) what does it mean ? ..does it mean that it can recieve larger amount of data ? yes ? but how ?.
 
sorry if I asked too questions , I hope you answer them simply ...


 
1) Using a 64-bit OS (obviously with a 64-bit CPU) I have noticed and documented personally perfomance gains of up to 12%with normal operation and running 32-bit applications. The entire gain of 64-bit over 32-bit can be up to 75%. Also, 32-bit applications (32-bit apps = applications) benefit because running 64-bit increases Memory Bandwidth and CPU performance which in turn increases the performance of 32-bit applications such as Games and 3D Rendering programs.
 
2) When it says 128-Bit Memory Bus, it means that's the length of the Bus, it's 128 bits wide. This means it increases performance beacause it can send more information per clock. An example is that a 256-Bit Memory Bus will, theoretically, offer double the Memory Bandwidth of a 128-bit bus. The larget bus's (wider) allows more information to flow in and out at a time, but this also creates latencies because of how large the bus is and how fast the clock speed of the bus is relative to the size.
 
If you need more simpler responses or want to know anything else, just ask. I don't have a problem helping.
 
~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

Profile: member
More Information

so when I say that a Memory chip is clocked at 1000MHZ and 128-bit bus and another memory chip with same frequency but has 256-bit bus ..
which is better ?  
 
the number of bits is related to the bandwith ..right ?

Profile: member
More Information

another thing about 32-bit applications ...we all know that 1 Byte = 8 bits  ...so we have 32/8 = 4 Bytes ..
so 32-bit applications means that they have 4 bytes per cycle  8O or what  :?:  these things are really confusing me !

Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information

Quote :

another thing about 32-bit applications ...we all know that 1 Byte = 8 bits  ...so we have 32/8 = 4 Bytes ..
so 32-bit applications means that they have 4 bytes per cycle  8O or what  :?:  these things are really confusing me !


 
I will respond to both of your posts with this post:
 
1st Post: The 256-bit Memory bus @ 1000MHz will be double the memory bandwidth of the 128-bit, theoretically that means it should be twice as fast, but just as more GHz doesn't meacaln a faster CPU, a wider bus doesn't always mean more performance, but it does have greater memory bandwidth. Yes, bits is related to bandwidth, it's Bits x Frequency / 8 = Memory Bandwidth.
 
2nd Post: The 32-bit means that is how large the data size is it's transmitting. So yes, it is transmitting 4-Byte size information vs. 8-Byte size information. Theoretically, 64-bit creates a larger latency than 32-bit, as is the case with almost everything. It goes alot more complex and in detail, but that is the jist of 32-bit and 64-bit.
 
~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

Profile: member
More Information

so normal processors have 32-bit FSB ..and 64-bit processors have 64-bit FSB ? ...
if that what it is ..in INTEL's processors why having the 64-bit as extensions only (EM64T) ...what is the difference between 64-bit controllers in INTEL and AMD .

Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information

Quote :

so normal processors have 32-bit FSB ..and 64-bit processors have 64-bit FSB ? ...
if that what it is ..in INTEL's processors why having the 64-bit as extensions only (EM64T) ...what is the difference between 64-bit controllers in INTEL and AMD .


 
The 64-bit processors refers to the size of the registers, a register is just a portion inside the computer that it uses for storin