PDA

View Full Version : Using AMD Opteron for gaming?


Kain
05-01-03, 03:40 PM
I don't understand why the AMD Opteron is doing so well in gaming when it is meant to be a server processor. :confused:

Can someone please explain.

StealthHawk
05-01-03, 04:24 PM
Why wouldn't it do well in gaming?

The server chips AMD and Intel use(AthlonMP and Xeon respectively) have the same core as the desktop chips.

Opteron is no different. Athlon64 is the desktop version, and Opteron is the spruced up version. Opteron has twice the memory bandwidth that Athlon64 will have, plus it will have as much cache as or more cache than Athlon64. There are some other slight architectural differences, but the two chips are more or less the same.

Basically your question amounts to "why would Athlon64 be good for gaming?"

edit: Just for clarification, the architectural differences help multi-processor systems.

Kain
05-01-03, 04:30 PM
Thanks.

But, will the AMD Athlon 64 have any "gaming enchancements" as it is meant to be a desktop version?

StealthHawk
05-01-03, 04:47 PM
Originally posted by Kain
Thanks.

But, will the AMD Athlon 64 have any "gaming enchancements" as it is meant to be a desktop version?

No. The server version of every CPU has always had all the features of the desktop version AFAIK.

For example, I'm pretty sure Opteron has SSE2, just like Athlon64.

Lunar
05-02-03, 12:33 AM
Intel Pentium4 "gaming enhancements":
MMX (of course)
SSE
SSE2

AMD Opteron and Athon64 "gaming enhancements":
MMX
3dNow!
3dNow! Professional (a.k.a. SSE)
SSE2

That's about the extent of it. High bus speeds as well I guess to. But as far as enhancements that matter in a gaming environment froma programmers aspect, then the instruction sets are really it.

SavagePaladin
05-02-03, 07:47 AM
Continuing on that, I believe SSE2 is also part of a 3dnow package for AMD, but I can't easily find the name for it.

R.Carter
05-02-03, 08:01 AM
Things that make you go hmm... SSE2 makes Opterons slower than Athlon XPs (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=9278).

So I guess you might NOT want to use SSE2 if you have an Opteron.

SavagePaladin
05-02-03, 08:13 AM
Based on one Inquirer article? Now that's reliable....or not....

StealthHawk
05-02-03, 05:39 PM
People still read the Inquirer :confused:

SavagePaladin
05-02-03, 11:46 PM
Actually I've seen a benchmark that agreed, and I've seen a benchmark that disagreed. So I say....bring on the driver/software updates! hehe

Dazz
05-03-03, 07:11 AM
No the report wasn't from them it was from someone else akiba2go.com you might want to read rather then just looking at the link :D

Dazz
05-03-03, 07:13 AM
The reason i see the x86-64 chips beinigng slower is due to the SSE2 instructions taking advanatage of the netburst which only the P4's have.

StealthHawk
05-03-03, 09:34 PM
Originally posted by Dazz
The reason i see the x86-64 chips beinigng slower is due to the SSE2 instructions taking advanatage of the netburst which only the P4's have.

So you're saying that the deeper pipelined architecture of P4 is more efficient when using SSE2?

Dazz
05-03-03, 09:38 PM
Yeap.

StealthHawk
05-03-03, 10:15 PM
Originally posted by Dazz
Yeap.

Just speculation on your part, or is there evidence of that?

VeritechK7
05-03-03, 10:35 PM
the only advantage teh server chips have are that they can be used in more than two way processor systems .. things like four way and higher

StealthHawk
05-04-03, 07:27 AM
Originally posted by VeritechK7
the only advantage teh server chips have are that they can be used in more than two way processor systems .. things like four way and higher

Nope, there are other differences. See the first reply in this thread.

Dazz
05-04-03, 11:21 AM
Originally posted by StealthHawk
Just speculation on your part, or is there evidence of that? It's the reason why the P4 can pull away in SSE2 based applications.