PDA

View Full Version : Why Test With The Opteron!


Pages : [1] 2

vicious2003
09-01-03, 10:26 AM
I have seen lots of people pitting the intel 4 against an opteron dual processor in test on games. I just want to know when the opteron was actually made for gaming? Isn't that a server processor and meaning that the processor is not for games. well, maybe game servers.

Dazz
09-01-03, 11:00 AM
Yeah but it's also a work station CPU so it has to do CAD work etc and possible games development, that and it's the closest thing we have to a Athlon 64 FX.

vicious2003
09-01-03, 11:35 AM
but why would they use gaming as a way to sell the chip. why not sell the bandwidth and also sell the idea of faster cading and such. why do they have to sell game stats. I see the performance and it still isn't close to comparison with the speed of the P4 because it is a server chip. I say wait until the desktop chip comes out before they start pushing the gaming.

MUYA
09-01-03, 12:31 PM
The purpose maybe to give an indication maybe on the potentional performance of the Athlon64. Opterons are everybit the same as Athlon64s except that the mmeory controller on the Opteron is designed for ECC memory. This makes it slower performing? On the Athlon64, the memory controller will not have ECC and be a lil faster. Some variants will have lower amount L2 cache as well. So all in all, a preview of sorts of how well the Athllon64 platform might perform in gaming situations?

Just a thought

MUYA

Dazz
09-01-03, 04:34 PM
Opteron Dual DDR memory controller PC3200 x2 ECC
Athlon 64 Single DDR memory controller PC3200 unbuffered
Athlon 64 FX Dual DDR memory controller PC3200 x2 ECC

As you can see the Athlon 64 FX is just a rebaged Opteron 1xx serise processor. This is aimed at the ultra high end gaming and possibly moving into high end later on.

MUYA
09-01-03, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by Dazz
Opteron Dual DDR memory controller PC3200 x2 ECC
Athlon 64 Single DDR memory controller PC3200 unbuffered
Athlon 64 FX Dual DDR memory controller PC3200 x2 ECC

As you can see the Athlon 64 FX is just a rebaged Opteron 1xx serise processor. This is aimed at the ultra high end gaming and possibly moving into high end later on.

Dazz mate would the ECC hurt overclocking attempts? In fact, ECC is slower than NON ECC ram right? I read that somewhere...exactly where can't remember.

Ha'way man!

MUYA

Dazz
09-01-03, 06:37 PM
Yeap it does limit it abit, and is slightly slower to to detecting errors over unbuffered memory. The Athlon 64 is to deal head on with the Pentium 4's while the Athlon 64 FX is to take on the prescott and use a diffrent naming aka Athlon 64 FX 51 (2.0GHz) You can get PC3200 ECC memory from crucial fairly cheap at CL3/4/4/8 i think Crucial will make a killing. Corsair is to bring out their own ECC PC3200+ when the new Athlons hit the market. They are a little cheesed off to say the least.

StealthHawk
09-01-03, 09:24 PM
Originally posted by MUYA
Dazz mate would the ECC hurt overclocking attempts? In fact, ECC is slower than NON ECC ram right? I read that somewhere...exactly where can't remember.

Ha'way man!

MUYA

Yeah, ECC should be slower than non-ECC.

fastguy94416
09-01-03, 10:07 PM
I don't think Athlon 64FX will need ECC. They are moving to a new socket, socket 939 which will not require ECC But will allow dual channel memory. I read this somewhere, but I can't recall the source.

vicious2003
09-01-03, 11:37 PM
this amd 64 fx...is that supposed to be marketed as a desktop processor as well and when does that come out. A very intriging name that goes with a certain other FX product. details details?

The Baron
09-01-03, 11:38 PM
Heh, AMD has a name of ripping off other manufacturers' two-letter product names (XP, FX) :p

vicious2003
09-01-03, 11:49 PM
yeah...now lets just not hope that the AMD processors will need a huge fan that will take up the entire computer case. like another certain company with the FX name. :)

The Baron
09-01-03, 11:59 PM
Only if you can daisy chain the CPU blower to the GPU blower. :D

StealthHawk
09-02-03, 04:37 AM
Originally posted by fastguy94416
I don't think Athlon 64FX will need ECC. They are moving to a new socket, socket 939 which will not require ECC But will allow dual channel memory. I read this somewhere, but I can't recall the source.

Well, there is no reason why a normal consumer would ever need ECC.

Dazz
09-02-03, 05:03 AM
The FX uses ECC due to it being rebagged that and it would be VERY bad if AMD had to build 3 diffrent processors at a single FAB, the 939pin Athlon is said to have the SMP pin removed. ECC is built into the processor and thats why the pin increase jumped right up, that and the dual memory controller.

vicious2003
09-02-03, 09:08 AM
With the AMD FX they will have a big push into the gaming realm though for extreme power. After they get us they will for sure get the other companies that they want. Like Dell and Gateway.

simwiz2
09-02-03, 03:52 PM
Even the 940-pin A64 is supposed to work with non-ECC, but it will only allow one non-ECC DIMM per channel, while the 939-pin will be designed for non-ECC and allow 2 per channel.

The Baron
09-02-03, 03:57 PM
Holy Pants. (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11339)

MUYA
09-02-03, 04:06 PM
Originally posted by The Baron
Holy Pants. (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11339)

Holy Mother Of All Pants!!! - if what they say are to be believed!

Check out the athlon64 review at oc workbench

http://www.ocworkbench.com/2003/aliuli/m1687/m1687-1.htm


MUYA

CaptNKILL
09-02-03, 10:50 PM
Originally posted by The Baron
Holy Pants. (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11339)
5600Mb\sec memory bandwidth? Holy freaking hell!

Mine in Dual Channel gets 2530!

:eek:

The Baron
09-02-03, 10:58 PM
Boyohboyohboy.

And that's with a KT800... can't wait to see if a nF3 has the Performance Crown like the nF2 did with Athlons XPs...

vicious2003
09-03-03, 12:34 AM
just read the review on the new AMD 64. Holy hell is that a nice looking chipset. I can't wait to spend 500 bucks on many gigs of ram and probably another 700 more just to have the AMD 64 with motherboard. I will wiat till Epox comes out with a nforce type chipset....That would be heaven.

Dazz
09-03-03, 05:23 AM
Originally posted by The Baron
Boyohboyohboy.

And that's with a KT800... can't wait to see if a nF3 has the Performance Crown like the nF2 did with Athlons XPs... You should bare in mind that the Athlon FX has a dual memory controller built into the CPU rather then the board, and the performance between the VIA, SIS & nVIDIA boards are going to be small.

StealthHawk
09-03-03, 07:28 AM
Originally posted by Dazz
You should bare in mind that the Athlon FX has a dual memory controller built into the CPU rather then the board, and the performance between the VIA, SIS & nVIDIA boards are going to be small.

I have a thing against VIA, the make pretty shoddy hardware, and they release a lot of "new" motherboards which really aren't so new. They aren't getting a dime from me as long as there are better alternatives out there. Their work ethic is weak, and while they might have been the best choice for an AMD platform more or less in the past, that is hardly true now.

If you trust VIA, then more power to you. You'll save a few bucks buying one of their motherboards over NVIDIAs. nForce2 has not disappointed me though, and unless reviews of nForce3 are bad, I'll stick with nForce. Assuming I don't switch to Intel next round, although that doesn't seem too likely :p

The Baron
09-03-03, 09:17 AM
I had a KT266 board for a year and a half.

I will not buy another Via product ever again. Simple as that.

(and I still think there might be more speed differences between different chipsets than you might think)