Go Back   nV News Forums > Hardware Forums > CPUs, Motherboards And Memory

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-01-07, 03:32 PM   #73
jAkUp
eat. sleep. overclock.
 
jAkUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chino, California
Posts: 17,744
Default Re: AMD Athlon 64 FX-70 Series Processors Reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow001
It's still very decent if you compare the prices though....It'll take a good 6 months before intel drops the price on the kentsfields to anywhere near 600$ like for the pair of FX 70's,which basically are 2.6 ghz X2's with 1 meg cache per core,and they were the fastest chips out there just before the introduction of the conroes 6 months ago....


The 150$ extra for the motherboard is easily justified by the possibility of later on,when they get cheaper,adding a pair of Quad core budapests,which will also have improvements in IPC over AMD's current chips,and gets the system into 8 CPU land in the process...


Add the increased memory support to 8 gigs of DDR2 800,wich no single socket motherboard can handle,and no less than 12 sata ports for harddrives /DVD rom/blueray drives,and the basic system will outlast any Quad core system,as a viable system,able to run anything at good performance levels likely for the next 5+ years once those 8 cores are in there,and the memory is also maxed out.....
Q6600 is dropping to $530 within a couple of months
__________________
965xe || evga x58 classified || 3x evga gtx 480 || 6gb g.skill || win7 x64
jAkUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-07, 03:36 PM   #74
jAkUp
eat. sleep. overclock.
 
jAkUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chino, California
Posts: 17,744
Default Re: AMD Athlon 64 FX-70 Series Processors Reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow001
Basically,It's a motherboard you can keep for a long time,as it also supports up to 8 gigs of DDR2 800,so running into memory support limits within the next 3~4 years is unlikely,as single socket motherboards usually top out at 4 gigs even anyhow,and you'll need a 64 bit operating system to address the extra memory above the 4 gig mark....Basically it's an option that has a lot longer usefull life and something that'll run all applications,at good performance levels,for quite a few years to come.....A lot longer than any single socket motherboard in any case.
Ok, by the time 8GB's is useful, a 4x4 setup will be so slow CPU wise it would be worthless to even use. Sure it may support 8 CPU systems in the future, but what about DDR3? DDR4?

It would be like using a Pentium 3 with 4GB's of ram.
__________________
965xe || evga x58 classified || 3x evga gtx 480 || 6gb g.skill || win7 x64
jAkUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-07, 04:10 PM   #75
pkirby11
Registered User
 
pkirby11's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 927
Send a message via AIM to pkirby11
Default Re: AMD Athlon 64 FX-70 Series Processors Reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by jAkUp
Q6600 is dropping to $530 within a couple of months
Yes, how ever the Q6600 is clocked lower if I remember correctly. This should make the performance not quite as good. Yeah I know, it still will probably be as good or better than 4x4 and in the end be cheaper. I just had to say it!
pkirby11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-07, 04:32 PM   #76
xhawk101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 19
Default Re: AMD Athlon 64 FX-70 Series Processors Reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow001
I'll have the Quad FX motherboard on wednesday,and a pair of FX70 CPU's and 4 gigs of corsair of DDR2 800....Total cost for all 3...1400$ Can.


Basically it's the cost of the Kentsfield chip by itself,wich also retails for 1300$ can.....The Kentsfield + a good motherboard and 4 gigs of DDR 2 would push close to 2000$ can....No way is that setup worth the extra 600$ for 15~20% better performance,and that's disregarding the 8 CPU potential later on with the Quad FX board.

I cant wait to hear your experience with the build!

i plan to do the same to have ready for when i can get Vista.
xhawk101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-07, 05:42 PM   #77
jAkUp
eat. sleep. overclock.
 
jAkUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chino, California
Posts: 17,744
Default Re: AMD Athlon 64 FX-70 Series Processors Reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by pkirby11
Yes, how ever the Q6600 is clocked lower if I remember correctly. This should make the performance not quite as good. Yeah I know, it still will probably be as good or better than 4x4 and in the end be cheaper. I just had to say it!
Yea it is clocked lower at 2.4GHz I believe... might be competitive with the 4x4, but likely still faster in games.
__________________
965xe || evga x58 classified || 3x evga gtx 480 || 6gb g.skill || win7 x64
jAkUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-07, 06:29 PM   #78
shadow001
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,526
Default Re: AMD Athlon 64 FX-70 Series Processors Reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by jAkUp
Q6600 is dropping to $530 within a couple of months

If by a couple of months you mean 6,then yes...I've seen the rumors regarding the price drops for the next 6 months....


Only thing that Intel will introduce this week or early next,is the 2.4 ghz Quadcore kentsfield,which will still retail for 850$(QX6600)...The current QX6700 version stays the same price(999$)...


Wouldn't be all too surpeised at this point that the timing in which Intel will price the QX6600 at 530$,matches that of the release of the Quad core AMD barcelonas,wich curiously enough,is also timed for Q2/2007...
shadow001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-07, 06:49 PM   #79
shadow001
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,526
Default Re: AMD Athlon 64 FX-70 Series Processors Reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by jAkUp
Ok, by the time 8GB's is useful, a 4x4 setup will be so slow CPU wise it would be worthless to even use. Sure it may support 8 CPU systems in the future, but what about DDR3? DDR4?

It would be like using a Pentium 3 with 4GB's of ram.

So 8 CPU cores,based of the current athlon cores,but enhanced in the upcoming barcelonas to match or perhaps even exceed the performance of the conroes at the same clock speed?.....Basically 6 more processsing cores than most people are using today,and those dual cores already have great performance as it is...You really think that would be slow anytime soon? ...



Then add the far superior hypertransport bus and built in memory controlers,which already has more than twice the memory bandwith and lower latency than any current conroe board right now....check this out for instance...


http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q4...x/index.x?pg=5


Look at the memory bandwith results in sandra for instance,and imagine the kinda scary FSB the conroe's would have to run,along with memory that doesn't exist yet(DDR 4 perhaps),to match that result right there,when still using their conventional FSB aproach,and a shared memory controler for all the cores,running in the northbridge chip at much lower clocks to make matters worse,and that same northbridge has to control the flow of data to other busses at well(PCI-E,Sata,PCI)....Not an efficient way of doing things to say the least,especially when Intel wants to introduce a dual die Quad core part in the same cpu package in late 2007(effectively 8 cores),while still on that bus...


Hence why with the nehalem architecture in 2008,wich seems that it has nothing to do with the current core architecture,Intel will add a built in memory controler on their chips and use CSI,wich is their version of hypertransport....
shadow001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-07, 12:59 AM   #80
snowmanwithahat
Snowy
 
snowmanwithahat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 974
Default Re: AMD Athlon 64 FX-70 Series Processors Reviews

shadow001, you realize you're talking about SYNTHETIC memory bandwidth... it doesn't translate into real performance... IF it did, AMD would be on top... you're an AMD fanboy who's trying to defend a lost cause.

Conroes out-run AMDs in every single benchmark, and AMD doesn't even have a true 4-core design. You could say the same thing about intel's design, but atleast it's 4 cores on a single socket. AMD has not, and can't do that because of the current size of their cores.

And jAkUp is right, 8gb will be useless to a system with that kind of power by the time 8gb is what most people need... On the other hand, it would be useful to someone who does rendering and editing of high-definition video, which I've worked worth before, and just a few minutes of 720p video eats through memory like candy. But that's a select few that would take advantage of it.
__________________
---Gaming Rig---
Q6600 3.4ghz (378x9) - 1.5v
Gigabyte EP45-UD3P
8gb (4x2gb) OCZ Gold DDR2-800 (5-4-4-12)
MSI+ASUS GTX 470 SLI
Dell u3011 IPS Display
HP 22" Auxiliary Monitor
256gb Western Digital Silicon Edge Blue SSD
5x2tb RAID-5 Array
750W PC P&C PSU
Windows 7 Pro 64-Bit & Ubuntu 10.04 64-bit

---Gaming Laptop---
ASUS G53JW
Core i7 740QM
16gb DDR3
Nvidia GTX 460m
1tb WD HDD
120gb Corsair SSD

Join the NvNews Folding @ Home Team
snowmanwithahat is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-07, 02:05 AM   #81
a12ctic
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chicago IL
Posts: 2,371
Default Re: AMD Athlon 64 FX-70 Series Processors Reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by snowmanwithahat
Conroes out-run AMDs in every single benchmark, and AMD doesn't even have a true 4-core design. You could say the same thing about intel's design, but atleast it's 4 cores on a single socket. AMD has not, and can't do that because of the current size of their cores.
What would the point be? Seperating the 2 dual core chips eliminates the heat caused by 4 cores in such a small area.
__________________
AMD X2 5050 AMD Radeon HD 4830 AMD 780G 4GB OCZ DDR2 Antec 300 Fedora 11
a12ctic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-07, 02:38 AM   #82
jAkUp
eat. sleep. overclock.
 
jAkUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chino, California
Posts: 17,744
Default Re: AMD Athlon 64 FX-70 Series Processors Reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by a12ctic
What would the point be? Seperating the 2 dual core chips eliminates the heat caused by 4 cores in such a small area.
Not really when each CPU is sucking 120w.
__________________
965xe || evga x58 classified || 3x evga gtx 480 || 6gb g.skill || win7 x64
jAkUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-07, 10:31 AM   #83
shadow001
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,526
Default Re: AMD Athlon 64 FX-70 Series Processors Reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by snowmanwithahat
shadow001, you realize you're talking about SYNTHETIC memory bandwidth... it doesn't translate into real performance... IF it did, AMD would be on top... you're an AMD fanboy who's trying to defend a lost cause.

Not at all,thought the truth is,a lot of people use it to gauge memory bandwith and have done so for years,same with super PI,3d mark,and god knows what else....But the fundamental question here isn't that i'm disputing that the conroe,when viewed at the chip architecture level,is better performing part,but when you consider the platform it's running on,and the fact that the emphasis is on adding even more cores as time goes on,Hypertransport and those built in memory controlers running at the same speed as the cores,plus having direct access to the ram slots,without going thru a single FSB,is vastly better,period.


Reason for why while the conroe is going great on the desktop market,Intel in generall is getting owned in the server market since AMD based systems simply scale better as you add more and more processors,and the reason they want to have a chip with a built in memory controler and CSI by 2008...So by buying this,i'm already buying a platform that will scale a hell of a lot better with 8 CPU's on board than any intel system right now,and it's a given that the upcoming Barcelonas,wich are enhanced with some of the same improvements that the conroe went thru(128 bit SSE engine,memory disambiguation,doubled FP units,beefed up memory controlers,L3 cache,HT 3.0),will perform better than the current athlon chips at the same clock,so the only question to find out is,how much better....And yes,my board supports those too.



Quote:
Conroes out-run AMDs in every single benchmark, and AMD doesn't even have a true 4-core design. You could say the same thing about intel's design, but atleast it's 4 cores on a single socket. AMD has not, and can't do that because of the current size of their cores.

I already mentioned that the conroe chip is better now,but did you notice that review where with seriously multithreaded software,wich not only is it putting a stress on the cores,but also on the bus protocol,and where the kentsfield setup gets beat in fair few of them,and where it still leads,the difference isn't 25~30% faster anymore,with only one where the difference is huge,becuase of the 128 bit SSE engine that the conroe/kentsfield have,something that the upcoming barcelona will also have.....And the future is for software to become more and more multhreaded,so it'll be interesting to find out how this turns out in the longer run.


That 65 nm Quad core barcelona is just 6 months away btw...And AMD showed a fully running prototype motherboard,using 4 sockets and 4 of those chips last december,for a grand total of 16 processors on a single board...



Quote:
And jAkUp is right, 8gb will be useless to a system with that kind of power by the time 8gb is what most people need... On the other hand, it would be useful to someone who does rendering and editing of high-definition video, which I've worked worth before, and just a few minutes of 720p video eats through memory like candy. But that's a select few that would take advantage of it.

Perhaps becuase the amount won't be enough,not becuase it lacks memory bandwith to feed those cores right now,but that's a bigger problem still for intel since they want to release a dual die Quad core part in the same CPU package,only running a 1333 FSB,wich is not exactly great,since you're doubling CPU power,but only increasing FSB 30% over current systems,and it seems those Quad cores will use 12 megs of L2 cache in each,so that Quad core dual die has 24 megs of L2.....


If that doesn't scream that the FSB + memory controler on the northbridge aproach just doesn't cut anymore when there's that many CPU's on board,then i don't what does....Barcelonas by contrast,wil simply use 512k L2 cache for each core,and a 2 meg unified L3,so 4 megs of cache in total.

Also keep in mind that single socket motherboards are limited to 4 gigs of ram,and that users with those systems will also need a 64 bit operating system as well....

So before any mainstream program uses more than that,most users will have at least moved on to 64 bit Vista,and it'll be interesting to see how chipset and motherboard makers tackle the problem of adding higher amounts of memory support in single socket boards,while at the same time,cranking up memory clock speeds,using DDR 3 and perhaps DDR 4,as current server motherboards that can support up to 16 and even 32 gigs of memory,have to use 6~8 memory slots for each CPU,and forces the use of ECC,registered DDR 2 ram that tops out at 667 mhz....

Last edited by shadow001; 01-02-07 at 11:02 AM.
shadow001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-07, 10:50 AM   #84
shadow001
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,526
Default Re: AMD Athlon 64 FX-70 Series Processors Reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by jAkUp
Not really when each CPU is sucking 120w.

True,no overclocking is intended with chips wich are pretty close to their limit,but with 4 cores on board,it's not like i'll really need to to run things smoothly...


Though an interesting idea just ran thru my mind,and that's that since all FX chips have their multiplier unlocked,and that the board does support overclocking quite extensively,i could simply drop the multiplier and raise the FSB and memory speeds,while still keeping the cores themselves running at the same speeds...Just to see the differences.
shadow001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Three-part Webinar Series: OpenCL Programming on Intel Processors News Archived News Items 0 06-11-12 02:50 PM
AMD Gooses the Clocks on 'Bulldozer' Opterons News Archived News Items 0 06-04-12 03:24 PM
CPUMark99 - how do you compare fuelrod Benchmarking And Overclocking 66 07-19-11 09:32 AM
AMD 2400+ and 2600+ Benchmark Extrapolations savyj CPUs, Motherboards And Memory 2 08-17-02 10:32 PM
Athlon 2400+ and 2600+? 333 MHz Front-side bus?? PaiN Rumor Mill 26 08-16-02 11:49 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2014, nV News.