What is Digg?Sponsored by Double Your Dating
Meeting Women Online "On The Cheap" view!
doubleyourdating.com - Here’s some killer free ways to stand out from the crowd if you're online looking for a lovely lady...
47 Comments
- lateralus, on 10/12/2007, -5/+20niiice.
Now I might be able to run Vista. - chicken101, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9AMD broke the 3.0ghz mark. A little bit of a milestone, congrats.
- Castaa, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6How hot are these CPUs going to get @ 3.0GHz? I've read these CPUs will still be made using the 90nm manufacturing process.
- trogdor282, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5You have a quad opteron system and you still find something to complain about ;)
- Kazbaeden, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6They can overclock like nobody's business.
- gunderwood, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Is everybody on this damn site 13, w00t! w00t! Does nobody here have a damn clue about even the most rudimentary computing concepts.
I'm kinda bored so I'll try and explain a couple things, but I can't stress enough that a few hours reading a basic text on computer architecture would go a long way for anyone that's commented here. (Sorry to those who knew better and were just to polite to say anything)
An Opteron is a server processor. The main difference is that it uses ECC memory which will run at slightly lower timings than non ECC RAM due to extra on board circuitry for error detection and correction. The other is that generally Opterons have a larger cache than a similiar clocked Athlon 64 chip. The exception to this is ithe FX series, which is basically an Opteron on a socket 939 platform, which means that you can use non ECC memory for an FX chip, thus you can utilize more aggressive memory timings and realize a slight performance boost over an Opteron.
In regards to some of the above comments about a 3.0 gHz Athlon 64 chip being on part with a 4+ gHz Intel P4 chip; the reasons for this are numerous. Chips are complex and can only compute as fast as they can be fed data and instructions, basically the Athlon is much better at keeping it's processors performing operations at all times is a similiarly clocked P4. This is not the case when comparing against the Pentium M line and future Intel architectures.
Another signifigant advantage Athlon chips have over Intel chips is their on die memory controller. This allows the chip to access memory, (and other cores for dual core processors) faster than intels design. Intel chips interface to memory over a separate chip, AMD has integrated this chip (the memory controller) onto the processor so it interfaces to memory faster. This allows an AMD chip to fead data and instructions to the CPU faster, thus the CPU may work more efficiently.
Unfortunately, by putting the memory controller on chip, Athlons are tied to a particular memory standard , in this case DDR, until they change the whole processor. This means a new socket, new motherboards, and new memory when you wnat to use new chips. And up until last year there was very little reason to move to DDR2 due to expense and the fact that DDR2 has a higher latency which offsets the fact that it has a higher bandwidth. At current speeds DDR memory is able to do the job. So AMD has choosen to wait until the move to DDR2 means that the switch will come with performance benefits at the same price level. Until recently a switch to DDR2 would not have provided that. Now as DDR2 has matured and come down in price the switch to a new socket and memory type makes sense.
fin - beret9987, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3AMD is going to have one hell of a time with Intel's new Core Architecture. A 2.66Ghz Conroe beat an OC'ed Athlon FX-60 doin 2.8Ghz. AM2 might help push it over the edge though...
- SpaceCow!, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I thought you could overclock Opterons very easily, from the 1.8 Ghz mark to about 2.8 Ghz. Read the reviews form Newegg.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16819103588
So can you overclock this just as much? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Pretty good thing AMD is pushing for better, as they have been lately.
- Hexman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Actually, it's the overall architecture for building computers with a specific chip: i.e. a more balanced system. The on-board memory controller helps a lot, for example.
- blackax, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3not that hot at all they have a 95w power out put for in the rage from 30 - 45 c in a good case and 50 - 55c in a blade
- geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2How can people positively moderate tripe like that? First of all he's applying Clockrate to a manufacturer and not an architecure, his grammar is attrocious, and makes a judgement about the difference between processors when the difference doesn't truely exist.
Fact: the Opteron and Athlon chips share the same cores. Fact: AMD selects only the best cores from any yield generation, and marks those as Opterons, whereas the next step down from those become Athlons (Or, if AMD has hit their quota for Opterons that day, they will simply take all of the chips from that batch and make them Athlons). Companies like Intel and Texas Instrument will often go the next step and take the knowingly good chips that passed certification to be Xeons all the way down to being Celeron chips, through burning of e-fuses that connect the on-die cache; I would assume the same could be said for AMD's "Sempron" chips.
Next, while the Opterons and the Athlons are really fast chips, this latest bump to 3GHz isn't that big of a step over their previous processors at 2.8GHz. 200MHz isn't going to buy you a lot in terms of performance on these architecures. That'd be like Intel saying they've bumped their Pentium 4's nMHzs; whole lot of speed, not a lot of work going on. While a 3.0GHz Opteron will perform diligently, no direct conclusion can be drawn to how much faster they are than an Intel chip (because it is a totally different chip architecture; they both speak x86, but they process that code in vastly different ways), though through benchmarking you might find gains of around 3 to 5 percent against current Opterons, depending on where the latencies reside. Those numbers could then be compared against an Intel chip and we could see what a fair gain would be against them (this is how Benchmarking works). - drizek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You can put 8 of them(if not more) on a single motherboard.
- blackax, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7A 3 ghz amd is like a 4.5 ghz intel. A Opteron is a server cpu and a x2 is a enduser cpu. the real difference is that a Opteron is rock solid!!
- slithy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Alienware is an extreme waste of money. Roll your own for half the price!
- isolationism, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Multi-processor capability and larger on-die cache, as far as I know. Also, try finding server-grade motherboards for 939 ... They're pretty much all about Socket 940. The 939 is more of an end-user/consumer product (which is great and all, but ... well, I have an XP3500+ and a dual opteron 246 server. Guess which runs wayyyy faster.)
- goat77, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2yes, 3.0ghz is the point of the article. You apparently don't know your hardware.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Actually..the Alienware workstations are competitively price compared to a do-it-yourself(don't have to wait for parts and assemble either). My point was whether DDR2's performance is worth waiting for considering AMD's lack of support until the end of 2006. I'm still weighing the pros and cons.
- battybattybatt, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3On-chip cache is what counts.
- Abyss_908, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Awesome. That means probably like 3.8 ghz on air overclocked. Opterons rule. People say "is this as good as an Athlon?" But what they should really be asking "is this Athlon as good as an Opteron?" But now with this on the market they are going to make something like the Athlon FX-65 for AM2 and charge twice as much for an equal performing chip that doesn't overclock as well. The Opteron brand name means free performance. On almost any Opteron you can get 800mhz more then stock on stock voltage and air cooling.
- joxrox22, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Don't read a book by its cover. Until the conroe is out I won't give it any thought- the same with the AM2 cores. As Flavor Flav would say: DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE.
- Satertek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I'm not sure about an Opteron, but my 2.6GHz (overclocked 3000 Venice) Athlon 64 rarely rises above 35C (at full load). I can't imagine there being much of a heat problem.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Why? DDR2 equipped intels (the current ones) are behind any of the recent AMDs with DDR1 ram thanks to the amd's on-chip memory controller. A move to ddr2 would be pretty pointleyy at the moment.
- beret9987, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Well if its anything to you... I'm 15. And yes, I do know about ECC RAM, on-die memory controllers and the likes, having an uncle who benches just about every processor under the sun.
- diggnationdevon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Impressive performance but I'll be even more impressed with a CPU running on AMDs new socket M2
- DEIx15x8, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Would 3.0GHz for an AMD be equal to a 4+GHz Intel?
- battybattybatt, on 10/12/2007, -7/+6Vista doesnt require anything more than XP does to run.
Unless you WANT to go 64 bit. - xiuxiu, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Heh, that's why I was so excited, but then they gave me a -8 digg up there :[.
If only people knew! - Magice, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Nice. AMD really IS kicking ass latley. but they should really support DDR2 first. Dugg.
- Protoss, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5Kind of funny, Intel tries their best making their CPU's run at 3.8+ghz while AMD is kicking their ass at current speeds. Just shows how much clockspeed really accounts for...not much.
- chickenlegs, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0The "C" class P4 supports 800 FSB (200 Mhz quad pumped). It will be available in 2.4, 2.6, 2.8, and 3.0 GHz speeds. http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-157-1.htm
- MadMan459, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3It's announced... they're *going* to build them... they do not have 3.0 GHz yet.
No digg. - battybattybatt, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2Ubuh, not boo boo.
- feihung08, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2I still don't understand what the Operons can do that the X2's cant?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1I have wanted to pull the trigger on a Alienware workstation with dual dual-core 2.8ghz Opterons but I can't decide whether the future performance benefits are worth waiting for with DDR2.
- buddyfarr, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1this rocks! I just upgraded to the athlon 64 3200+ and now I feel soooo far behind...boo hoo for me :(.....
(*keyboard shorts out from drool...*)
__________________________________________
http://www.farrandsons.com
__________________________________________ - drizek, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2*****!
Vista does not install on a partition smaller than 9gb. The 5gb thing is not true at all(and have fun running it on a 300mhz p3). - feihung08, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0I thought the X2's were dual core as well?
- battybattybatt, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1No...
- shashin, on 10/12/2007, -7/+0They can do more,but they won't because they have us on leashes.sit boo boo sit.
- anenokoji, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1w00t
- anenokoji, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1w00t
- treelovinhippie, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1Are you sure this article is referring to the correct numbers?
i.e. is it 3.0GHz or 3000+ ?
cos even the Athlon 64 3200+ etc were only "clocked" at 2.0GHz - battybattybatt, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1TerraHz woulb be a milestone. 3 GHz is just business-as-usual.
- chickenlegs, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1So for vista, you need,
300 Ghz+ (1000 Mhz recommended),
512 MB+ (I recommend 2GB+) 1GB 32-bit 2GB 64bit (DDR3),
5GB HD (SATA2),
A video adapter capable of supporting the Longhorn Display Driver Model (LDDM) drivers,
DVD Drive,
PCI Express GPU mem 256 MB +,
To play HD-DVD or Blu-Ray (DRM) content you need a HDCP compatible monitor. Good thing it is coming in 07 not 06.
Copied from Microsoft.com and bit-tech.net - xiuxiu, on 10/12/2007, -13/+1I currently have a funny feeling inbetween my legs and it ain't a boner...
:]
YEAHHHHHHHHHH.
Sorry, got a little excited there. - noneloud, on 10/12/2007, -23/+2Wow, on the front page and no comments yet. That's rare.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is