@/2ct!<

After reading the full reviews for A64 at Anandtech and Tomshardware, the FX did marginally, if any, better than the P4 EE. This cant be good for AMD, since this is vs. the p4 ee and not even vs. Prescott, the real competitor. Will AMD last

__________________

Necrosis

Do we forget these processors clock speeds?

@/2ct!<

Who cares about clock speeds, price range is where its at. AMD needs to kick up its clocks without making it so close to price of p4. AMD is slightly better value now, but what else is coming? If AMD makes 3 ghz by the time Prescott becomes available at say 3.8 ghz, then AMD can win. Hopefully Windows 64 will bring some advantage too though.

__________________

Sharkims

Well, see the problem here is, clock speed means nothing. As many, many people have said. Intel uses clock speed to its advantage and AMD has chosen not to use clock speed.

__________________
System-1:
MSI K8N Neo Platinum || A64 3200+(200x11) - Zalman 7000A-AlCu || 1x1gb OCZ PC3200@400(3-3-3-7) || 9800XT || WD Raptors 2x36 RAID0
System-2:
MSI 875P Neo-FIS2R || P4 2.4c(FSB:200) - Intel Cooler || 2x256 GEIL PC3200@400(2-3-3-6) || AIW9000 || WD SE 120x2 RAID0
System-3:
DELL Inspiron 9100 || P4 3.0c(mobile) || 2x256mb PC3200(3-3-3-8) || Mobility Radeon 9700 - 128mb || WSXGA+ 15.4" || 60gb 5400RPM 8mb

Necrosis

Um, yes it does mean something if a processor is keeping good pace with another processor that is 1000MHz faster.

PoopyTheJ

perhaps a bit dissapointed although I would like to see the overclocking potential of these and the performance you can get afterwards. That I think will give us a clue of how succesful the architecture will be, how fast AMD can scale the things. Is it gonna require another die shrink to be competitive at higher frequencies? If so things are not so good. However I think we need to see more manufacturers getting on the ball with 64 bit drivers, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that intel is pushing for manufacturers to hold off on their drivers and game manufacturers to hold off on compiling for 64 bit. Also XP 64 needs to be released sooner rather than later of course. My two cents.

__________________

@/2ct!<

yeah, i didnt mean it like THAT, it is quite remarkable. I just want it to increase at least .8 Ghz so that it can beat the Prescott depending on how that goes. These are great numbers had it been released 9 months ago.

__________________

Sharkims

No... Lets look at the facts, twice the L2 cache, and optimised to perform as a 3.2ghz processor. Making the mhz not really matter. AMD will continue to keep their clock speeds as low as possible and charge as much as possible. It's like I put it before, Intel chose clock speed, AMD chose a different method. If the current AMD FX-51 is not that huge of an advantage over the P4 3.2c, than I'm concerned with how this is actualy going to turn out. We all know Intel is going to make 64-bit, but why wouldn't they? They shouldn't be trashed on because, AMD made it first.

Supposedly the Presscot is going to be "64-Bit Inside". We shall see, won't we?

If the FX-51 starts to majorly rock it up, I will probably get one.

__________________
System-1:
MSI K8N Neo Platinum || A64 3200+(200x11) - Zalman 7000A-AlCu || 1x1gb OCZ PC3200@400(3-3-3-7) || 9800XT || WD Raptors 2x36 RAID0
System-2:
MSI 875P Neo-FIS2R || P4 2.4c(FSB:200) - Intel Cooler || 2x256 GEIL PC3200@400(2-3-3-6) || AIW9000 || WD SE 120x2 RAID0
System-3:
DELL Inspiron 9100 || P4 3.0c(mobile) || 2x256mb PC3200(3-3-3-8) || Mobility Radeon 9700 - 128mb || WSXGA+ 15.4" || 60gb 5400RPM 8mb

Necrosis

1. How much cache is on the P4 EE?

2. It's not optimized as a 3.2GHz processor..that is just it's model rating to give an idea. Show me where it says that the rating is against Intel.

3. AMD is trying to get their clock speeds up big they don't have the big fat bloated pipelines like Intel has.

4. You're bitchin about AMD chargin a lot...how much did you pay for your processor?

Sidenote - I don't really even understand why AMD even bothered with the plan Jane A64.

Update - I'm not trashin Intel but it seems a lot of the Intel users here are putting a scornful eye on this new processor.

Update 2 - Remember folks these two were just released so I'd be weary of upgrading right away. What about the first Athlons that were released, or the first P4's? How many people were kicking themselves in the ass for buying new technology later on.

Sharkims

I have nothing against AMD, I've had my own before. I like Intel and AMD, but as of right now, my chip is still very powerful. I will not buy a 64-bit chip for a year. I have to wait, AMD has made the first move, lets see what Intel has up their sleeves before anyone makes a choice.

500$(Pretty much when it was released) for my chip. About as much as a A64 3200+.

The rating system is based against Intel. Of course there is no proof, if there was, it would be ugly.

3200+ is faced against the 3.2ghz P4.

__________________
System-1:
MSI K8N Neo Platinum || A64 3200+(200x11) - Zalman 7000A-AlCu || 1x1gb OCZ PC3200@400(3-3-3-7) || 9800XT || WD Raptors 2x36 RAID0
System-2:
MSI 875P Neo-FIS2R || P4 2.4c(FSB:200) - Intel Cooler || 2x256 GEIL PC3200@400(2-3-3-6) || AIW9000 || WD SE 120x2 RAID0
System-3:
DELL Inspiron 9100 || P4 3.0c(mobile) || 2x256mb PC3200(3-3-3-8) || Mobility Radeon 9700 - 128mb || WSXGA+ 15.4" || 60gb 5400RPM 8mb

DriveEuro

They would dominate right now if there was a 64bit windows for it to run on.... But the benchmarks all show it to be equal in almost all respects with a few scorign lower and a few scrolling higher. I really don't think it'll be the king...... But seriously... This is the bottom line of the AMD 64..... 3200... They will have faster chips....

__________________
[color=orange]ASUS P4P800 Deluxe [color=black]-[/color] 2.4C --> 3300mhz [color=black]-[/color] Mushkin PC3200 at 220 5-2-2-2 (cpu limited) [color=black]-[/color] BBAti 9800Pro at 430/375 [/color]
[color=black]3[/color][color=gray]D[/color]M[color=black]a[/color][color=gray]r[/color]k[color=yellow]01[/color] [color=black]3[/color][color=gray]D[/color]M[color=black]a[/color][color=gray]r[/color]k[color=yellow]03[/color] 1600*1200 1280*1024

@/2ct!<

Thats what im countin on, waitin to see how much faster they become by Spring 04, where Prescott and it should have relatively well established bounds. I also keep forgeting that 64 is meant for a 64 OS..., and as a general rule its like 6mos. after cpu is released to buy it for price and optimization,right? Someone should try and OC these as thats what I gather made the barton so great.

__________________

Vampyromaniac

Yeah I wouldn't mind seeing AMD release a chip faster than 2250 MHz, seeing as how it's been a year already since the orig xp2800...

__________________

Sharkims

That is true, but that once again brings us to the facts.
64 vs 32? That is a false comparison. 64 should be faster.

__________________
System-1:
MSI K8N Neo Platinum || A64 3200+(200x11) - Zalman 7000A-AlCu || 1x1gb OCZ PC3200@400(3-3-3-7) || 9800XT || WD Raptors 2x36 RAID0
System-2:
MSI 875P Neo-FIS2R || P4 2.4c(FSB:200) - Intel Cooler || 2x256 GEIL PC3200@400(2-3-3-6) || AIW9000 || WD SE 120x2 RAID0
System-3:
DELL Inspiron 9100 || P4 3.0c(mobile) || 2x256mb PC3200(3-3-3-8) || Mobility Radeon 9700 - 128mb || WSXGA+ 15.4" || 60gb 5400RPM 8mb

HawK

To "feel" a real performance boost one would need a double clockspeed,
sure you can measure the difference between clockspeeds,
but it doesnt give one the feeling that things are really going faster.
The real performance boost will come from getting the rest of the system up to speed,
meaning; the PCI/ISA and other ancient parts (bottlenecks) is where we must get rid of before we see some performance boost to bring the PC once again to a more balanced machine like it was in the 90's.
That said, this is why I think the 64bit move is to early,
it is like tuning your car:
you can throw in a faster engine every time, but if the rest of your car can't keep up it will only breakdown faster

scobywhru

How about Price to performance How much are the AMD's latest to Intels Latest, does one beat the other, well I want to know if I buy one or the other which is the better deal and this is what most consumers want

__________________

mike2h

from the inquirer -

By Sume Gai: Tuesday 23 September 2003, 08:57
LEADING MOTHERBOARD maker Biostar this morning confirmed to us what we've been suspecting for quite a while - that memory suitable for the upmarket AthlonFX platform is going to be very hard to come by.
In an interview with Biostar this morning, it revealed how its biggest problem designing Athlon64 motherboards had been finding memory they could use to test it with. A source at Corsair hinted this to us last month - that none of the DRAMurai realised that ECC, Registered DRAM was required for the FX platform and, since no other (major) platform on the earth requires it, nobody bothers making it (and apparently AMD didn't bother telling Biostar. Surely it wouldn't have been hard?.....

__________________

MSX

OCZ seems on it. I imagine more are following suit. ECC is great, doesn't cost much more to produce and they sell for almost twice the price. Sides... there's much speculation the NF3 250 will not require registered DIMM's.

As a side note, I think some of these companies are kinda grateful to AMD... thinking about it without AMD they'd still be small fries working using RAMBUS licences. So I'm thinking they'll come through for AMD.

Vampyromaniac

Heh, if you've ever encoded audio/video on different systems, performance increases almost linearly with the CPU. Even in gaming, an increase you'd say is not noticeable . . . is very noticeable to a guy who uses V-sync, and can now do 85 fps instead of 42.5, or alternatively increase his resolution/visual quality settings

__________________

mike2h

"As a side note, I think some of these companies are kinda grateful to AMD... thinking about it without AMD they'd still be small fries working using RAMBUS licences. So I'm thinking they'll come through for AMD."

the way it is looking in court, they will be paying rambus licence fees. ddr has rambus tech in it. as soon as micron & infineon(samsung already pays) run out of legal shennanigans they & some other companies will be paying rambus for current & past use. + ip theft & fraud damages.

__________________

HawK

true, but a 25% faster processor speed, does not mean a 25% system boost

MSX

That... sucks.

mike2h

actually it is fair. it appears they stole the tech from rambus!

__________________