Athlon Socket AM2 Review 185
NerdMaster writes "Hardware Secrets has just posted an Athlon 64 X2 5000+ review, one of the first AMD CPUs to support the new socket AM2. It runs at 2.4 GHz, has two 512 KB L2 memory caches (one for each core) and supports DDR2 memories." However, many are still predicting an end to AMD's dominance in the market thanks to Intel's Conroe.
[offtopic] 'Print' version is split into 10 pages. (Score:5, Insightful)
10 pages not saying very much is (irritating, but) acceptable, but when you split the print article [hardwaresecrets.com] into 10 pages, you've crossed line from greediness to stupidity.
(fires up IE). Oh nice, and there's advertisments on each of the print pages too. How is that supposed to be printable?
Re:[offtopic] 'Print' version is split into 10 pag (Score:5, Informative)
[from page 10]
Re:[offtopic] 'Print' version is split into 10 pag (Score:2, Funny)
AMD are in deep shit once Conroe appears in volume, as comparisons have already shown that even an overclocked FX-60 loses badly to Conroe. Oh well, it was a nice couple of years for them.
Re:[offtopic] 'Print' version is split into 10 pag (Score:3, Interesting)
Take a look at this article: http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2487 [dailytech.com]
It's showing the new woodcrest chips to be somewhere between 5 -
Re:[offtopic] 'Print' version is split into 10 pag (Score:3, Informative)
Well, that's true, except it's not.
Re:[offtopic] 'Print' version is split into 10 pag (Score:2)
Re:[offtopic] 'Print' version is split into 10 pag (Score:4, Informative)
The funny part is that it just hasn't happened yet, but the Intel fans have been waiting for so long that they've just gotta get up and sing anyways. AMD has only a 90nm process, and is still competing with the futuristic Conroe. AMD is still the best option on the desktop. AMD is still the only real option in server land. Want 4 sockets (or even just 2)? Want a reasonable cooling/power bill? AMD is the only option. Intel lucked out by keeping the Pentium 3 architecture around thus managing to keep the laptop/mobile market. Now they're putting those benefits into their desktop/server platforms and by doing being competitive again.
But Intel has not won the battle yet, is the Conroe out yet? Where is the massive proliferation of desktop motherboards for building Core Duo machines? They're not here yet.
Once DDR2 moves beyond 400mhz, AMD will have some serious bandwidth. Later this year AMD will have 65nm, this will bring huge results for their power/watt numbers. So both sides of the story can spout off about what they will have 'eventually.' People need to sit back and re-evaluate things. All we have right now is a healthy, competitive market.
Re:[offtopic] 'Print' version is split into 10 pag (Score:2)
btw, did you notice the numbers the a
Shocking news: 1/2 as much ram may be slower (Score:2)
1 GB of DDR2
2 GB of DDR1
If you skip over to their auto department, you'll also find that, despite expectations to the contrary, a Ferrari performs no better than a VW Beetle. Granted, they didn't have any tires on their Ferrari at the time of testing but that's not going to stop them announcing their findings now with a quiet footnote about retesting later.
HardOCP review, link to print version (Score:4, Informative)
Much better than the posted story which is nothing more than an advertisement for Hardware secrets.
When will
Uneven Benchmark (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Uneven Benchmark (Score:2)
if they'd run 2 quake4's at the same time on the machine, the results would be interesting, but all these benchmarks are just quite worthless from the real life point of view. it is nearly identical cpu with just 2 cores of the logic, why do you expect it to differ in any way (most of the single threaded benchmarks are head-to-head, showing o
Re:Uneven Benchmark (Score:2)
That would be true, if not for the fact that Quake 4 is multithreaded. [amdzone.com]
So are Oblivion and Serious Sam 2.
Re:Uneven Benchmark (Score:5, Funny)
Upgrade? (Score:5, Interesting)
However, I don't know that I can convince my wife to let me spend the money on such a large overhaul again. I'm fairly happy with my AMD 64 system at the moment.
Honestly, I just hope AMD maintains their lead long enough for people to start taking notice (like Dell using AMD in the server line).
Re:Upgrade? (Score:5, Informative)
Does that mean it has finally reached some degree of maturity ?
And sorry to disappoint you - since the chipset-cpu interface remains the same, the "old" chipsets can be used for AM2 processors, as long as the mainboard has an AM2- and DDR2-sockets.
Re:Upgrade? (Score:2)
Re:Upgrade? (Score:2)
How so? My current setup (ASUS A8N-SLI Deluxe, 3800+, 7800GTX, 1 GB DDR) has no problems running any of the most intensive games and/or apps. About the time that Vista comes out I'll probably just upgrade the processor to a 4800+ (which will be about $300 by that time), get a second 7800GTX, and slap in another 1 GB of DDR. All for about $600. And then I should be good to go for another year or two.
Re:Upgrade? (Score:3, Informative)
Early SLI offerings leave much to be desired in efficency and design. Furthermore, the NForce 4 series was innovative in features, but since so many of these features were new, they were buggy or weren't implemented horribly well.
We're due for a more stable NForce 5 series.
Re:Upgrade? (Score:2)
Maybe I'm just trying to convince myself that I don't need a new system because I know that if I were to purchase one my wife would remove a very important body part.
Oh well... at least I convinced her that we should get a Nintendo Wii. Although all I had to tell her
Re:Upgrade? (Score:2)
Your left mouse-clicking finger?
Re:Upgrade? (Score:2)
Sigh.
2.6 Ghz, not 2.4Ghz (Score:2, Informative)
Ignore these benchmarks (Score:5, Insightful)
When benchmarking, you should try to keep all test systems as comparable as possible. I really am disappointed by what I consider a glaring oversight.
Seriously, for shame.
Re:Ignore these benchmarks (Score:3, Informative)
However, AMD is going to lag a little behind in the short term, although the memory latancy is still allmost half of what intels current parts are capable of (check out theinquirer.org for some interesting insights into thise issue).
Re:Ignore these benchmarks (Score:5, Informative)
In all the CPU specific test, the 5000+ came out on top. In tests that benchmarked total system power, the FX-60 rig with 2 gigs running in dual channel mode came out on top.
If these guys don't know how to put together proper testing rigs, let alone extrapolate results, then AMD shouldn't be wasting test equipment on them. They can send processors to me, and I'll put up some serious benchmarks, including detailed overclocking, burn-in testing, temperature readings, etc.
Re:Ignore these benchmarks (Score:2)
Re:Ignore these benchmarks (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Ignore these benchmarks (Score:2)
It doesn't suck. Any other hardware review site would have had another DDR2 stick to put in, or would have at least gone out and bought one. The reviewer sucks.
Welcome, Intel (Score:5, Insightful)
Now that Intel is back, we can finally see some heavy competition between the two. The Core Duo is a superb processor and I am eagerly awaiting my MacBook to arrive and I can't wait to see the second release of the Core Duo.
Remember what it was like a few years ago? I used to follow the price charts of CPU:s for drops and they were a lot more frequent than they are today. So now it's easy to say that we should get the same competition all over again and I am quite sure that Hector Ruiz at AMD has a backup plan ready to be enrolled this year.
So once again, welcome, Intel!
Re:Welcome, Intel (Score:2)
Intel might be the king in the performance-per-watt race, but AMD is still the king in the far more important performance-per-dollar race.
It's a pity Apple didn't go AMD as well as Intel for their supplier of x86 chips - 'cause I always feel like I'm overpaying for an intel product
Re:Welcome, Intel (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Welcome, Intel (Score:2)
I did feel like I was overpaying for ppc - but I guess you're right. Apple products are just overpriced.
I guess I'll just stay happy with my very cheap AMD laptop
Re:Welcome, Intel (Score:3, Insightful)
Speculation was that Apple paid under $50 for a G4 CPU.
For a large OEM like Dell, I doubt there's any huge difference between Intel and AMD pricing. Apple however is pretty much only using the luxury Core Duo parts, so they are probably spending a lot more money on CPUs and saving it elsewhere by using Intel chipsets and integrated video. If component costs were really a huge concern for App
Re:Welcome, Intel (Score:2)
Infact, Turion is 64bit, in many benchmarks faster than centrino, and depending on usage patterns, could consume less power.
On the other hand, intel have dual core laptop chips and AMD dont yet, tho turion is still 64bit and intel has yet to release a 64bit laptop chip.
Re:Welcome, Intel (Score:2)
Re:Welcome, Intel (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.sharkyextreme.com/guides/WCPG/article.
And here's one for RAM:
http://www.sharkyextreme.com/guides/WMPG/article.
Re:Welcome, Intel (Score:2, Interesting)
One could then analyse the steepness of the curve and come to some conclusions, such as the best time to buy a graphics card is nine or twelve months after release, LCD panel prices are unlikely to experience the same rate of decrease in the coming twelve months
Re:Welcome, Intel (Score:3, Interesting)
Happy Birthday!
Anandtech's Real-Time Pricing Engine [slashdot.org] gives you real-time prices, plus a graph of the last 6 months of price changes.
I'm amazed at the fact that they log 6 months of history, and offer it to the public at no charge. Most accounting firms charge through the nose for this kind of pricing trend data.
I'm guessing that CPUs have a reason
WRONG LINK (Score:3, Informative)
Here is the correct link:
Anandtech's Real-Time Pricing Engine [anandtech.com]
Re:Welcome, Intel (Score:2)
(I've been using PriceScan for quite a few years... maybe as far back as 1998? I still end up ordering from places like NewEgg or MWave.com or TheNerds.net but it's good for seeing prices.)
That's what I would do too (Score:2)
HotHardware's Coverage Of AM2, Much More Detail (Score:5, Informative)
Problems with memory dividers (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.nordichardware.com/Reviews/?page=3&skr
Buying PCs isn't as exciting as it used to be (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Buying PCs isn't as exciting as it used to be (Score:2)
it also crunches dnetc faster than a single 2.8 GHz XEON IBM server i have at work.
Re:Buying PCs isn't as exciting as it used to be (Score:2, Informative)
Where do you get 2x performance? Are you just looking at the clock speed? I ask because my A643000+ is a good clip faster than my AXP3200, both at the same clock speed.
Re:Buying PCs isn't as exciting as it used to be (Score:2)
If you want to go 100MPH you can buy a Civic for $15K.
If you want to go 200MPH you can buy a Zonda for $300K.
If you want to go 250MPH you can buy a Bugatti for $1 Million.
Sometimes I think computers are spoiling people. Small improvments can be very expensive.
For what it's worth though, you don't have to upgrade and you aren't expected to upgrade every time AMD makes a 20% bump in speed. New motherboards are for pe
Re:Buying PCs isn't as exciting as it used to be (Score:2)
They had 15k scsi disks back when he bought his rig as well. I've got some next to my desk here which have been running for more than 3 years. Nothing new here. Just a bit cheaper.
Much More benchmarks are available on the web (Score:5, Informative)
- HardOCP [hardocp.com]
- X-Bit Labs [xbitlabs.com]
- HotHardware [hothardware.com]
up to date list here [madshrimps.be]
Re:Much More benchmarks are available on the web (Score:2)
Verdict
These are all some pretty impressive numbers, but bear in mind that we tested the AM2 platform with the FX-62 - other AM2 processors won't show any big improvements over their Socket 939 counterparts. It's a real shame that AMD didn't manage to squeeze some more performance out of the new CPUs, but this will hopefully come with time. For now, the AM2 processors aren't worth the investmen
Re:Much More benchmarks are available on the web (Score:2)
am2 seems to be doing fine (Score:4, Interesting)
It's great to look at fx-62 results - it looks like only that processor (or if you overclock it) can
use the available bandwidth
"Frankly speaking, it's the main competitor who must be bustling now. AMD is doing great anyway. At least in terms of CPU performance. Durability of the K8 core and its capacity to adapt to new market realia is admirable: having lived without major modifications through two process technologies, dual cores, and now a new memory controller, this core meticulously responds to each improvement with performance gains. We were very skeptic about future chances of the new AMD platform against the new processor core from Intel (Intel designed the new core nearly from scratch, while AMD K8 is rather old), but our tests warmed up our interest. The situation may turn out not that simple"
AMD Catches Up in Technology and Shoots Out in Performance
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/cpu/amd-athlo
My review (Score:5, Funny)
Sure, Socket 939 was amazing when it came out. Nine hundred and thirty-nine pins -- quite an amazing figure.
But I'm sure I wasn't the only one who was less than thrilled at the release of Socket 940. I mean, just one more lousy pin? That's only a tenth of a percent improvement on Socket 939! One wonders what AMD was thinking.
And now here we are, with this farce of an architecture. Yes, Socket AM2 has only 940 pins as well! All that AMD has done in all this time is to shift the pins around on the CPU, much as the occupants of the Titanic spent their time rearranging their deck chairs -- even while that one guy kept on yelling "Iceberg ahead!"
Of course, AMD has tried to hide their laziness with the snazzy marketing name AM2. And yeah, I have got to admit that the name sounds pretty damn good. But in the end, isn't the socket itself more important than a mere name?
Socket consideration (Score:2)
O. Wyss
Re:Socket consideration (Score:2)
Re:Socket consideration (Score:2)
O. Wyss
Re:Socket consideration (Score:2)
Yeah, I can see where spending an extra 60$ to double or triple your PC speed is just unreasonable.
Where's the sarcasm tag button?
Re:Socket consideration (Score:3, Insightful)
Am I complaining? Not much, I understand it is necessary to improve the architecture. Nn the o
Re:Socket consideration (Score:4, Informative)
be available for a while yet. So you will be able to
upgrade. Consider that you can't use DDR2 memory in DDR sockets,
so you would STILL need a new MB even if AMD kept the same
socket for the new cpu.
Alway's upgraded mobo + cpu + ram (Score:2)
Even if amd used socket a for a long time they migrated from pc100-133 ram to pc 2100-2700 (drr 266 & 333) and bus speeds changed. That required new motherboards. It's quite pointless to upgrade your machine to a new cpu if your bus speed and memory speed remains unchanged in almost all cases. The speed difference is so minor.
Re:Socket consideration (Score:2)
O. Wyss
Re:Socket consideration (Score:2)
DDR2 and DDR1 are NOT electrically compatible. That means you plug DDR2 into a DDR1 processor and it goes boom.
And as for making some form of DDR1+DDR2 processor that's really expensive given the protocols aren't the same, etc. You'd be wasting a lot of die space that will be effectively off all the time.
DDR1+939 chips will be out for a while I imagine. If you're really paranoid you should wait till they get past AM2.
Tom
Re:Socket consideration (Score:2)
Better Reviews (Score:3, Informative)
Much Better Review (Score:2)
There you go.
What about Pacifica? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:What about Pacifica? (Score:2)
Ah... (Score:3, Funny)
Ummmmm. (Score:2)
Why didn't they just test with 1GB of ram accross the board? That would have make it seem fairer than 2GB and 1GB systems.
My two cents is that wait for the AM2 socket to progress further and don't jump on the band wagon just because its there. I am a computer enthusiast and love to have
The Once and Never Champion (Score:4, Insightful)
The chips are cheaper and are faster than Intel's. You couldn't tell from the press!
No matter what AMD does, the next line in this type of story is "But Intel's next CPU, expected in the year 2121, is expected to outperform AMD's best. Is AMD doomed? "
Re:The Once and Never Champion (Score:2)
Back in the 90s AMD was the company you went to for budget machines when reliability wasn't an issue. It takes a long time to recover your image from that.
Re:The Once and Never Champion (Score:2)
Re:The Once and Never Champion (Score:2)
Re:Intel's roadmap to the Cornroe and beyond (Score:2)
I personally have absolutely no interest in 'the fastest thing in town', gamers may care but Cool, Quiet and Reasonably Fast are easily enough for me.
From what I hear, the Conroe is slightly more energy-efficient than AMD's offerings.
How does it scale? The Opteron is designed to be a server processor more than anythin
Re:Intel's roadmap to the Cornroe and beyond (Score:5, Interesting)
When we compare apples to apples (the P4 line to the K8 line) Intel actually uses more power, generates more heat, runs slower, and is more expensive.
I'm glad Intel stepped up and made a good processor. The Core Duo is a good processor, don't get me wrong. But for all the marketing buzz about Intel right now, AMD does in fact have a response.
AMD is not only rolling out Turion X2 series processors, but they've got the AM2 lineup such as the 5000+ X2, the quad core series, etc.
Re:Intel's roadmap to the Cornroe and beyond (Score:5, Interesting)
Even if the Core Duo turns out to be better than the comparable AMD chip, Intel still has ground to catch up onin the multi-chip arena due to memory bandwidth. For most people at home this might not be an issue, but for servers it can be.
Between that and the quad-core chip, it would be very interesting to see Intel manage to recapture some desktop space while AMD gets into the Server Room.
Re:Intel's roadmap to the Cornroe and beyond (Score:2, Insightful)
It's totally fair. You could say that the upcoming amd chips *might* be better than what intel is rolling out now, but to say it isn't 'fair' smacks of fanboiism.
Re:Intel's roadmap to the Cornroe and beyond (Score:2)
So basically the opposition argument goes like this:
(pre-Conroe)
"AMD's K8 beats Intel's 10 year old core, I guess Intel doesn't have any new designs"
(post-Conroe)
"Stop comparing AMD's 3 year old K8 core to intel's latest and greatest... um, despite the fact it's still the same 10 year old c
Re:Intel's roadmap to the Cornroe and beyond (Score:2)
it's totally fair... (Score:2)
From what I understand, AMD will not have 65nm chips until December. That means they won't be catching up soon.
When we compare apples to apples (the P4 line to the K8 line) Intel actually uses more power, generates more heat, runs slower, and is more expensive.
Apples to Apples will change next week when Core 2 Duo comes out. And already, if you compare C
Re:it's totally fair... (Score:2)
wtf? I want independent confirmation of *that* one. It flies against everything we have seen in the last couple of years. Was there something wrong with the AM2 which meant it ran flat out all the time?
I know they have a problem (design flaw?) with dual-core processors whereby if one processor is running flat out then the other is as well, regardless of load.
Re:Intel's roadmap to the Cornroe and beyond (Score:2)
BTW, does anyone else see how the name "Core 2 Duo" could lead to confusing people? Joe Sixpack is going to
Re:wishful thinking (Score:2)
Re:wishful thinking (Score:2)
On the Intel side of the po
Re:wishful thinking (Score:2)
That said, chipsets are more important than heat. As expensive as it is to power machines and to keep them cool, it is even more expensive to have a machine melt into a klump of toxins.
Re:wishful thinking (Score:2)
But 'AMD Cheaper' is NOT a myth. You can't say 'X isn't true because in Y area it isn't true.'
You are only looking at major computer manufacturers, and then, only a few of them.
Build your own rig. AMD is quite a bit cheaper than Intel if you do.
Major manufacturers have many political and legal hoops
Re:wishful thinking (Score:2)
> in Y area it isn't true.'
Clearly, I meant it is a myth within the server space, and possibly in the corporate workstation market as well. I can't even get 1U AMD servers from a certain "whitebox builder" at a cheaper price than intel machines, as they claim that they have to pay more money to get a motherboard that won't melt.
However, this isn't to say that it isn't a myth in the desktop market too. Whitebox has problems. A tru
What "whitebox" builder are you using? (Score:2)
* Supermicro
* Monarch
* Polywell
* PenguinComputing
* eRacks
* ASA
Take your pick. All of these 'whitebox' vendors release quality, SUPPORTED configurations using custom, bleeding-edge hardware for build-it-yourself prices.
Re:wishful thinking (Score:2)
The very best OEM I've ever dealt with was MicronPC, and they went out of business I think.
Of course, neither one of us is statistically relevant, but I've had the exactly opposite experiance of you.
Re:wishful thinking (Score:4, Informative)
You also have to deal with their horrendous OS loads which nearly cripple the system and the fact that 99% of the time they don't include an actual OS install CD to start from scratch - just a "restore disk" that will start off with a fresh system just as messed up as when you started. Heck even when they do include an install disk it's often missing stuff from the full version.
Yes, a whitebox system can be crappy too, because you have the option of buying crap components. However, a custom/whitebox system built with good memory, a reputable mainboard/graphics card/etc, will beat an OEM machine in quality and stability every time. The only caveat is that you have to be preparted to do some legwork regarding the warranties if something breaks (which in my experience, isn't often. only things I've ever had actually break were hard drives, and most of those were from that horrdendous IBM 60GXP line).
Re:wishful thinking (Score:2)
With that said though, I
Re:wishful thinking (Score:2)
I've had nothing but success using nForce4 and nForce4 Pro based motherboards.
On the other hand my i915G motherboard for my 775 pin Prescott can't access the CDROM in Linux [reliably anyways]. My Gigabyte i945 was fine though.
Stop buying crap ECS boards or low end KT or nF series. Spend the $100 and get a nF4 ASUS or Gigabyte and get over it.
Tom
Re:wishful thinking (Score:2)
The other gigabyte motherboard I bought was crashing at high loads, even with low temperatures. The jury is still out on that one, as it could still possibly b
Concerning nVidia chipsets: (Score:3, Interesting)
An even better mix is the AMD 8131 + nForce 2050. That gives you PCI-X AND PCIe, dedicated. It's my favorite server platform.
Re:wishful thinking (Score:2)
It would be accurate to say that the first K7 had some lousy chipsets. Then again, I own one and it routinely reaches 40+ days of uptime (note that this is an el-cheapo box that I use as proxy server). The newer Athlon XPs had decent chipsets, with some exceptions. You may have suffered with some of them. The At
Re:wishful thinking (Score:2)
Re:Moore's law (Score:2)
Re:desktop benchmarks? (Score:2)
Because even if AMD didn't prove the clock-rate-only wars as a sham, Intel destroying the P4 with a chip sucking a quarter the power did.
Modern machines run dozens, if not hundreds, of processes simultaneously. Even if not running multithreaded apps, the average user will benefit from going multi-core.
In no way is x64 bit or duel core processing support available for important desktop applications(games).
64 bit (easily) allows
Re:desktop benchmarks? (Score:2)
What are you? 14-years-old? Perhaps 16? Perhaps you've never had to use your computer as anything but a toy, but for those of us who use machines for work, there are plenty of other applications that prompt upgrades. High end digital photography, print work, 3D modeling and annimation and let's not forget video editing. That's just the tip of the iceberg.
For me, dual cores rock because they greatly assist with virtualization