Will AMD Hammer CPUs fit into current mobos?

[sKuLLsHoT]

unless of course you find a bios flash that modifies the socket and chipset whilst its going at it!

[Albinus]

Methinks that the Hammer will require a serious redesign in board technology - it's not just an evolutionary step (eg Thunderbird to Palomino), but a very revolutionary one :)

[RDR]

Originally Posted by Albinus

Methinks that the Hammer will require a serious redesign in board technology - it's not just an evolutionary step (eg Thunderbird to Palomino), but a very revolutionary one :)

My thinking exactly.......

[Orestis]

A 64 bit processor, has major differences compared to a 32 bit one....For instance, 64 bit wide data bus....Therefore, unless you want to have multiplexed signals (which is not very good), you want 32 more pins for the data bus.....(without taking into account other things you may need). That alone, makes the slot less likely to be kept the same....

The second thing, is the chipset, which will also have to be designed to support the CPU....Current chipsets are designed for 32-bit processors....

The compatibility with current architectures, simply means hammer will use PC hardware and will be able to run programs designed for the 8/16/32 bit x86 processors .

[JediAgent]

I would have to agree with Orestis. A new mobo will be required for a hammer proc. It may even need newer RAM because in nine monthes when it does come out, the DDR standard will have already moved to DDR333 and DDR400. If not QDR.

It would be very cool thou if you could use a Socket 462 to run a Hammer in only 32-bit mode. As to be upgrade friendly. It wouldn't support anything 64-bit and of course would get a major performace hit. Just changeup the mobo and you've almost double proc performance. That would be a very market savvy thing for AMD to do. But we know that is near impossible and most unlikely.

What im wondering is if they are going to change socket format for the hammer are they going to do the same for the XP/Duron lines too? Or are they going to actually have two different socket formats in between the processors? Sounds like an Intel move...

[Wiggo]

Actually the memory controller will be built into the CPU with "Hammer" so even though the same socket will be used the current chipsets won't be. :smokin:
<center>:cheers:</center>

[falecomigo]

that´s not all.
I've already read that hammer will have a memory controller inside of it.
Nowadays the memory controller is in the motherboard, so I think you can see that it´s impossible that our motherboards will be compatible with hammer.

[Wiggo]

Duh. Maybe someone should read the previous post. :rolleyes2

[Wiggo]

Well apparently we were being lead along a little as with a 754-pin count the Clawhammer certainly won't fit.
<center><img src="http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/shows/2002/SpringIDF/day%202/hammer/clawhammer.jpg"></center>
Sledgehammer is rumoured to have a whopping 940 pins.

[FiReBLaZR]

Originally Posted by Wiggo

Well apparently we were being lead along a little as with a 754-pin count the Clawhammer certainly won't fit.
<center><img src="http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/shows/2002/SpringIDF/day%202/hammer/clawhammer.jpg"></center>
Sledgehammer is rumoured to have a whopping 940 pins.

Now that the Hammer Family is going to have a Heat Shield on top...i am probably never going intel again...but that P4 1.6A does look pretty sweet...but price wise...the hammer looks awsome...i wonder how are the benchmarks on that sucker (claw-since its for desktop use)...they both look sweet...cant wait now...probably ill stick with my Athlon-C till the hammers are out and the memory is lower...take care guys...have fun