Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 63

Thread: Athlon 64FX




  1. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,790

    Default

    Yup voltage requirements are different, the slot is different (200 something pin vs 184 pin) and the memory controller is on the CPU. You need to make a whole new system basically.

    FX5900 - 3DMark2001 [20,566] - 3DMark2003 [7,281] - Aquamark3 [56,694]
    Ti4400 - 3DMark2001 [16,028]

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1,661

    Default

    <center>Athlon 64 sockets explained
    Reasons behind 754, 939 and 940 pins
    </center>
    It's a puzzle that has been irritating many AMD-watchers for a good little while. Ever since the company announced that the Athlon 64 would come in three different pin counts, everyone has wanted to know why. It seemed to defy logic.
    The Opteron uses 940 pins so it might have made some sense to stick with that. The socket allows for two banks of memory. A 754 pin socket makes reasonable sense too, it only allows a single bank of memory but there are some obvious advantages like lower cost. Why mess up the whole thing by introducing a socket with 939 pins?

    At the technical symposium following the Athlon 64 launch, Mike Goddard, AMD Director of Technical Marketing of the firm's Computation Products Group, explained it in a way that it has left almost as many questions unanswered. But the long and the short of it is that Socket 940 requires a 6 to 9 layer motherboard and Socket 939 only requires a 4 layer design, making the motherboards much cheaper for chips using the latter.

    Goddard is a seriously technical guy, he comes from a background of designing chips himself and knows a thing or two. He said that Socket 939 would allow later Athlon FX chips to use standard DDR memory rather than the current requirement for ECC registered DDR.

    The Inquirer

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    476

    Default

    and the 939 is dual channel as well................the only thing, it can't beat the a64 3200 pricewise..............and from firingsquads analysis, other than bandwidth, the two (fx/a64) run about as fast............so, 530 for a 64 and a mobo w/ unregistered ram, even though it'd not dual channel , i'm lookin' at

  4. #34
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    268

    Default

    What you say is right JSR, but i think it is too early to compare price/performance ration of these procs. i'll wait to see how they do in the futur, and wish that AMD will keep us in mind, enthousiasts who like cheap processors with high overclockability!!!!: peace2:

    And for the coming FX procs. on socket 939 using standard DDR i say WOOHOOO!!:D
    SYX -=AMD Powered=-
    AMD 1800+ @ 1880Mhz on A7S333 , 250 Meg DDR 333 Platinum @2-2-2-6
    Asus TNT 2 32 meg (128) , 250W ATX, 200W AT (same case)
    Steel automotive intake fan (see avatar) , 3X40mm exaust fans in the back

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,790

    Default

    Also remember that the FX has been benchmarked on the nForce3 boards, which are not running up to par yet. They are only running at a 600mhz Hypertransport link, where they Vias are running the full 800mhz. Look to see better nForce/FX performance later.

    FX5900 - 3DMark2001 [20,566] - 3DMark2003 [7,281] - Aquamark3 [56,694]
    Ti4400 - 3DMark2001 [16,028]

  6. #36
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    268

    Default

    Right now the better choice for a AMD FX is a VIA motherboard, but in the futur, we will see if N-Force 3 gets to the top like N-Force 2!:thumb:
    SYX -=AMD Powered=-
    AMD 1800+ @ 1880Mhz on A7S333 , 250 Meg DDR 333 Platinum @2-2-2-6
    Asus TNT 2 32 meg (128) , 250W ATX, 200W AT (same case)
    Steel automotive intake fan (see avatar) , 3X40mm exaust fans in the back

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    184

    Default

    It's been mentioned before, but via's downfall was always the memory controller. Now that it's on-die, via has one less thing to screw up. I think they're gonna retake the lead as the AMD chipset performance leader because of that.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    476

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    494

    Default

    any one of yall ever think, that maybeee, the athlon64/fx already has ddr2 built in? ;)

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    184

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •