Fremskynder sokkel AM2

[Re-Offender]

Da var de første exemplarene i salg i webshop`s (pre-orders)

Prisene var omentrent de samme som i 939serien

 

http://www.geizhals.at/eu/?cat=cpuamdam2

Endret 25. april 2006 av ArcticOC

[snorreh]

Josh fra PenStar Systems har etter min mening en ganske innsiktsfull og balansert kommentar vedrørende denne saken her:

 

Intel Conroe Thoughts

The first thing we need to do is sit down and realize that Intel set up these two machines.  While Anand couldn't find anything wrong with them, there is the possibility of some tricks going on to make the Conroe look like a huge favorite.  For example, Apple is well known for using tricks and specific tests that made its previous products look like the second coming as compared to the products in the PC market.  Compiler optimizations, low level driver settings, and other little tricks could work together to give the Conroe an unfair head start.  I am not saying that Intel is out and out cheating here, but the guys setting up these machines do not want their products to look bad, and I can see them "optimizing" the Conroe machine to give better results.  So, until a 3rd party can get their hands on a Conroe and run some independent tests, we should take these results with a pretty big grain of salt.  There could be a lot going on that we don't know about, and until we can get some 3rd party verification, the Conroe should just be considered an exciting but unreleased product.

[...]

I do believe that the Conroe will be a very fast part, and it is refreshing to see Intel finally step away from the failed Netburst architecture and embrace something new.  They look to have solved their power and heat issues that plagued the Netburst processors with Conroe and its brethren, and OEM's around the world are overjoyed about it.  Intel is a big company, and they have a lot of very talented and smart engineers there.  There was little doubt in anyone's mind that they could produce a good, fast processor.  It seems that they have done so, but we still don't know how well it will truly fare against AMD and their upcoming Rev. F offerings.

 

So, let us assume that the results of Anand's tests are truly valid.  This means that the current Athlon 64 parts will not be able to compete with Intel in any way, shape, or form.  AMD is apparently not terribly worried about this, as DDR is starting to dry up and they are transitioning to the new Rev. F DDR-2 based processors.  Current tests and reports have all shown that the DDR-2 based Athlon 64's are not any faster than current Athlon 64's, and in fact the new ones can be a bit pokier than the old.  There are many out there panicking that these Rev. F chips will just not pass muster and AMD will again be a has-been in the CPU industry.  Personally I believe the proclamations of AMD's death is premature.  AMD has a history of "leaking" out parts to motherboard manufacturers for validation that are not fully functional or show the true potential of the part.  I distinctly remember when the original Athlon was two months from release and Firing Squad got a hold of one of these chips and benchmarked it.  The Athlon sample they had was a 550 MHz part and it was actually beat up really badly by a 500 MHz Pentium 3, not to mention it fell behind the K6-III 450 overclocked to 550 MHz.  When the real Athlon 550's hit the market, they were without a doubt the fastest things out there.  Bar none.  AMD has done this several times since then, and some of the first K8's sent to motherboard guys were partially disabled as well.

 

I believe that the Rev. F's will show up and be a lot beefier than what we have seen so far.  There are those out there quite vehement that Rev. F will surprise people with its performance.  I am a bit more conservative here in that I think Rev. F. will be faster than the current Athlon 64's, but if Conroe performs in the real world like it did at IDF, then these new AMD chips will be taking a back seat.

 

Something else to consider is that AMD now has a lot more fab space open for production since Fab 36 went online, and they have the ability to massively increase the L2 cache on the Athlon 64 even on their 90 nm process.  Bloating out the die size is an option for AMD at this point, and an Athlon 64 could certainly show an improvement in performance with 2 MB of L2.  Apparently Fab 36 is producing 90 nm parts at a rapid pace as we speak, and it will be producing even more come this summer.  If AMD wants to shore up any performance deficiency, they could certainly turn to more L2 while not negatively affecting their ability to provide parts to customers.

 

We will see our first real look at the Rev. F Athlon 64's this June at Computex, and then a month after that Intel is planning on releasing some of its next generation parts.  Conroe will definitely be a contender for the performance crown, and it is a huge leap forward for Intel from the current Pentium 4 based chips.  My little editorial here was not meant to give the impression that Intel is lying and Conroe will be a failure.  Far from it, I believe Conroe will be an excellent part, one which we have been expecting from Intel for years since they abandoned the Pentium 3 architecture.  My only thought here is caution.  Both AMD and Intel have great engineers working for them, and in the end I believe that both will produce very good parts that will compete well with each other.  One might get a jump over the other at one time or another, but unlike the last few years, the offerings from each will be much more competitive with the other.

Jeg er klar ovet at den ikke er ny, men jeg synes likevel den kan være verdt å få med seg for dem som ikke har sett den før

Endret 25. april 2006 av snorreh

[Gjest Slettet+6132]

Det som ihvertall (for meg) virker klart, er at Conroe, Merom, Yonah er esktremt "gode" i visse "øvelser", men at de på ingen måte er så "overlegne" AMD64 i mer praktisk bruk. OK.. en del tester viser jo en klar ledelse for Conroe 2.6 vs. FX60.

Jeg regner med at AMD jobber med et svar på dette..

[ElderScrollsinisten]

Ja det er jo en påminner om at ting ikke alltid er som de ser ut ved første øyekast. Gledet meg virkelig til AM2 sokkelen skulle komme på markedet da jeg plutselig så disse vidunderlige benchmark'ene fra Conroe. Jeg vet egentlig ikke hva jeg skal tro! Glad for å se at Intel ikke er helt ute, "Alt kan vel ikke være juks og fanterier?" I allefall gleder jeg meg som en unge til å se noen objektive benchmarks når det gjelder Intel Conroe mot en jevnpriset AMD-prosessor i AM2 sokkelen! :!:

 

PS: noen som vet om HyperTransport 3.0 vil bli lansert omkring AM2/Conroe tider?

[snorreh]

PS: noen som vet om HyperTransport 3.0 vil bli lansert omkring AM2/Conroe tider?

5984045[/snapback]

HyperTransport 3.0 ble lansert igår:

http://www.hardware.no/nyheter/prosessor/h...nnonseres/25563

[el_salvad]

AM2 priser har nå komt ut:

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=31233

 

Last up, the flagship Athlon 64 FX 62 is based on Windsor core, F-stepping and supports AMD64, Cool'n'Quiet, NX-Flag, SSE3, Pacifica and it is dual-core, of course. It is clocked to 2.8GHz x2 and each core has 1024KB cache memory. It is listed for saucy €1223.48.

 

Det er nå tiden for at AMD skal prise neeedover kommer, vel?

 

Edit: Med andre ord over 9 og et halvt tusen kroner. Rart å tro at mest mulig vil en prosessor til ca 3500 kanskje kjøre over den

Endret 25. april 2006 av el_salvad

[Boralis]

Josh fra PenStar Systems har etter min mening en ganske innsiktsfull og balansert kommentar vedrørende denne saken her:

 

Intel Conroe Thoughts

The first thing we need to do is sit down and realize that Intel set up these two machines.  While Anand couldn't find anything wrong with them, there is the possibility of some tricks going on to make the Conroe look like a huge favorite.  For example, Apple is well known for using tricks and specific tests that made its previous products look like the second coming as compared to the products in the PC market.  Compiler optimizations, low level driver settings, and other little tricks could work together to give the Conroe an unfair head start.  I am not saying that Intel is out and out cheating here, but the guys setting up these machines do not want their products to look bad, and I can see them "optimizing" the Conroe machine to give better results.  So, until a 3rd party can get their hands on a Conroe and run some independent tests, we should take these results with a pretty big grain of salt.  There could be a lot going on that we don't know about, and until we can get some 3rd party verification, the Conroe should just be considered an exciting but unreleased product.

[...]

I do believe that the Conroe will be a very fast part, and it is refreshing to see Intel finally step away from the failed Netburst architecture and embrace something new.  They look to have solved their power and heat issues that plagued the Netburst processors with Conroe and its brethren, and OEM's around the world are overjoyed about it.  Intel is a big company, and they have a lot of very talented and smart engineers there.  There was little doubt in anyone's mind that they could produce a good, fast processor.  It seems that they have done so, but we still don't know how well it will truly fare against AMD and their upcoming Rev. F offerings.

 

So, let us assume that the results of Anand's tests are truly valid.  This means that the current Athlon 64 parts will not be able to compete with Intel in any way, shape, or form.  AMD is apparently not terribly worried about this, as DDR is starting to dry up and they are transitioning to the new Rev. F DDR-2 based processors.  Current tests and reports have all shown that the DDR-2 based Athlon 64's are not any faster than current Athlon 64's, and in fact the new ones can be a bit pokier than the old.  There are many out there panicking that these Rev. F chips will just not pass muster and AMD will again be a has-been in the CPU industry.  Personally I believe the proclamations of AMD's death is premature.  AMD has a history of "leaking" out parts to motherboard manufacturers for validation that are not fully functional or show the true potential of the part.  I distinctly remember when the original Athlon was two months from release and Firing Squad got a hold of one of these chips and benchmarked it.  The Athlon sample they had was a 550 MHz part and it was actually beat up really badly by a 500 MHz Pentium 3, not to mention it fell behind the K6-III 450 overclocked to 550 MHz.  When the real Athlon 550's hit the market, they were without a doubt the fastest things out there.  Bar none.  AMD has done this several times since then, and some of the first K8's sent to motherboard guys were partially disabled as well.

 

I believe that the Rev. F's will show up and be a lot beefier than what we have seen so far.  There are those out there quite vehement that Rev. F will surprise people with its performance.  I am a bit more conservative here in that I think Rev. F. will be faster than the current Athlon 64's, but if Conroe performs in the real world like it did at IDF, then these new AMD chips will be taking a back seat.

 

Something else to consider is that AMD now has a lot more fab space open for production since Fab 36 went online, and they have the ability to massively increase the L2 cache on the Athlon 64 even on their 90 nm process.  Bloating out the die size is an option for AMD at this point, and an Athlon 64 could certainly show an improvement in performance with 2 MB of L2.  Apparently Fab 36 is producing 90 nm parts at a rapid pace as we speak, and it will be producing even more come this summer.  If AMD wants to shore up any performance deficiency, they could certainly turn to more L2 while not negatively affecting their ability to provide parts to customers.

 

We will see our first real look at the Rev. F Athlon 64's this June at Computex, and then a month after that Intel is planning on releasing some of its next generation parts.  Conroe will definitely be a contender for the performance crown, and it is a huge leap forward for Intel from the current Pentium 4 based chips.  My little editorial here was not meant to give the impression that Intel is lying and Conroe will be a failure.  Far from it, I believe Conroe will be an excellent part, one which we have been expecting from Intel for years since they abandoned the Pentium 3 architecture.  My only thought here is caution.  Both AMD and Intel have great engineers working for them, and in the end I believe that both will produce very good parts that will compete well with each other.  One might get a jump over the other at one time or another, but unlike the last few years, the offerings from each will be much more competitive with the other.

Jeg er klar ovet at den ikke er ny, men jeg synes likevel den kan være verdt å få med seg for dem som ikke har sett den før

5983946[/snapback]

 

 

Greit nok,her er mange usikre momenter enda og det endelige svaret får vi ikke før den er lansert/testet sikkelig.

 

*fjernet av moderator*

 

Mvh. Snekker`n

Endret 25. april 2006 av Dotten

[Dotten]

Stenges midlertidig for opprydding.

 

Åpnes igjen.

 

Det er bøttevis med innlegg her som er off topic, noen er fjernet, men ærlig talt det ble litt vel mye å gripe fatt i.

 

Så her gjør jeg det enkelt;

 

- Mer off topic blir slettet uten varsel.

- Personangrep, personuthenging eller det minste forsøk på å gå på bruker fremfor det som blir skrevet og man får ferie fra forumet.

- Innlegg hvor man er uhøflig, frekk eller spydig vil bli fjernet uten varsel.

 

Det er ikke meningen å virke "gretten", men det må nå være måte på. Diskuter artikkelen, som for de som har glemt det er AMD sokkel AM2 lansering. Rapporteringslisten flyter over av brukere som klager over endel av dere som poster her, så jeg vil instendig be dere telle til ti før dere poster, spesielt de av dere som føler seg veldig engasjert.

 

Reaksjon på moderering gjøres som alltid på pm, ikke i tråden. Føler du at ditt innlegg urettmessig er blitt fjernet så kan det være den forsvant i dragsuget, strengt talt er det vel 4-5 sider her som burde blitt fjernet.

 

Jeg håper dere kan fortsette en saklig, konstruktiv og hyggelig diskusjon videre, som ikke minst er on topic.

Endret 25. april 2006 av Dotten