ummm...
AMD says that 4x4 is not simply workstation and server technology reduced down to consumer level, but is in fact, a whole new design. The company indicated that the new 4x4 chipset will be able to allow each processor core to have direct access to memory, and to have direct access to each other. The technology is called Direct Connect, and according to AMD, will be able to give huge boost to performance over traditional multi-socket platforms.
I'd like to know what exactly this means :Q
SunnyD
Belgian Waffler
Sheesh, why is this remotely exciting? AMD was talking about quad-core before X2 was even rolled out - in fact, I think it was even roadmapped for next year at some point.
Heh- That's what I meant by touching- just the side of each chip- not the pins. But as another said- The Daily Tech article makes it sound like 2 seperate sockets, which makes a lot more sense.
So $2000 for 2 FX CPU's and $450 for this motherboard and $1000 for 2 vid cards and 4 sticks of 1GB memory for say $300 and a new PSU for $200 to drive all this crap.....Wow- where do I sign up. Oh I know where- at the homeless shelter in the food line.
Edit- and to think people were complaining about a measley $300 PPU. Not that I'm buying one of those anytime soon either...
Well, one thing that makes this at least slightly interesting is it opens up dual-processor boards for the enthusiast market (instead of only servers) permanently on AMD's roadmap. Note this slide from Tech Day:
http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTE0OTE5MDI3NTA4amFCbk5YanBfMV81X2wuanBn
As you can see, "4x4+" will be around for the quad-core launch, allowing for 8-core systems outside the server space. Again, of little use for the vast majority of software currently in the ecosystem, but it still gives AMD bragging rights ("first to 8 cores on the desktop!") and racks up a few sales to the enthusiasts who have more money than sense.
heh, Direct Connect's back! i'd like to know how a file sharing service will increase my performance
Originally posted by: the Chase
Yes, a compatibility problem of about $600 or so.
yeah.... per chip :Q
This would be deadly to conroe if they happened to have chips ready with reverse hyper threading
I have a feeling we probably would have heard something if this possibility was even in the cards. There's no way "reverse hyperthreading" is coming before K8L, if at all, and we know that's a ways off yet.
How very unimpresive.
In the bang/buck equation it's going to lose hands down to conroe. Overclocking it's unlikely to perform as well as a single chip. Dual core support is still mostly vapourware, as far as AMD's little secret goes it's just as dissapointing as i feared.
Of course for those who need some serrious number crunching then it'll be quite nice.
In the bang/buck equation it's going to lose hands down to conroe. Overclocking it's unlikely to perform as well as a single chip. Dual core support is still mostly vapourware, as far as AMD's little secret goes it's just as dissapointing as i feared.
Of course for those who need some serrious number crunching then it'll be quite nice.
it is not that simple. plus mostly likely it needs compiler's support, which is nowhere except in research papers. Unless more reliable sources can put a roadmap on this technology, it is pretty much a rumor.
Naa...what AMD is doing is putting money into marketing and package something already exists as the new and cool technology. It is a new marketing ploy, not a new platform that specifically target enthusiasts (ie those who got way too much money to burn) so AMD can dope those people into putting up more money.
AMD won the last round of the battle of chips, but looks to me they have stopped innovating. Hope Intel's Conroe is as good as promised, and maybe that will kick AMD into developing something that's really good.
You're victim of stereotype thinking. It's the total opposite to what you say. Anybody should be able to see that multi-processing is the future.
4X4 is massively multicore, 4 to 8 cores, with new cool connection technology that will later be integrated into future mainstream chips.
In complete contrast to, for instance, "Extreme Edition" and Pentium D, 4X4 really represents the way AMD intends to move forward. Available early.
Costly yes. But also contrary to EE and P-D (and even, dare I say it, Conroe) 4X4 cost will come with a very tangible performance edge.
On multithreaded software of course. But again, that is the future. If you're not happy with how your old/current single threaded games run on your current A64 may I suggest you buy a new videocard? Because that's where the problem is if there is a problem.
There really doesn't exist much of a need for a future processor to run single threaded apps faster. Software will take advantage of multiple processors where performance is an issue. This is certainly true already today for some tools. It will definitely also be true for future games.
I'm certainly not one to advocate burning money on bleeding edge, immature, highend equipment. I won't recommend 4X4 either. But to be fair, one has to recognize that the actual additional user value you get for your money this time is rather considerably greater than is usually the case with highend stuff. To make a contrast: is it worth it to buy a new Conroe system, $530 processor alone, that is only 10%-30% faster than the system you have today? Does that makes sense? And how long have you waited for this? Longer, I bet, much longer than it will take for that system to be surpassed by a cheaper system. And then the Conroe deal still seems brilliant compared to EE or FX parts.
(Of course one reason why the Conroe deal has seemed so brilliant is that it's a deal where people compare future parts and future pricing with current.)
Maximilian
Lifer
- Feb 8, 2004
- 12,604
- 15
- 81
Originally posted by: Dark Cupcake
Must resist......... i mean seriously i must resist, faster cpu does not matter, but something new.........
Does it work with any cpu, cause it would be cool to run 1 dual core and 1 single core. Also if only they brought it out it for socket 939.
Toms hardware ran a dual core 940 with a single core 940 and got some pretty weird results from 3 cores. Suppose theyre on different steppings etc though so it might work well with this new solution.
What I'd LOVE to see is lower-cost dual AM2 socket boards.
...then you can go ahead and throw on a pair of Semprons or cheap A64's (which is significantly cheaper than a dual-core 3800+)
...of course, said board and a reduced-price 3800+ with room for a second one down the road is a nice idea too....
[/pipedream]
...then you can go ahead and throw on a pair of Semprons or cheap A64's (which is significantly cheaper than a dual-core 3800+)
...of course, said board and a reduced-price 3800+ with room for a second one down the road is a nice idea too....
[/pipedream]
I dont know what most of you dope smokers are talking about....dual dual cor eia affordable now.....AMD would have to get sub 200 dollar boards and get the cpus under 300 to make this fly...which it doesn't sound like they are talking about....
You can get a high end quality mobo with Ocing options like the Asus K8N-DL for 230 at newegg......opteron 2xx series are not much of any premium over regular dual core X2's....ECC DDR not much over regular DDR, and a 550watt Antec can power the whle thing easily (even oc'd a bit) and most ppl have more then that in their turbo AMD rigs....
You can get a high end quality mobo with Ocing options like the Asus K8N-DL for 230 at newegg......opteron 2xx series are not much of any premium over regular dual core X2's....ECC DDR not much over regular DDR, and a 550watt Antec can power the whle thing easily (even oc'd a bit) and most ppl have more then that in their turbo AMD rigs....
What dual-dual-cores (and respective motherboards) are available NOW at an "affordable" price. "Affordable" is a fun one... for you, maybe. For those on a Sempron budget and find the X2 3800+ "expensive" perhaps not.
Actually it is, a Dual Socket motherboard that uses vanilla DDR2 versus the FB-DIMM/ Burffered DDR2 typically found in servers. Lack of PCI-X, and other server related features.
Is it entirely new technology far from it, but it is targeted at enthusiasts as something new that hasn't been marketed to this segment before. This platform is different from the one targeted to servers and hence is new. Not to mention this seems to only works with FX's while the Server Dual Socket line extends downward to less costly processors.
if you factor performance only, I think AMD can say they can outpace Conroe 2.93 GHz or until Kentsfield but this is not the case anymore.... It all boils down to price/performance/watt which I think Conroe can make a run of it.
Its a surprise that once AMD is singing to this equation when Prescott was released but now they are somehow eating up what they preached before......
From what I see, they dont even have any answer to Conroe unless you are using dual-socket mobo.
Its a surprise that once AMD is singing to this equation when Prescott was released but now they are somehow eating up what they preached before......
From what I see, they dont even have any answer to Conroe unless you are using dual-socket mobo.
What strikes me as odd is that there are many posters who are waiting breathlessly for the Kentsfield but turning their noses up at 4x4...they are the same thing (except that the 4x4 will be faster due to cHT links instead of an FSB link).
Kentsfield will be 2 Conroe dual cores glued together and communicating through the FSB, while 4x4 is 2 FX-xx dual cores in 2 sockets and communicating through cHT links.
Kentsfield will be 2 Conroe dual cores glued together and communicating through the FSB, while 4x4 is 2 FX-xx dual cores in 2 sockets and communicating through cHT links.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter