• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Cheap opteron board?

A

Athlex

Golden Member
I have a lonely opteron 144 chip sitting in my desk that I'd like to fire up to do a little folding. Can anyone reccomend any place to find a cheap (<$100) Socket 940 motherboard?
 
Spotted THIS over at Monarch for $145.00

I haven't seen any Opteron(940) boards dual or single for less than that.

Edit: Socket 939 are plentiful - question is, which chip does the OP have?




 
Originally posted by: JC
Originally posted by: natethegreat
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80100-R">Opteron 144 1.8GHz Processor</a>

This processor is listed as socket 939, why am I feeling stupid for thinking it's a bad idea to cram it in a socket 940 board?
Click to expand...


Those come in 939- and 940-pin flavors.

http://www.amdcompare.com/us-en/opteron/details.aspx?opn=OSA144BOX
Click to expand...

Ah yes, I see the light 😀

Thanks for clearing that up for me.
 
Share the stupidity; I just recently had to ask over at 2CPU how to tell a P4 Xeon 603 from a 604. :Q 😱

Kinda helpful to know when you have pair of P4 1.7s and you're trying to figure out what motherboard you need. 😛
 
Thanks nwm- that Arima board seems to be a pretty good deal. I figured I'd only be able to snag one of those VIA-based MSI boards (with the soc 603 Xeon heatsinks) for ~$150.
To clarify, I have a 940-pin 144. Bought it about a year and a half ago and recently upgraded to a 130nm 150 because I didn't want to hassle with replacing my SK8N because it would also require a new (3GIO) video card, etc. etc.
 
ok, my turn for a dumb question!

To start, I'm a rank-beginner when it comes to SMP. I recall reading early on that sledgehammer-core Opterons are identical across the 1xx, 2xx, and 8xx range even though the # of coherent HT links is supposed to be different. If I were to pick up a second 130nm 144 (or 150) could they work together in a dual-proc board? If they didn't, would I be limited by the BIOS or the chip itself?

My other question is- does it make any sense to put both chips in the same board? For the sake of argument, let's say they're a 244 and a 250. I never read about any SMP systems with different speed CPUs so there's probably a good reason for that. Would they both operate at the slower chip's speed or would the motherboard just freak out?

TIA
 
Originally posted by: Athlex
ok, my turn for a dumb question!

To start, I'm a rank-beginner when it comes to SMP. I recall reading early on that sledgehammer-core Opterons are identical across the 1xx, 2xx, and 8xx range even though the # of coherent HT links is supposed to be different. If I were to pick up a second 130nm 144 (or 150) could they work together in a dual-proc board? If they didn't, would I be limited by the BIOS or the chip itself?

My other question is- does it make any sense to put both chips in the same board? For the sake of argument, let's say they're a 244 and a 250. I never read about any SMP systems with different speed CPUs so there's probably a good reason for that. Would they both operate at the slower chip's speed or would the motherboard just freak out?

TIA
Click to expand...


My understanding is that 1xx chips will not work in an SMP board. I think the issue is that one or more hypertransport links are disabled. Someone can correct me if I am wrong. 🙂
 
One of the reasons I recently registered at the 2CPU forums was to learn even more about SMP systems(and to fuel my DC addiction) 😀

In any event, they have an EXCELLENT EXCELLENT smp FAQ list located HERE Go to the "Opteron FAQ" and you should find plenty of info on what you're looking for. 🙂
 
Thanks for the link. Been a while since I've visited the 2cpu forums...

OK, last question- according the FAQ, MS licenses # of CPUs by socket and not by core (cool.) Would Win2k pro recognize two dual-core CPUs or would I need XPP?
 
My understanding is that as long as Microsoft licensing stays at the number of CPUs being defined by the physical sockets present on the board, it wouldn't matter whether the CPUs had 2 cores, 3 cores or 10 cores. That said however, the OS[2000] is not HT aware and won't make use of the additional core(assuming an HT type CPU like an upper-end P4). For that, you need XP Pro or 2003.

 
Originally posted by: networkman
My understanding is that as long as Microsoft licensing stays at the number of CPUs being defined by the physical sockets present on the board, it wouldn't matter whether the CPUs had 2 cores, 3 cores or 10 cores. That said however, the OS[2000] is not HT aware and won't make use of the additional core(assuming an HT type CPU like an upper-end P4). For that, you need XP Pro or 2003.
Click to expand...
or Windows 2003 (Windows XP Pro 64) ....

BTW, it seems pretty impressive how much a difference the 64 bit OS makes over the 32 bit OS on BOINC ...

Perhaps just an isolated instance but I am using an optimized client as well ... results speak for themselves.
 
Eh cool 'n quiet doesn't matter since the CPUs will be running wide open all the time. 🙂
I guess I was just concerned because Win2K predates dual-core (and HT for that matter), so I'm not sure if there's a trick to getting it to recognize 4 cores in a dual dual-core setup.
 
Windows 2000 Pro will support an x2. It will see it as a dual processor. The problem is Windows 2000 Pro will only support 2 processors so it would not work for Dual x2s.

That is the same problem with XP Pro. If you want to do dual x2s you are looking at a Windows Server if you go with a Microsoft OS.

Here is the numbers for Procs and RAM

Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition
4 Processors 4GB RAM

Windows Server 2003 Standard x64 Edition
4 Processors 32GB RAM

Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition
8 Processors 32GB RAM

Windows Server 2003 Enterprise x64 Edition
8 Processors 1TB RAM

Windows Server 2003 Datacenter Edition
32 Processors 64GB RAM

Windows Server 2003 Datacenter x64 Edition
32 Processors 1TB RAM

Windows XP Professional
2 Processors 4GB RAM

Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
2 Processors 128GB RAM

Windows 2000 Professional
2 Processors 4GB RAM

Windows 2000 Server
4 Processors 4GB RAM

Windows 2000 Advanced Server
8 Processors 8GB RAM

Windows 2000 Datacenter Server
32 Processors 32GB RAM
 
....and there's the rub.
Thanks for the info. Interesting that the server versions of the 32-bit Windows support >4GB RAM. Must use Intel's funky 36-bit addressing mode.
 
Originally posted by: Crazee
Windows 2000 Pro will support an x2. It will see it as a dual processor. The problem is Windows 2000 Pro will only support 2 processors so it would not work for Dual x2s.

That is the same problem with XP Pro. If you want to do dual x2s you are looking at a Windows Server if you go with a Microsoft OS.
Click to expand...


Hmmm....maybe not?

For example, Windows XP Professional is designed to be used with desktops that have up to two processors, Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition is designed to be used with systems that have up to four processors, and SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition is designed to be used with systems that have up to four processors.

For most currently shipping Microsoft software with processor limits, each processor counts as a single processor regardless of the number of cores and/or threads that the processor contains. For example, Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition can be used on a four-processor system, whether the processors in the system are single-core, hyperthreaded, or multicore.
Click to expand...

Found this here.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top