-
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.
Dual Processor 939 pin athlon 64
- Thread starter Brian23
- Start date
Search for CPU articles at AnandTech, Aceshardware, or other sites.
Basically the major difference between an Athlon FX, an Opteron 2 series, and an Opteron 8 series is the number of HT links, they have 1,2, and 3 links respectively.
The CPU uses these links to communicate with other CPU's as well as with the northbridge.
So, if you only have one, you can only communicate with the northbridge, hence no SMP.
Cerb
Elite Member
All 'round the 'net. Google some (I'm tired! 🙂). Much of it should be in the early Opteron reviews here, actually.
The Hammers have three HT controllers. One goes to the chipset (AGP, PCI bus, etc.). This one is the only one enabled on the desktop CPUs.
The Opteron 2xx chips have two of these enabled, with the second connecting between the first CPU and the second. Part of why they perform so well under Linux is because of this, and it doesn't hurt with overall design, either. Rather than sharing a bus, each CPU has a connection to the other.
The Opteron 8xx chips have three HT controllers, letting them talk to two other CPUs each. Only the first CPU talks to the chipset.
Now, whether the socket supports it is another matter, as the original roadmaps had the low-end ones being 256KB cache models with a 8bit HT link available for low-end server and workstations. While no one can verify it, my personal guess is that the performance difference was probably nowhere near the price difference, justifying Opterons being the only ones able to work with multiple sockets.
On the bright side, we will get dual core socket-939 chips in 05 or 06.
The Hammers have three HT controllers. One goes to the chipset (AGP, PCI bus, etc.). This one is the only one enabled on the desktop CPUs.
The Opteron 2xx chips have two of these enabled, with the second connecting between the first CPU and the second. Part of why they perform so well under Linux is because of this, and it doesn't hurt with overall design, either. Rather than sharing a bus, each CPU has a connection to the other.
The Opteron 8xx chips have three HT controllers, letting them talk to two other CPUs each. Only the first CPU talks to the chipset.
Now, whether the socket supports it is another matter, as the original roadmaps had the low-end ones being 256KB cache models with a 8bit HT link available for low-end server and workstations. While no one can verify it, my personal guess is that the performance difference was probably nowhere near the price difference, justifying Opterons being the only ones able to work with multiple sockets.
On the bright side, we will get dual core socket-939 chips in 05 or 06.
Cerb
Elite Member
Yes they would, because it would allow cheaper CPUs to operate together. dual dual-core A64s? That'd be sweet, and you'd have to work to make it near as expensive as an Opteron for the performance, even if they shared one CPU's RAM.
As far as anyone knows, though, the other HT links are either not connected to pins they match, no pins match up, or they are otherwise disabled in the package's circuitry.
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: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
