Poll: CPUs changing design question...

[bob4432]

just out of curiosity, are all of the skt changes necessary or is it a marketing thing? skt462 vs skt 754 and 939 - are all the extra pins needed? skt 370 vs skt 478 and 775? same question.

 

[stevty2889]

Well in some cases yes it is neccessary, if they make big enough changes, the extra pins are needed for extra functionality. skt462(athlon xp) didn't have an on die memory controller, A64, socket 754 added an onboard memory conroller, need more pins to communicate..socket 939..dual channel memory will need more pins than single channel..in other cases they can keep the same socket and pin count, but still need a new motherboard..LGA775 for example, there are 865/875 chipset versions, but won't work with 2mb cache prescotts with EM64T, so you need a 915/925 chipset for that, but then you have dual cores coming, and they are still LGA775...but they don't work with 865/875 or 915/925 based chipsets, so now you have to get a 945/955 chipset based motherboard. So even if you keep the same package/pin count, changes might need to be made anyway. As for prescott going from 478 to 775..it didn't seem all that neccessary, athough the extra voltage pins were supposed to help control temps better theoreticly, even though there wasn't really a change in functionality.

 

[theMan]

it can go both ways. i mean, im sure they dont hesitate to make a new socket, after all, it is a business.

 

[DaveSimmons]

I'm only aware of one socket change in the last 20 years that was purely for marketing, that being the 486SX motherboard socket for a 486DX "overdrive" chip that was really just a 486DX in a differenet package.

As far as I know all other socket and packaging changes have been made to cut manufacturing costs, reduce heat [, shrink the form factor ], or to add pins needed to carry additional signals.

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
I'm only aware of one socket change in the last 20 years that was purely for marketing, that being the 486SX motherboard socket for a 486DX "overdrive" chip that was really just a 486DX in a differenet package.

As far as I know all other socket and packaging changes have been made to cut manufacturing costs, reduce heat [, shrink the form factor ], or to add pins needed to carry additional signals.

what about skt939 and 940? surely just for amd to keep their server cpus high in price.

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

Originally posted by: bob4432

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
I'm only aware of one socket change in the last 20 years that was purely for marketing, that being the 486SX motherboard socket for a 486DX "overdrive" chip that was really just a 486DX in a differenet package.

As far as I know all other socket and packaging changes have been made to cut manufacturing costs, reduce heat [, shrink the form factor ], or to add pins needed to carry additional signals.

what about skt939 and 940? surely just for amd to keep their server cpus high in price.

No, the server space requires registered (and ECC compatible) buffered memory for optimum stability and reliability. There is a difference between the two types of memory