Questions on upcoming AMD 64FX CPUs...

[ArvinC]

Hello all. I am deciding on replacing my existing AMD XP2000 rig. I was planning on going Athlon 64FX route, but have been reading that the current FX 940 socket is being replaced with a newer version. I have been trying to find out more about the upcoming CPU, but have not been able to find much more than it will not be compatible with the 940 socket.

So my questions are:

1.) If you were considering the current FX, is it a concern that the 940 socket is being replaced?
2.) Will the next FX platform support dual-channel memory?
3.) Will you need registered memory for the next FX?
4.) Do you think that by introducing higher clocked versions of the Athlon 64, they will ever come close to current FX performance?

Thanks for any info or insights!

 

[josedawg]

Originally posted by: ArvinC
So my questions are:

1.) If you were considering the current FX, is it a concern that the 940 socket is being replaced?
2.) Will the next FX platform support dual-channel memory?
3.) Will you need registered memory for the next FX?
4.) Do you think that by introducing higher clocked versions of the Athlon 64, they will ever come close to current FX performance?

Thanks for any info or insights!

1) Yes you should take it into consideration, but AMD has already stated recently that it will support the FX line further into 2004 (and possibly 2005?) They were gonna hack off one pin, make it 939pin and it was supposed to support dual-channel + non registered memory. This, however, has changed, so I don't know what's going on with the continuation of the FX as 940pin.
2) Hopefully, but I am not certain.
3) Hopefully not, but I am not certain.
4) Eventually, yes.

 

[Lonyo]

I think the next FX is meant to be dual channel DDR, but using "normal" DDR (not registered/buffered/ECC), while the AMD64 is single channel normal RAM, and the Opteron is dual channel server (registered etc RAM)

 

[sellmen]

Originally posted by: ArvinC
Hello all. I am deciding on replacing my existing AMD XP2000 rig. I was planning on going Athlon 64FX route, but have been reading that the current FX 940 socket is being replaced with a newer version. I have been trying to find out more about the upcoming CPU, but have not been able to find much more than it will not be compatible with the 940 socket.

So my questions are:

1.) If you were considering the current FX, is it a concern that the 940 socket is being replaced?
2.) Will the next FX platform support dual-channel memory?
3.) Will you need registered memory for the next FX?
4.) Do you think that by introducing higher clocked versions of the Athlon 64, they will ever come close to current FX performance?

Thanks for any info or insights!

I would wait for socket 940 if you are buying an AthlonFX, because:

1) When socket 940 comes out, AMD will ramp up AthlonFX production, which in turn means lower prices. Also, AMD will not have to keep AthlonFX prices artificially high to preserve their Opteron pricing structure. The current FX is simply a rebadged Opteron.

2) Registered memory is very expensive, and using registered memory on the AthlonFX causes a 20% increase in latency. Furthermore, it is difficult to find CAS 2-2-2 registered memory, so performance will be lowered further. The 940pin AthlonFX will perform better with cheaper RAM.

3) The 940 pin version will require motherboards w/ 4 layer PCB; this should lead to low motherboard prices

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: sellmen

Originally posted by: ArvinC
Hello all. I am deciding on replacing my existing AMD XP2000 rig. I was planning on going Athlon 64FX route, but have been reading that the current FX 940 socket is being replaced with a newer version. I have been trying to find out more about the upcoming CPU, but have not been able to find much more than it will not be compatible with the 940 socket.

So my questions are:

1.) If you were considering the current FX, is it a concern that the 940 socket is being replaced?
2.) Will the next FX platform support dual-channel memory?
3.) Will you need registered memory for the next FX?
4.) Do you think that by introducing higher clocked versions of the Athlon 64, they will ever come close to current FX performance?

Thanks for any info or insights!

I would wait for socket 940 if you are buying an AthlonFX, because:

1) When socket 940 comes out, AMD will ramp up AthlonFX production, which in turn means lower prices. Also, AMD will not have to keep AthlonFX prices artificially high to preserve their Opteron pricing structure. The current FX is simply a rebadged Opteron.

2) Registered memory is very expensive, and using registered memory on the AthlonFX causes a 20% increase in latency. Furthermore, it is difficult to find CAS 2-2-2 registered memory, so performance will be lowered further. The 940pin AthlonFX will perform better with cheaper RAM.

3) The 940 pin version will require motherboards w/ 4 layer PCB; this should lead to low motherboard prices

He means Socket 939.

 

[PaperclipGod]

Originally posted by: Lonyo
the AMD64 is single channel normal RAM

Err... the AMD64 uses DDR ram.

 

[jpprod]

Just a thing to consider; the Socket-940 might have a long-term upgrade path as it's possible to use 100-series (ie. a single-processor model) Opterons on a Socket-940 Athlon/FX motherboard. And the Opteron's not going to have a change in the form factor anytime soon.

 

[dguy6789]

1. Socket 939 will be the final socket for the amd 64 fx. it will be whats used 80% of the cpus lifetime, from when it launches to the end of the amd 64fx.

2. Yes, socket 939 will be dual channel.

3. No, socket 939 will not require registered memory to run.

4. yes, the top end amd 64 cpus a year from now should be faster then current amd 64 fx cpus.

Im glad i could be of help.

 

[ArvinC]

Thanks for the info, guys. Looks like I will TRY to hold out for the 939 FXs...but the possibility of the Athlon64 at higher clock speeds matching/outperforming the FX series is very tempting. Oh well, D3 and HL2 are still not with us...so I can hold out that much longer!

Cheers! :beer:

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: PaperclipGod

Originally posted by: Lonyo
the AMD64 is single channel normal RAM

Err... the AMD64 uses DDR ram.

Are you saying DDR is not what is considered "normal"?

 

[andreasl]

Have a look at this AMD roadmap (official).

It mentions the current Athlon 64 being replaced by a CPU codenamed Newcastle. It has been suggested by some people that this will be a K8 with 512KB of L2 on both Socket 754 and the upcoming 939 (dual channel DDR). It reportedly has a diesize of 150 sq mm vs 193 sq mm of the current version, further supporting the smaller L2 cache. The Athlon FX will also move to Socket 939 (but AMD will continue to provide it for socket 940 for a long time still) but will keep it's 1MB of L2 and the high prices. It might be worth waiting for Socket 939 to appear, and IF they make an Athlon 64 for this socket as well, go for it instead of the FX. The extra L2 won't be worth the huge price premium that the FX line has.

 

[ArvinC]

The Athlon FX will also move to Socket 939 (but AMD will continue to provide it for socket 940 for a long time still) but will keep it's 1MB of L2 and the high prices. It might be worth waiting for Socket 939 to appear, and IF they make an Athlon 64 for this socket as well, go for it instead of the FX. The extra L2 won't be worth the huge price premium that the FX line has.

Hello. Thanks for the info. I had been studying the roadmap on AMD's site since Anand posted it, but do you think that the FX will continue to be "ramped" up clockspeed-wise as the Athlon64? Or do you think that AMD will introduce faster A64's more often?

I am leaning toward the upcoming FX 939 if it is indeed dual-channel. However, if the newer FXs require registered memory, that may definately be a deal-breaker.

 

[BD231]

This processor is way to new right now man, and if you've watched CPUs evolve, they always have their biggest changes EARLY. Be patient, or you might end up being stuck like the people with Wilmette P4's.