I don't think I would say "lack of dual-channel memory is a benefit for s754".
Yes, AMDs PR numbers do take duel-channel memory into account, but one thing that is overlooked is that a lot of benchmarks purposely try to eliminate variables outside of core logic and cache. This means the increased bandwith provided by duel-channel memory might provide quicker responce or smoother operation that is not shown by benchmarks alone.
I'm not trying to say that this is fact as I don't have the equipment to test this out, I'm just questioning that some of the benchmarks used to compare the two might not show the true benifit of duel-channel memory.
Also, wouldn't the arguement about matching DIMMs have little relavance to this discussion?
The s939 uses individual memory controllers for each channel so the only requirement should be that the memory operates at the same speed and timings (the same requirement a s754 system would have if two memory sticks where used).
I think s754 is a good option to have, but it wouldn't surprise me if a duel-channel s939 has a more responsive feel.
One reason to go the 939 route is to get the 90nm core revisions. Those processors use less power than the their 130nm 754 cousins (and produce less heat). Over a year period I wonder how much electricity difference there is running to the two. HMMM. 5 dollars? 20 dollars? I guess it depends on whether you run your system continually (like me) or whether you are a part time user. Everyone is focused on initial cost but I missed the awareness of newer revisions for the 939 if it was posted before.
this is what like the 100th thread on this topic? i think by now everyone knows the advantages and disadvantages of each platform. might as well just tag your thread "useless bickering: here."
if you want i can go dig up all the old threads, but i dont feel like sifting through them right now.
if you want i can go dig up all the old threads, but i dont feel like sifting through them right now.
KoolAidKid
Golden Member
- Apr 29, 2002
- 1,932
- 0
- 76
The upgradability argument is overused. Here's why:
1) More expensive items depreciate faster. As time goes on the difference in value between a 754 and a 939 motherboard will shrink. A year from now you can easily sell your 754 board, add $10 (or less), and buy a 939 board.
2) Upgrades usually require the replacement of multiple components. Every upgrade that I've done over the past 15 years has involved replacing at least the CPU and motherboard, and oftentimes the RAM as well. Why spend more for upgradability when your probably going to want/have to replace the motherboard with your next upgrade anyway?
1) More expensive items depreciate faster. As time goes on the difference in value between a 754 and a 939 motherboard will shrink. A year from now you can easily sell your 754 board, add $10 (or less), and buy a 939 board.
2) Upgrades usually require the replacement of multiple components. Every upgrade that I've done over the past 15 years has involved replacing at least the CPU and motherboard, and oftentimes the RAM as well. Why spend more for upgradability when your probably going to want/have to replace the motherboard with your next upgrade anyway?
The power, heat and cooling does matter. The difference between Newcastle and Winchester/Venice at the same clock speed is 14W at idle and 30W at load. 14W doesn't add up to that much on your electric bill, maybe $10 a year, but it does make a big difference in fan noise and cooling. Test is here.
The arguments for S939 so far are as follows:
1) Better overclockability/more frequency headroom
2) Better upgradeability/more "futureproof"/cheaper in the long-run
3) Better heat/power output
The counterarguments for S754 so far are as follows
1) 90nm Semprons can overclock about as much as their S939 Venice/Winchester counterparts
2a) It's cheaper to get an S754 now and use the money saved to get better associated hardware.
2b) The user is able to sell the S754 mobo/CPU and pay a marginal amount to upgrade to a S939 platform in the future
2c) S939's upgradeability is moot since most of the time you'll need to upgrade the rest of the system anyway.
3) Semprons have lower heat/power output
However, I think that we should segregate the CPUs into different classes, as mentioned by others in previous posts.
In the low end side, there's no doubt that S754 is the obvious choice since Semprons are cheaper, have lower power/heat output and some are highly overclockable as well. The price/performance ratio favors S754 systems, and at the low end, price/performance ratio rules.
In the high end side, S939 systems are also obvious since the FX series CPUs are currently the fastest systems. Overclocked, they are even faster. The fastest S754 CPU right now is a 3700+, and since these are 130nm cores AFAIK, they won't be as overclockable.
The controversial range is the mid-range section, where there's an overlap of S754 and S939 CPUs. In this range, argument 1 and 3 doesn't really hold for S754 sytems since the overlaps occur only in the A64 CPUs, and AFAIK the only S754 A64 CPUs are 130nm ones, hence they won't overclock as well, or have as lower a power/heat output as S939 CPUs. Therefore, S939 wins in overclockability and power/heat output.
However, argument 2 is still debatable. It's not entirely clear which platform will be "cheaper" in the long run. If you're one to upgrade frequently, S939 might have a few breaths more because there are a few more iterations of CPUs coming out for S939. However, if you upgrade say once a year or longer, then it depends on other factors such as the need to upgrade memory/graphics card. S939 still offers a choice between sticking with your existing platform and just plugging in a new CPU. Obviously this won't be ideal since a year from now newer and faster chipsets/memory/video cards/HDDs will be available. A S939 system now might not have SATA3/PCI-e 32x/DDR-3 support/etc. However, the choice is still there to upgrade just the CPU. As for the S754 system, the choice isn't there since AMD has made it clear that 3700+ is the end of the line, so unless you start out with a <3700+ CPU, that's as fast as you can go. Of course, you can sell your existing S754 system pay a marginal fee to upgrade to a S939 system, if you don't mind the hassle of finding a buyer and finding a "old" S939 in the future. You could also leapfrog the S939 system for whatever new system there is, and pay a price premium. However, if a user is starting off with a S754 system in the first place, I doubt he'd be willing to pay a price premium. Finally, if you're going to keep your system for a while(2+ years) without upgrading anything at all, then S754 is the obvious choice in the mid-range since it's cheaper and performs almost as well as its S939 counterparts.
1) Better overclockability/more frequency headroom
2) Better upgradeability/more "futureproof"/cheaper in the long-run
3) Better heat/power output
The counterarguments for S754 so far are as follows
1) 90nm Semprons can overclock about as much as their S939 Venice/Winchester counterparts
2a) It's cheaper to get an S754 now and use the money saved to get better associated hardware.
2b) The user is able to sell the S754 mobo/CPU and pay a marginal amount to upgrade to a S939 platform in the future
2c) S939's upgradeability is moot since most of the time you'll need to upgrade the rest of the system anyway.
3) Semprons have lower heat/power output
However, I think that we should segregate the CPUs into different classes, as mentioned by others in previous posts.
In the low end side, there's no doubt that S754 is the obvious choice since Semprons are cheaper, have lower power/heat output and some are highly overclockable as well. The price/performance ratio favors S754 systems, and at the low end, price/performance ratio rules.
In the high end side, S939 systems are also obvious since the FX series CPUs are currently the fastest systems. Overclocked, they are even faster. The fastest S754 CPU right now is a 3700+, and since these are 130nm cores AFAIK, they won't be as overclockable.
The controversial range is the mid-range section, where there's an overlap of S754 and S939 CPUs. In this range, argument 1 and 3 doesn't really hold for S754 sytems since the overlaps occur only in the A64 CPUs, and AFAIK the only S754 A64 CPUs are 130nm ones, hence they won't overclock as well, or have as lower a power/heat output as S939 CPUs. Therefore, S939 wins in overclockability and power/heat output.
However, argument 2 is still debatable. It's not entirely clear which platform will be "cheaper" in the long run. If you're one to upgrade frequently, S939 might have a few breaths more because there are a few more iterations of CPUs coming out for S939. However, if you upgrade say once a year or longer, then it depends on other factors such as the need to upgrade memory/graphics card. S939 still offers a choice between sticking with your existing platform and just plugging in a new CPU. Obviously this won't be ideal since a year from now newer and faster chipsets/memory/video cards/HDDs will be available. A S939 system now might not have SATA3/PCI-e 32x/DDR-3 support/etc. However, the choice is still there to upgrade just the CPU. As for the S754 system, the choice isn't there since AMD has made it clear that 3700+ is the end of the line, so unless you start out with a <3700+ CPU, that's as fast as you can go. Of course, you can sell your existing S754 system pay a marginal fee to upgrade to a S939 system, if you don't mind the hassle of finding a buyer and finding a "old" S939 in the future. You could also leapfrog the S939 system for whatever new system there is, and pay a price premium. However, if a user is starting off with a S754 system in the first place, I doubt he'd be willing to pay a price premium. Finally, if you're going to keep your system for a while(2+ years) without upgrading anything at all, then S754 is the obvious choice in the mid-range since it's cheaper and performs almost as well as its S939 counterparts.
Farmer
Diamond Member
- Dec 23, 2003
- 3,334
- 2
- 81
Also have a 1.5 y/o S754/9800XT AGP system. Very happy. Runs BF2 like a charm.
SonicIce:
Your saying the A64X2 is not an improvement?
Megatomic:
I will purchase your 3400+ from you if you give me a good deal. Is it Hammer core or Newcastle?
There was a thread on this a while ago.
SonicIce:
Your saying the A64X2 is not an improvement?
Megatomic:
I will purchase your 3400+ from you if you give me a good deal. Is it Hammer core or Newcastle?
There was a thread on this a while ago.
- Apr 12, 2004
- 4,771
- 0
- 76
excellent post Goi. one of our major problems is we dont know how soon AMD will change courses and cause everyone to upgrade. the deciding factors i guess when buying right now would be how often do you upgrade, and do you like to OC to super high speeds (>2.5GHz). some of my friends want a new setup and since they are on a limited bugdet i suggested 754 so they can get a better videocard to play current games they like.
Farmer
Diamond Member
- Dec 23, 2003
- 3,334
- 2
- 81
Of course. Unless you are rich as hell, when you upgrade, there will be a new socket regardless. This would be true if you were like me; upgrading or building anew once every two years (hopefully). Not so true if you like to upgrade every 6 months or so.
I am still upset at the relatively short life of S754 as the premier AMD socket. When I purchased my 64, there was no mention of S939; otherwise, I would have held off for a month or so.
I am still upset at the relatively short life of S754 as the premier AMD socket. When I purchased my 64, there was no mention of S939; otherwise, I would have held off for a month or so.
Nice post Goi but I doubt
1) the Semprom when OC performance the same as the Winnys/Vennies ?...and most go to 939 nowadays is for SATA, PCI-E, Dual Channe/Corel and yes Firewire800
1) the Semprom when OC performance the same as the Winnys/Vennies ?...and most go to 939 nowadays is for SATA, PCI-E, Dual Channe/Corel and yes Firewire800
Probably not absolute performance wise but the amount of extra clockspeed you can get out of them are probably similar? I don't know for sure since I'm not into the Sempron overclocking scene. Some people don't really overclock for all-out performance but rather just to get as much extra clockspeed as possible. As for features, I didn't list that as one of the arguments, but yeah that's certainly a valid point. However, other than dual channel/core, I believe there are S754 mobos that support all the other features you mentioned.
Originally posted by: Vernor
Originally posted by: ProviaFan
One word: dual core
Will we see <150$ s939 dual-cores ?
In the next 12 months ? Ever ?
god i can only dream...
The reason it's faster is because 3000+ 754=2GHz while 3000+ 939=1.8GHz which is my opinion is stupid....
Originally posted by: ariafrost
His response would be that WE are high.
I've been wondering about that: Does dual-channel memory overcome the 10% clock speed hike? Many benchmarks show the "Newcastle" 3400+ outperforming the "Winchester" 3500+, for example.
Mrpilot007
Senior member
- Jan 5, 2003
- 227
- 0
- 76
I have a the Athlon 64 2800 754 and I can still upgrade to the 3700. I have something faster to look forward to and not have to pay alot for it. . . so I am happy
akugami
Diamond Member
- Feb 14, 2005
- 6,210
- 2,552
- 136
Anyone who is worried about a $100 difference in price performance ratio is not going to be buying a $300 CPU to go with their $65-80 mobo. I have yet to hear from anyone who buys a $300 CPU and skimp on the cheapest mobo they can find. That's why I don't consider prices for the more expensive CPU's irrelevant to this discussion. I think most people would agree with me on this point.
Barring delays in the next socket being released, 18 months down the line, people are going to be considering a socket M2 system so memory most definitely does play a role, even if minor, in this discussion. Anyone thinking of upgrading now then upgrading in 12-18 months have to consider the impact of M2.
By my count, you save between $35-45 bucks on a good budget system that is good price/performance while keeping almost everything except for the socket the same. By your count using the much pricier higher end cpu's which no person that worried about price/performance would use it's as much as a $85 difference.
You also didn't address the time wasted re-installing your system which is also a factor. Forget tinkering. Unless you're doing extreme overclocking or resoldering parts on your motherboard or doing other mods requiring soldering there is very little tinkering required in the modern computer system. Gee, I think I'll plug the PCI card in the PCI slot. Maybe I'll plug the IDE cable in the IDE socket. In a stroke of genious I could plug the CPU in the CPU slot! It's not that I mind working on a computer system but not when it's merely upgrading my system. I'd rather be watching a show I downloaded or playing a game instead.
By no means am I saying that S754 is a bad purchase. I just don't think that it's the ideal platform for everyone because of usage and upgrading differences between individuals. To make a blanket statement saying S754 is the best solution is simply wrong. The situation where a person buys a very low end S754 mobo and then buy an expensive mid-range CPU is a small percentage of buyers and any S754 mobo purchaser is much more likely to buy a CPU under $150.
Barring delays in the next socket being released, 18 months down the line, people are going to be considering a socket M2 system so memory most definitely does play a role, even if minor, in this discussion. Anyone thinking of upgrading now then upgrading in 12-18 months have to consider the impact of M2.
By my count, you save between $35-45 bucks on a good budget system that is good price/performance while keeping almost everything except for the socket the same. By your count using the much pricier higher end cpu's which no person that worried about price/performance would use it's as much as a $85 difference.
You also didn't address the time wasted re-installing your system which is also a factor. Forget tinkering. Unless you're doing extreme overclocking or resoldering parts on your motherboard or doing other mods requiring soldering there is very little tinkering required in the modern computer system. Gee, I think I'll plug the PCI card in the PCI slot. Maybe I'll plug the IDE cable in the IDE socket. In a stroke of genious I could plug the CPU in the CPU slot! It's not that I mind working on a computer system but not when it's merely upgrading my system. I'd rather be watching a show I downloaded or playing a game instead.
By no means am I saying that S754 is a bad purchase. I just don't think that it's the ideal platform for everyone because of usage and upgrading differences between individuals. To make a blanket statement saying S754 is the best solution is simply wrong. The situation where a person buys a very low end S754 mobo and then buy an expensive mid-range CPU is a small percentage of buyers and any S754 mobo purchaser is much more likely to buy a CPU under $150.
socket changes
sunny day
do I detect tougn in cheek here?
my take- Dirt cheap socket 754 in refirb market and e-bay from thoie who just have to have a dfi 939 sli extreme
and socket 754 oc like crazy
recent poster got motherbord, cpu, cooler i.e. everything he needed to move from socket a for under $100- and he's running 2.4
what's not to like?
sunny day
do I detect tougn in cheek here?
my take- Dirt cheap socket 754 in refirb market and e-bay from thoie who just have to have a dfi 939 sli extreme
and socket 754 oc like crazy
recent poster got motherbord, cpu, cooler i.e. everything he needed to move from socket a for under $100- and he's running 2.4
what's not to like?
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: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter