Originally posted by: Alkaline5
If both the standard A64 and FX will be dual channel, then what's the diff. between them? Cache size?
Honestly, I don't know. But since AMD is moving to the socket 939 in order to repackage a FX processor that is capable of dual channel unbuffered RAM-use (so the FX isn't just an Opteron thats supports DDR400), it would make sense that they would introduce a number of other improvements as well. Keep in mind, also, that the Clawhammer has only one HyperTransport link (as opposed to three with the FX/Opteron), which would make multiplie-processors impossible with a Clawhammer (but then again, you can't use FX-51s in a multi-processor environment for some reason, so, I really don't know. Maybe you will be able to in the future)
Unless the FX changes from simply being a rebranded Opteron (like the EE is to the Xeon), there is no real reason for its exsistence (I don't know, it might sell better as the FX as opposed to Opteron). I doubt anyone actually owns one.
The way I see it, the only reasons to wait for S939 as opposed to getting a S754/S940 right now are:
1. Upgradeability, if you upgrade that often (I'm poor, so, the next time I upgrade, we'll be buying AMD128s)
2. Obviously, the much-vaunted 128-bit memory controller on the S939 Clawhammers (looks great on benchmarks)
3. Chipset improvement and maturation (I guess thats the word).
I would think the third reason would be the most attractive reason. Hopefully, locked AGP/PCI bus.