Who's looking to avoid the M2? **Update: with EXTENDED POLL**

[Diasper]

Personally, I'm looking to avoid M2 entirely as it just doesn't seem to be worth it. Two things seem to be clear.

First, currently there isn't looking to be any significant speed increase planned with going to M2 - sure they'll tweak the CPU again and wrangle a few extra % but then again moving to DDR2 could equally lose some despite the first showings of lower timings RAM (3-2-2 stuff).

Outside of that AMD (towing the line like many other hardware & software producers) are including their own DRM in the form of Presidio - something quite worthwhile avoiding IMHO.

So the question is who is waiting for the M2 with any bated breath? Who is looking to avoid it entirely say until the performance increase can at least justify the added DRM?

I'll just stick to a X2 on the future ATI chipset (with SB600) - heck the ATi chipset is looking to wrangle a few percent over the typical nforce4 chipset board. (Upto 5.7% over the very best in Far Cry). That'll do me.


*Added Poll*
*Poll extended*

 

[Furen]

It's hard to make a decision without knowing more about M2 than we know at the moment. Here are some things I'm looking forward to in socket M2:

- 65nm shrink: AMD might make 65nm chips almost exclusive to M2, like they did for socket 754.

- DDR2: What can I say? I'm actually looking forward to it because of lowered power consumption, but I'm guessing DDR2 667 with tight timings will be expensive even when M2 releases.

- Pacifica: Yay, another technology to mess around with.

- Presidio: Yes, I'm actually looking forward to it, mostly because there might be some new online services that are interesting. Since AMD said we would be able to disable it, it shouldnt be anything to be afraid of. Be afraid when every cpu out there has DRM so software publishers start REQUIRING it.

- The K10 (cant remember the codenames), I bet we wont see this on socket 939.

- Power Consumption: after an initial surge in power consuption (using the 90nm process), power consumption should drop like it did on socket 939 unless the 65nm process sucks.

Things I'd dislike about M2:

- Presidio being conpulsory (AMD has said it'll be optional but who knows...)

- M2 being expensive (which it will probably be for the first months)

Socket S1 sounds very good, too. DDR2 and a smaller cpu footprint will be useful on the mobile sector, I just wish we had more info on all this.

 

[Hacp]

I'm skipping M2 def. Gonna be 3 years till i'll get a new comp, though I'm saving up already. 110 dollars saved! I jsut bought an x2 rig last month heh.

 

[DanDaMan315]

Originally posted by: Hacp
I'm skipping M2 def. Gonna be 3 years till i'll get a new comp, though I'm saving up already. 110 dollars saved! I jsut bought an x2 rig last month heh.

VIVA 939!

 

[MDE]

I'm going to milk my AGP based 939 system for as long as I can, hopefully either ATI or Nvidia will release an R520\G70 based AGP card because my 6800GT is starting to struggle at 1600x1200.

 

[rise]

i'm planning on skipping it.

how 'bout a poll diasper

 

[MBrown]

skipping.

 

[Bateluer]

I may hold off on s939 and bump up to M2 when its prevalent on the market.

It really is impossible to make any informed decision right now with the limited information we have.

IMO, AMD should pick a socket and stick with it for a while. Socket A lasted a good long while, s754 and s939 are blinks of an eye in comparison.

 

[bersl2]

Getting an X2 4400+ (eventually) and 2GB RAM, which should last me until DDR3, or in the case of DRM supremacy, will be the first and last computer I ever assemble for myself (until it goes away).

 

[Fox5]

An X2 system with high end ddr will probably come close to anything AMD will have on M2.(m2 is 940 pins right?)

However, DDR2 will eventually noticably surpass ddr because its technology will advance, while ddr will stagnate.

I'll skip something, don't know what though. If I just wanted the cheapest possible upgrade I could go 754, but if I want something that's on top I'll go with what's available at the time, if it's the near future I'll max a 939 system and skip m2, if not then I'll skip m2. Lol, it'd be something if I made it all the way though the k8/k9 generation though. I don't think I've ever skipped a cpu generation, but I may just miss out on athlon 64 and prescott.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

I skipped s754, which wasn't that big of a deal given how soon s939 came around. Given the way I've been upgrading, unless M2 is the new s754 and there will be an N5 or something the likes of what s939 was compared to s754, then I'll probably upgrade to M2 - given that Intel doesn't have a more enticing offer by then.

Reason? The fastest CPUs will most likely be available for it and not s939. DDR2 will probably be a moot point, yes we know current A64's love low latency and don't exactly thrive on insane bandwidth, but they might not have been made to, CPUs on the the M2 might. I doubt AMD will allow us many 65nm options on the 939 (if they allow any at all, 90nm on s754 isn't exactly possible except via Turion I believe) and thus M2 will probably be the only way for me to grab the next 3000+ and push it for all its worth.

Then there are the ever evolving motherboards. When I look back on the motherboards I've had since my KT266A powered Abit (My old BX one would be even more extreme, going from jumpers to BIOS to change cpu clock settings), motherboards have grown leaps and bounds better with the features they support and options they provide, I would be suprised if the evolution does not continue forward into the future, which includes the M2.

We've still yet to see some great stuff on s939, with ATI and ULi offering solutions that would easily make anyone reconsider nVidia and their nForce. With such good competition heating up this late in s939's life span, that competition should only be beginning to get good, who knows what we'll see with M2.

 

[R3MF]

skipping.

i will put a 7800GT and X2 3800 in this box and motor on happily for quite some time yet.

if M2 planned to use DDR2 800 i might have been swayed, but it doesn't, and DDR2 is inherently rubbish anyway.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: R3MF
and DDR2 is inherently rubbish anyway.

Except that it should eventually be cheaper than DDR1 (some of it is already) and it should offer larger capacities, especially for the price. If 2GB is going to become the new ideal standard for enthusiasts, DDR2 should make 4GB+ look far more reasonable than it is now and bring it sooner than DDR1 could. There are already 2 x 2GB DDR2 kits going for $400, grab a second kit and a 64bit OS and you've got 8GB of ram...although it is slow stuff and $400 isn't chump change (although a "fair" $100 per GB), however we've got it as an option this early in DDR2's lifespan, once the entire market is in full gear for it, we'll see faster and faster DDR2 (lower latency), larger capacities, and for cheaper.

 

[sbuckler]

I need to upgrade next year so will probably end up getting M2 (unless intel produce something amazing). I agree M2 won't be much faster. DDR2 will give it a bit more performance and by next year will be cheaper then DDR but nothing spectacular. Incidentally it's not like DDR3 is the solution to the worlds ills - it's only a little faster then DDR2 and has even bigger latencies.

What I care about is what comes after dual core. Will M2 take amd's triple/quad core processors like 939 takes single and now dual core? Then M2 is really worth it (and all that extra DDR2 bandwidth will be come useful for > 2 cores). If it doesn't and the first quad cores use another socket and DDR3 only then it's a bit of a dead duck.

 

[Capt Caveman]

fwiw - I was able to get 3-2-2-8 timings @ 667mhz w/ my Patriot DDR2 ram on my Intel system. DDR2 has come a long way. It's also at the same price as DDR.

 

[Pabster]

You should have put an option "...if all new 65nm AMD chips require socket M2" which is quite likely.

Shall be interesting to see all those who are chastising Intel for requiring new boards on the D series have a similiar opinion when AMD forces you to the M2 socket and that "slow, expensive" DDR2 memory.

 

[BlingBlingArsch]

personally i dont need a X2, i wouldnt never use its whole performance. why spend big money on that big mofo, and then let it idle all day?

 

[Diasper]

Sure DDR2 has come a long way and 3-2-2 is certainly impressive compared to the CAS 4/5 stuff we saw initially. However, for single or dual cores it'll offer next to nothing.

If going quad-cores then undoubtedly, they'll see some benefit but it only seems quad-core will be coming out in 2007 and first on server level chips. So given M2 is only meant to last a 1-1.5years before the next socket comes out by the time we start seeing quad-core for the desktop the next socket will ne nearly apon us.

Also, software and games taking advantage of dual-core is still some way off let alone quad-core, which will undoubtedly be exceptionally expensive.

The only thing that might make M2 more appealing is if they use the new 65nm process but don't on X2. However, given that S939 won't be going away any time soon (need mature chipsets on M2 and production to ramp up) and given how easily X2 is outselling maybe there is some hope we'll see them using some of their 65nm fab capacity on S939 ...maybe.

Why I am looking forward to the DDR3 socket after is because DDR3 will be the one staying around for longer so meaning it'll be a better investment at least regards RAM once it matures. However, at around that time they'll be introducing their new core the K10 (to compete with the Yonah-derivative on desktop Merom/Conroe). My hope is that will be the first chip to offer significant performance advantages - my hope is that they take the lead from Dothan and incorporate super fast L2 cache which allows the Dothan to benefit so significantly which in turn would help offset the lower latency RAMs.

As far as I'm concerned I see the S939 and M2 as offering very little performance and rather a 'featured' update. Howevere, a neither care for Pacifica or Presidio as neither will be of any use to me - even if Presidio is voluntary which I haven't heard about I'd still rather avoid it. Heck given the way things are going are we sure Vista will allows us to disable it and kindly re-enable it for us? To be sure I see it as being more use to system administrators if anything. Also give the RIAA or MPAA even a whiff of it and they'll try and find some way to take advantage and force you to use it.

S939 especially with the ATI chipsets coming out is looking to have some excellent and mature chipsets - this is compared to M2 where we'll have to wait some while for them to appear and settle.

 

[Diasper]

Originally posted by: Pabster
You should have put an option "...if all new 65nm AMD chips require socket M2" which is quite likely.

Shall be interesting to see all those who are chastising Intel for requiring new boards on the D series have a similiar opinion when AMD forces you to the M2 socket and that "slow, expensive" DDR2 memory.

just did

 

[xtknight]

I'll get it when I feel the need. That means I'll get the M2 platform a year or so after its release. I hate getting new RAM though. Seriously, do we need anything more than DDR? Is that what's holding us back right now? I was under the impression it was the CPU more than anything else ("general computing"-wise). I have hardly ever gotten more than one CPU per platform, except for the long-lived Athlon XP series. When I upgrade, I look to get a whole new platform (chipset(=motherboard), CPU, and sometimes RAM). I like features more than anything, and I figure should I ever need any more performance, I'll just overclock it. Trust me, if I won the lottery, I'd be all over it though.

I do wish they would stick with one socket. What do the extra pins help with? It's just because of the DDR3? Anyone care to explain why they have to keep switching sockets?

Seeing as I experiment with video encoding a lot, the A64 X2 is high on my list. Combined with the DivX Helium (multithreaded) codec, the performance would be killer. But first, I need a HUGE hard drive (and some cash).

Right now, I find it odd that there's a centralized processing unit in a PC (quote me). It's not very adept to video encoding, gaming, or anything but Microsoft Office really. The CPU has already "lost" its graphics power to the graphics card, its sound to the sound card, and network processing to the network card. Also, sometime when NVIDIA gets their PureVideo encoding accelerator working, the CPU will no longer encode video. Ageia's PhysX will then steal the last of the CPU's physics processing "thunder". Now that the CPU has a hit a speed barrier, I think we will see more and more dedicated ASICs.

 

[Elcs]

With M2 on the horizon, I may skip s754 and s939 completely, although it depends on prices and timing.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: Elcs
With M2 on the horizon, I may skip s754 and s939 completely, although it depends on prices and timing.

Same here. My AXP 2500+ and Geforce FX are really really showing their age.

-Kevin

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: xtknight
I do wish they would stick with one socket. What do the extra pins help with? It's just because of the DDR3? Anyone care to explain why they have to keep switching sockets?

The memory controller being on the CPU forces them to change the socket with new RAM technologies. While M2 is still 939 pins IIRC, it was smart for AMD to change the socket rather than have a DDR\DDR2 confusion which would probably result in chaos for anyone building an AMD based system. Also, IIRC more pins are being dedicated to delivering power to the CPU.

 

[Concillian]

<shakes Magic 8-ball>
"Ask again later"

I guess I'll have to wait and decide once there are any actual performance numbers.

 

[Concillian]

Originally posted by: xtknight

I do wish they would stick with one socket. What do the extra pins help with?

The extra pins have been speculated to be for adding more of the functions normally on the motherboard chipset onto the CPU. Like PCI-e controller.