AMD says 'No' to dual Athlon XP's

[mEKbOY]

Just got a heads-up from Anthony (Scriion in the forums), who wanted to point me to this thread in Storage Review's forums. Apparently one of their users gave a pair of Athlon XP's a try in his shiny new Asus A266M-D, based on the new MPX chipset:



My new Asus A266M-D won't work in dual mode with AMD-XP's - at boot it reports:

"AMD XP CPU detected - forcing single CPU mode"

According to Asus this is a requirement being placed on manufacturers of 760MPX boards by AMD. Only MP CPU's will be allowed to run in MP mode unless someone can figure out how to trick the CPU model detection?

I guess they need to force people into the high profit MP chips!

I guess they do at that. So, does anyone want to lay any bets on what this might mean (if anything) for the future? Is AMD going to start playing "dirty" like Intel as they become bigger? Do corporate types automatically get the itch to squeeze their user base as that base grows?

Or is this just good business sense? After all, if a few enthusiasts buy Athlon XP's instead of MP's, that doesn't matter much, does it? But what if all your corporate customers start buying the cheaper XP's and giving your cash-cow MP's the cold shoulder...?

Edit: Speaking of 760MPX-based boards, Aaron just let me know that Tyan has the page up for their TigerMPX.

I got this from www.2cpu.com on there main page.

[mEKbOY]

More info on this:

no XP in dual (http://forums.2cpu.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12066)

[rugby]

I read all the threads over there about this and I sort of agree with AMD on this one. Of course this from somebody with a 760mp chipset that for right now doesn't care about what chip I run in it. Now, if Tyan produces a bios update that fixes all the stuff with the tiger mp AND disables non-mp cpu's I will be ****ed.

Darn, the price difference on xp and mp 1900's is $100 on Pricewatch! That's a huge chunk of change.

[Yobbzz]

Yea this does suck but I don't realy blame AMD they have to make money some how.

[Dissolved]

wouldnt dual mp xp amds be better then just amd xp's?

[mEKbOY]

I think this is a totaly reasonable move by AMD. Consumers are getting of on them a bit to much now a days. Intel charges a fortune for there xeon based P4 chips. Even if a MP cost $60 more than a xp its still well within reason. Lets not forget that Mp's and server boards are usualy ahefty amount of change that are meant for business server's not normal consumers. However AMD has changed this by offering some what affordable solutions. Lets not get greedy about this. Even if you do want to do a cheaper SMP solution they are offering the MP duron's.

[Dissolved]

would mp's be better the basic xp's neways?

[deenda]

mp's are better because they ARE MADE for multiprocessing applications and xp's AREN'T
you get what you pay for

[mEKbOY]

More news on this. Looks like this not going to be a Asus only deal as this is now noted in the new tyan manuel as well.
tyan (http://forums.2cpu.com/showthread.php?threadid=12084)

[Dissolved]

Originally posted by deenda
mp's are better because they ARE MADE for multiprocessing applications and xp's AREN'T
you get what you pay for

exactaly, i dunno why ud wanna try and run 2 amd xp's neways,, kinda stupid if you think about it..

[rugby]

Show me a benchmark that says 2 MP are better than 2 XP's at smp. ON the 760mp chipset they're identical cpu's. People have reported on the tyan tiger s2460 that their XP's are called MP's in the bios.

I guess I do have a little problem with their solution. The only difference between the chips being an identifier (that would allow 760mpx boards to tell) I don't agree with what they're doing. At least make the MP's have a larger cache or something to compensate for the hike in price.

[mbigna]

Don't the MP's come unlocked? That may be reason alone for the extra money!

[David]

I think that $60 (£40?) is not much more to pay for an SMP CPU

[tbirdkiri]

i paid 160 for my 1.2 mp and at the time the 1.2 tbird was 60 bux less.
but i dont regret it cause this thing hits 1.6 on air!
how could anyone in there right minds not think that was kewl?

[SickBoy]

The only objection I have to the "Forcing Single CPU" thing is that I would like it to be only for AthlonXP's - I would hope Morgan core Durons would still work. I guess they're coiming out with a DuronMP but it'll most likely be priced at a premium over a plain jane Duron anyway, which kinda defeats the purpose.

It is an interesting issue though. You know, there are 11 sets of bridges on Palo core chips. That's a lot more bridges than the TBirds, and they MUST do SOMETHING. If someone got a AthlonXP and an AthlonMP of same clock speed, maybe they could inspect them for differences in bridges - maybe "unlocking" SMP on an AthlonXP for MPX boards will be as simple as multiplier unlocking....

SB

[el]

yeah adn this means the new durons won't work so there goes a really cheap way to go dual proc.

[Cowboy X]

I agree with rugby ........... but as far as i know only the first set of XPs came MP ' unlocked '.

[muddocktor]

I guess that your best hope will be that someone hacks the bios on the mpx chipset boards and disables this sorry feature. Something like some people did with the KK266 bios that enable the ACPI disabling feature on those boards. The only difference that I know of between the MP and XP chips is the fact that AMD certifies the MP for SMP operation and doesn't check this with the XP. I could see maybe paying a $20-30 premium for a chip that is guaranteed to SMP, but not $100. That sounds like something that Intel would pull to me. They are all using the same manufacturing process after all.