Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 32
  1. #1
    Member Quattro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Dubai, U.A.E
    Posts
    2,079

    After S939... What's next?

    So what's going to be the next big jump for processors as we know them?

    • Dual Cores?
      128bit?
      Something that will blow us away?


    What do you think it will be?

    I reckon dual cores will be the next major thing that will be mainstream in about 2 years, maybe less.
    Need a new sig

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    3,766
    Quote Originally Posted by Quattro
    So what's going to be the next big jump for processors as we know them?

    • Dual Cores?
      128bit?
      Something that will blow us away?


    What do you think it will be?

    I reckon dual cores will be the next major thing that will be mainstream in about 2 years, maybe less.
    The first dual cores will be compatible with the s939 socket. However, there is a very strong possibility that AMD will adopt DDR2 once it begins to provide an actual performance benefit over DDR. Once this occurs, it will be necessary to formulate yet another socket, as DDR2 is comprised of more pins than standard DDR.

    deception``

  3. #3
    Member OC-Master's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    3,397
    Quote Originally Posted by Quattro
    So what's going to be the next big jump for processors as we know them?

    • Dual Cores?
      128bit?
      Something that will blow us away?


    What do you think it will be?

    I reckon dual cores will be the next major thing that will be mainstream in about 2 years, maybe less.
    Unfortuneatly, AMD will be changing the socket design yet again from S939 to a socket design of over a 1000 pins to support DDRII technology. Fortuneatly, this wont happen untill at least Q1 2006 so its a good year's away.

    Next big jump for AMD will be the K9 core which rumor has it AMD renamed to K10 which sports Dual cored CPUs. At first, Dual cored CPUs will be slower than single cored CPUs in almost every task due to most applications not having multi thread capabilities.

    AMD has already told us that Dual core Athlon64s will be compatible with current generation S939 (2000 HTT) and will start at clock speeds around 3GHz (2X1.5GHz).

    I cant say much because its all up in the air and specs could change, but I can tell you there will be some dual cored Socket 939 chips to come next yeat.

    EDIT: As an interesting fact, it seems that Socket 939 (Or 940/754 for the matter) was specifically designed for Dual core operations with current hypertransport technology. The CPU it self only uses 1000MHz of bandwidth with current Winchester chips yet HTT is actually effectively double that (2000HTT) because it possess bi signals which means you can send signal both ways at full speed. So technically, Winchester chips can only consume half of the hypertransport bandwidth when working at full speed. Dual cored CPUs would require double the FSB which would effectively consume that bi-directional extra bus speed that HTT gives us more effectively than a single cored CPU.


    OC-Master
    Last edited by OC-Master; 11-24-04 at 02:28 PM.
    RIG:
    ASUS A8N-SLI Deluxe nForce4 SLI | 1805:Bios
    AMD Athlon X2 4200+ | 2733MHz
    4.00GB OCZ PC3200 | 400MHz 2-3-2-5-2T
    2.00TB Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 (4X500)
    1.00GB Radeon HD 4870 | CORE/MEM 790 / 3840
    Creative X-Fi Fatality Champion Platinum
    OCZ 850Watt Xtreme PSU | MS Windows Vista Ultimate x64 Edition
    Acer 26" Wide LCD 1920X1200 5ms | Sunbeam Fully Mod BlueUV Acrylic Case

  4. #4
    Member Quattro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Dubai, U.A.E
    Posts
    2,079
    Only a year away?

    But the new ones will not be very quick will they?
    I was planning on keeping my S754 2ghz for a year, I wonder what will be around during that time.


    Anyone know what my avatar is about?
    Need a new sig

  5. #5
    Member OC-Master's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    3,397
    Quote Originally Posted by Quattro
    Only a year away?

    But the new ones will not be very quick will they?
    I was planning on keeping my S754 2ghz for a year, I wonder what will be around during that time.


    Anyone know what my avatar is about?
    Intel has already demostrated a crappy Workstation Dual cored setup which showed how slow current Dual cored chips will be with single threaded applications.

    A 3GHz Dual cored Athlon64 running a single threaded application is slower than a Athlon64 2800+. But then again, if what you work worth is only multi threaded applications than the dual cored CPU would smoke any single cored CPU.
    RIG:
    ASUS A8N-SLI Deluxe nForce4 SLI | 1805:Bios
    AMD Athlon X2 4200+ | 2733MHz
    4.00GB OCZ PC3200 | 400MHz 2-3-2-5-2T
    2.00TB Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 (4X500)
    1.00GB Radeon HD 4870 | CORE/MEM 790 / 3840
    Creative X-Fi Fatality Champion Platinum
    OCZ 850Watt Xtreme PSU | MS Windows Vista Ultimate x64 Edition
    Acer 26" Wide LCD 1920X1200 5ms | Sunbeam Fully Mod BlueUV Acrylic Case

  6. #6
    Member Quattro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Dubai, U.A.E
    Posts
    2,079
    Ah... I see.

    But when we get 2 cores that can do multithreading, that will when we will have some serious performance.

    I'm kinda looking forward to the next big leap.
    I have to say my 64bit if really quick but it wasn't a big leap as I was perhaps expecting. Don't get me wrong it is blindly quick and amazing how far we've come in say, just 5 years.
    Need a new sig

  7. #7

    c(π*199780) Senior Member
    c627627's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    11,332
    Quote Originally Posted by OC-Master
    AMD has already told us that Dual core Athlon64s... will start at clock speeds around 3GHz (2X1.5GHz).
    Where did you get the 1.5 GHz x 2 info please?

    First dual cores for Socket 939 time frame looks like toward the beginning of 2006.

    That means that if the new socket as you say is Q1 2006, it may only be for servers and that the new socket for desktops is much further away unless AMD releases dual core 939s at almost the same time as dual core for the new socket which makes no marketing sense.

    Is 2007 too far away for the new desktop socket? 754 and 939 were more than a year apart...


    and no I don't know what the avatar is.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    3,766
    It's way too early to speculate on the performance of dual cores or how they will be marketed. All we do know is that the first ones will be s939 compatible and should begin to surface toward the end of the year.

    deception``

  9. #9
    Disabled
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Uk
    Posts
    1,899
    It would be nice for AMD cpu's to have a hyperthreading type feature that Intel CPU's have.

  10. #10

    c(π*199780) Senior Member
    c627627's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    11,332
    Quote Originally Posted by deception``
    ...and should begin to surface toward the end of the year.

    deception``
    We're still in 2004.

    signed,
    c627627


  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    3,766
    Quote Originally Posted by c627627
    We're still in 2004.

    signed,
    c627627

    I was referring to 2005. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

    deception``

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    1,279
    I read that AMD is targeting mid 2005 for the release of dual cores. So we're looking about 8-10 months.
    main rig - 2500k @ 4.8GHz, under water | P8P67 Dlx | 2x4gb Crucial Ballistix Sport | eVGA 9800GX2 | Corsair HX620 | 3x80gb SSD raid0, 150gb Raptor, 2x1tb raid1 | Ubuntu 13.10 / Win7 Pro
    Steambox - E4400 @ 3.2GHz, TT120 | P5B | 2x1gb Super*Talent | 8400 GS | generic psu | 80gb WD | Toshiba HD-DVD | Ubuntu 13.10 & Steam
    HTPC - Sempron 3400 @ 2.5GHz | ECS nForce3-A | 2x512mb DDR416 | Ti4600 | Antec EW 380 | 120gb, 250gb & 500gb drives | Ubuntu w/ XBMC

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    3,766
    Quote Originally Posted by doublejack
    I read that AMD is targeting mid 2005 for the release of dual cores. So we're looking about 8-10 months.
    Yes, mid 2005 is the target. Knowing AMD, however, it is more likely that their release date will be pushed back to the end of the year (2005, that is ). I suspect a run-of-the-mill paper launch a good month or so before we even begin to see the actual product.

    deception``

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    526
    Quote Originally Posted by OC-Master
    Intel has already demostrated a crappy Workstation Dual cored setup which showed how slow current Dual cored chips will be with single threaded applications.

    A 3GHz Dual cored Athlon64 running a single threaded application is slower than a Athlon64 2800+. But then again, if what you work worth is only multi threaded applications than the dual cored CPU would smoke any single cored CPU.
    hey, dont make fun of my A64 2800+!!!!

    she's plenty fast and OCs better than all of these higher priced A64s

  15. #15

    c(π*199780) Senior Member
    c627627's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    11,332
    Quote Originally Posted by doublejack
    I read that AMD is targeting mid 2005 for the release of dual cores. So we're looking about 8-10 months.
    Where did you read about it being mid year instead of Q4 2005?
    It would be nice if it was mid year instead of Q4 so that they can go down in price by then but if it's Q4, that may mean December 2005 + these are going to be FX-class CPUs which means we shouldn't be surprised with an $850 tag.

    It's going to be Venice, not dual core , most people will buy next year and probably well into the year after that.

  16. #16
    Member OC Detective's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    4,691
    Everyone needs to remember that for AMD you will only see dual core for the server market for at least the first few months (similar to Opteron v A64 launch dates) - this is because the server market is more ideally suited as most applications are multi threaded (unlike games which are primarily single threaded applications).
    Although I will not say a 3Ghz dual core is worse at single threads than a 1.8Ghz A64 it is undoubtedly true that single cores are better at handling single threaded applications.
    Until games start becoming multi threaded I see little point in gaming enthusiasts going multi core for those more into encoding etc however it will be a different story.

  17. #17
    jcw122's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,707
    Quattro...what IS ur avatar about?
    "YES! I AM INVINCIBLE!!!"
    Folding for Team 32!
    Gaming Nick: new_Faction64 or CharminULTRA
    CPU-AMD Athlon 64 3000+ 2.0Ghz@2.2Ghz (was 2.4) Socket 754, VENICE
    Memory-Crucial Ballistix 2x512MB @ 220mhz 2.5-2-2-5
    Motherboard-No Idea My DFI Died
    Video Card-MSI ATI 9800XT---412/390(was 424/395)---w00t! Flashed
    PSU-Forton Blue Storm 500w

    Currently Air Cooled w/ Scythe Ninja and AC VGA Silencer
    R.I.P. Project: Humidity
    Heatware

  18. #18
    Member G0DZILLA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    129
    You have to remember you 64 bit isn't even being utilized yet so once 64 bit applications start you will notice a difference.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    529
    Just because each of the cores in a dual-core A64 will be running 1.5GHz (or so), doesn't mean it's a "3GHz" CPU. Dual cores don't effectively increase clock speed and they won't be referred to that way.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    3,766
    Quote Originally Posted by DanIdentity
    Just because each of the cores in a dual-core A64 will be running 1.5GHz (or so), doesn't mean it's a "3GHz" CPU. Dual cores don't effectively increase clock speed and they won't be referred to that way.
    Like I said, we have no real information of dual cores from either Intel or AMD. So it is rather moot to speculate on their clock speed, how they will be marketed, or how they will perform. Better to sit tight on and wait on this one.

    deception``

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •