- Joined
- Jul 30, 2001
- Location
- Mauritius
... and NOT socket 900 if this link is to be believed. Good news for those looking for future proofing on 939.
http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=1123&s=1
http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=1123&s=1
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Dual Core to be on Socket 939...
- Thread starter OC Detective
- Start date
With all those goodies for rev E 939 chips/dual core such as SSE3, enhanced memory controller, power management, many cache function enhancements, ... mentioned in that article, I doubt the current Nfoce3 Ultra chipset/motherboards would be able to fully take advantage of them.
So I think newer chipset and motherboards would be needed to fully performing with the rev E 939 chips/dual core.
So I think newer chipset and motherboards would be needed to fully performing with the rev E 939 chips/dual core.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2003
Socket 900 (or whatever will it be) is for DDR2 memory. It has nothing to do with dual-core as dual-core is in this case independent of chipset.
So how do the Nforce3 Ultra, Nforce4 chipsets and the corressponding motherboards position with the rev D, rev E 939 A64? Any more info about those rev D and rev E 939 chips.
I suppose the current Nforce3 Ultra chipset/board would work with rev E/dual core, but they may not be able to take full performance advantage of the future rev E chips.
By the time these dual core chips come out, people will want to get better chipset/boards at that time for performance and features.
I suppose the current Nforce3 Ultra chipset/board would work with rev E/dual core, but they may not be able to take full performance advantage of the future rev E chips.
By the time these dual core chips come out, people will want to get better chipset/boards at that time for performance and features.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2004
Dual core simply isn't as simple as it is chalked up to be, unfortunately. There are issues with addressing the bus (Is a dual-core AMD two logical processors from the bus's point of view, or is it one unit?) and memory (both cores use the same memory bus).
But it should be interesting to see anyway.
But it should be interesting to see anyway.
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2004
- Location
- Sunnyvale, CA
Single cored 3800+ A64 costs $700. Dual core 7600+ A64 for $1400......
I'm fine with AXP-M. jk
Either way, it would be much more benefitial if you get socket 900 just like 754/939. I'm sure with 900, you can take advantage of DUAL CHANNGEL DDR2-667 and what not. Plus, it'll take a looong time before software can fully integrate dual cores just like hyper-threading wasn't performing any better when it first came out.
I'm fine with AXP-M. jk
Either way, it would be much more benefitial if you get socket 900 just like 754/939. I'm sure with 900, you can take advantage of DUAL CHANNGEL DDR2-667 and what not. Plus, it'll take a looong time before software can fully integrate dual cores just like hyper-threading wasn't performing any better when it first came out.
OP
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2001
- Location
- Mauritius
- Thread Starter
- #12
Its not really that much different from the early Opteron systems that were dual core but only used one set of main memory. This is not that much different except that the two cores are now on the same die instead of being separate. Indeed from the very start AMD designed the architecture so the system request queue and APIC always had the capability of handling two cores (it was just that one core was never present).Captain Newbie said:
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2003
OC Detective said:
I think that is the most important point, that AMD designed the AMD64 around two cores. Unlike the other company that will band-aid something together. For bus intensive processing, the front bus will become the bottle neck. Even if the dual AMD64 uses a share memory bus, it still has the HT bus to take care of all the other types of data flow besides memory in/out. If the dual AMD64 uses seperate memory for each core, all the better.
For Intel to effectively counter, I see them having to propose to new set of busses, comparible to AMD. That means drawing up new specs, getting the mobo companies on board. That can't happen over night. Down stream companies will have their own R&D to do and retooling for manufacturing.
Time to market will drive Intel. I think Intel will glue two P4s together.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2003
I would like to add, that I was reading a article that stated something about AMD would have problems with its dual share the memory bus. If AMD does go to 939 with its dual memory 939 socket, that might mean that the dual core would run more like two 754s together each with their own single channel.
Heck, everyone says that the dual channel doesn't help out that much performance wise. Why would AMD waste money on pushing that unless the DC memory 939 can be used as a SC memory dual core chip?
Heck, everyone says that the dual channel doesn't help out that much performance wise. Why would AMD waste money on pushing that unless the DC memory 939 can be used as a SC memory dual core chip?
