AMD Will Officially Launch Improved HT Next Month Hopefully

AMD Will Officially Launch Improved HTT Next Month Hopefully

I'm still waiting to see AMD make DDR500 an official standard like they promised nine months ago when they first started talking about S939. This almost means nothing to most people but I would'nt mind getting peace and mind from motherboard manufactures stateing that their boards will garantee DDR500+ with the latest AMD processors.

Its an easy prediction that AMD will launch the new standard along with JEDEC sometime next month. All Winchester CPUs use the new 1000MHz Bus (2000HT) and for you to take full advantage of the increased bandwidth, you need to have Dual Channel DDR500.

That way, we will see even better benchmarks coming from current Winchesters and even more FPS in games. Some of you are already running Bus speeds past 1000MHz but for non overclockers, it will be good to see the speed boost.

I can almost bet AMD will launch this speed increase maybe a week after Intel launches their 1066MHz bus for there main stream desktop line.

The point of this thread is, isnt it a bad thing that hardware sites are benching Winchesters with 800MHz bus instead of there 1000MHz bus which is what the new 90nm chips are intended for? Isnt that misleading?

Thats like benching a 1066 bus Intel chip at 800MHz bus and comparing it to the competition. I think thats totally misleading.

Anyhow, that will give you the doubt that you can expect even higher benches from current AMD chips in the near future. I want to see how well an Athlon64 3000+ 1000MHz Bus chip coupled with an nForce4 Ultra or VIA K8T890 setup performs.

I think that we should see the Tomb Stone for the whole AthlonXP lineup for bang for buck once this standard is announced. VIA already has K8T890 boards for $99 US, which is decent.

Wouldnt it be nice to recommend a 64-bit computer with amples of performance to someone on a budget for cheap.

nForce4 Ultra or K8T890 $99
3000+ 1000bus chip for $150
512MB of DDR500 Dual Channel $150


OC-Master

I dont think that HT bus speeds bottleneck the athlon64 nearly as much as the FSB does on an intel rig. I've seen benchmarks where people have tested their boards running at all 5 different HTT mulitpliers, and the differences were negligible. I agree, official DDR500 support is a very good thing, but it not nearly like the jump from intel's 533-800mhz FSB.

Zac42 said:

I dont think that HT bus speeds bottleneck the athlon64 nearly as much as the FSB does on an intel rig. I've seen benchmarks where people have tested their boards running at all 5 different HTT mulitpliers, and the differences were negligible. I agree, official DDR500 support is a very good thing, but it not nearly like the jump from intel's 533-800mhz FSB.

Click to expand...

Is it true that HT does absolutely nothing for performance if your ram isnt running 1:1 with it? I heard that the amount of bandwidth your ram offers to your CPU is what determines how effecient the hyper transport is.

In that case, every Athlon64 benchmark used with Winchesters is pointless because they are benching with DDR400 only which is just stupid if you ask me. I just noticed this today lol


OC-Master

announced and delivered can be far apart though.

I think we are dealing with two different things.. I am not certain, but I think that Hypertransport links the CPU to the chipset, while the ram is directly linked to the on-die memory controller. Ram speed is determined by dividing the cpu speed, so the ram is never running asynch, it just.. uhh... runs. Thanks to the on-die controller we do not have to worry about the relationship to the HTT running to the rest of the system.

OC-Master said:

Is it true that HT does absolutely nothing for performance if your ram isnt running 1:1 with it? I heard that the amount of bandwidth your ram offers to your CPU is what determines how effecient the hyper transport is.

In that case, every Athlon64 benchmark used with Winchesters is pointless because they are benching with DDR400 only which is just stupid if you ask me. I just noticed this today lol

OC-Master

Click to expand...

This is not stupid. Despite AMD's move to 5x HTT, the fact of the matter remains that DDR400 is the standard at this point and time. Having said this, it is good for A64's to be benched using DDR400 to provide a level benchmarking environment. Without a DDR400 benchmarking standard, we would not be able to draw clear performance differences between an A64 and P4, or even a Winchester from a Newcastle/Clawhammer.

deception``

I do no exactly get the point, doesn't all S939 run 1000MHz HT??? As someone has posted, it has nothing to do with the performance of a system.

I think that we are still thinking too much about the older K7/P4 architectures.. With your barton/northwood, you have a 200mhz FSB (either double or quad-pumped) This was the speed of the link between the CPU and memory controller(northbridge). For best performance, you wanted ram the opperates at the same speeds, so it is in synch with the memory controller. If the ram was not in synch, there was a big performance hit. But, now that memory is run directly off the cpu, it is always in synch, because memory speed is derived straight from the CPU speed. Yes, all 939s run a 1000mhz HTT link to the rest of the system, but not to the memory

You shoud change the title. You confused me by saying HT. HT is really "hyper-threading". You were really refering to HTT.

As for the bus increase, Im sure they will do it eventually. Mainly to be honest they dont need to.

So.... is this mean we're going to see something like
1000HTT..... SOOO.... CPU's running at 1000(HTT) x 2.6(Multiplier) ????

Hypertransport runs at 200 mhz with a 5x multiplier, for 1000mhz. CPU speed is found by the CPU mutiplier times 200 mhz HTT (10x200, 11x200,10X250 for a good OC...). The Hypertransport bus is speced to run at 1000,hz, so when you overclock to 250, then you want to reduce the HTT multiplier to 4, keeping it at 1000 mhz.

I'd suggest taking a look at Gautam's A64 101 thread, as all of this is explained within.

Yes I know how A64 works, but what is all the topic of this thread is about??? If DDR500 was the new standard for A64, it'll make it 250x4 HTT on S939, and CPU would run something like 250X10.5. If the HTT bus is currently too slow like OC-Master has said, there needs to be an improvement for HTT bandwidth greater than DDR500.

OC-Master said:

The point of this thread is, isnt it a bad thing that hardware sites are benching Winchesters with 800MHz bus instead of there 1000MHz bus which is what the new 90nm chips are intended for? Isnt that misleading?

Thats like benching a 1066 bus Intel chip at 800MHz bus and comparing it to the competition. I think thats totally misleading.
OC-Master

Click to expand...

It is not a bad thing at all. HTT bandwidth is a non-issue at the moment. Because A64's utilize an on-die memory controller, there is no memory bus overhead imposed on the HTT bus. As a result, the HTT bus is grossly unsaturated. This is why changing the LDT multipler has a negligable impact on performance.

The speed your RAM is running at is completely unrelated to HTT bus speed. Memory bus frequency is derived directly from CPU speed using a divider, despite what mobo makers would like you to believe.

Benching an Intel CPU at an 800MHz FSB vs a 1066 FSB like it was designed for is a completely different scenario. The FSB in an Intel system has the overhead of the memory bus so it can be saturated quite easily.

Soooo....your're telling me that when I upgrade, my BH-6 Mushkin RAM will not be optimizerd for full bandwidth?

Damn it....

*starts looking for ebayable items*

your ram can work as fast it is capable of.. Ram speeds and HTT bus speeds aretwo different things... I dont know how it could not run at it's full bandwidth...

-=Ambush=- said:

Soooo....your're telling me that when I upgrade, my BH-6 Mushkin RAM will not be optimizerd for full bandwidth?

Damn it....

*starts looking for ebayable items*

Click to expand...

As long as you give it some good volts your bh-6 at 2-2-2-x timings will be quite the nice commodity. However, it is strongly recommended that you pick up some TCCD for the greatest compatibility with majority of motherboards.

deception``

Glad i didnt listen to anyone and got pc4200 Ram instead of pc3200

CandymanCan said:

Glad i didnt listen to anyone and got pc4200 Ram instead of pc3200

Click to expand...

PC4x ram makes for some easy 1:1 overclocks, but TCCD is still optimal if you're looking for tight timings.

deception``

TCCD wasnt even out when i got my A64 4-5 months ago, everyone or most people said to buy some BH5 ram or something that can run with goo timmings cuss 1:1 ratios didnt matter anymore. I didnt listen and got some pc4200 cuss it was dirt cheap only $120 from KOMUSA with ADATA ram and it paid off.


I know what you mean tho