AMD Cores

[Gig-O-Ram]

I have plans to get the A64 for socket 939 to go with my DFI, and I have my eye on the 4000+ with a San Diego core. I know about the various cores for the Intels, with the Prescott being one of the hottest running cores on that side, as is proven with my current chip. But I don't know anything about which AMD cores run hotter or cooler, or if there is even an issue with that between the myriad cores on the AMD side.

Is the San Diego a good core, and does it run fairly cool?
What about the Venice? That core has also been suggested to me, as has going more with a 3600+ or a 3800+. I have been told that the AMD's beat the Intel's for gaming by a long shot, and given what I have now, probably even a 3000+ would be like night and day compared to my current chip.

But I really want to do a radical change from what I have now, which is why I am looking at the 4000+, because I think it would be a stellar CPU to have in order to really bump up my gaming performance. That, in addition to installing 2GB of really tight timed RAM and the GF7800GT, will hopefully (finally) put me in a position of not having to worry about graphical or fps issues ever again, (until somebody makes a game even that system couldn't handle). I think it kind of makes sense, if you think about it in terms of going from 478 pins on the chip to 939 pins...more pins and faster chip = more processing power, I would assume. Plus I've been told that the AMD pins are shorter, providing faster overall responses, like a 2.4Ghz AMD being at least as fast, or faster than a 3Ghz Intel. Is that the case?

Anyone have any thoughts on the cores, or any of my other points?

 

[Flip-Mode]

As for cores the difference between the San Diego and Venice is in the CPU cache with the Venice being 512mb L2 cache the San Diego is 1mb L2 cache.
You can buy an 939PIN Opteron with a Venus core which is in fact a San Diego for a lower price.
Hope this answers some questions about the cores.

 

[The Coolest]

As for cores the difference between the San Diego and Venice is in the CPU cache with the Venice being 512mb L2 cache the San Diego is 1mb L2 cache.
You can buy an 939PIN Opteron with a Venus core which is in fact a San Diego for a lower price.
Hope this answers some questions about the cores.

The Opterons are not Venus, they are San Diego too. Only s940 1xx Single Core Opterons code name is Venus.

Yes an Opteron is the CPU of choice if you want great performance, awesome overclockability (better than A64) and low price.
But for the price of the A64 4000+, I think you'd be better off adding some more $$$ and getting a Dual Core (DC) Opteron 165 (if you can find it) or a 170. These will own any single core system in everyday use, it will overclock like no other, it will be plenty fast for any current game. And another thing with a DC chip you're also future-proofing your system, there are already some multithreaded games and nvidia already has multithreaded drivers out for their cards, so a DC Opteron is a way better buy than a single core chip, if you can afford it.
The only reason for going single core right now would be if you can't afford a dual core (even by cutting corners).

Dual Core was the future a year ago, right now its becoming the present, don't get stuck in the past.

 

[rseven]

Yes, in that same vain, if you can't find an an Opteron, I have seen the 3800 X2 for as low as $290. Yes, it has a smaller cache(2X512) and does not OC as well as the Sandy, but still it's a damn good CPU. All of the A64's run pretty cool. Add some good air cooling and you have a lot of potential.

 

[Flip-Mode]

The Opterons are not Venus, they are San Diego too. Only s940 1xx Single Core Opterons code name is Venus.

Yes an Opteron is the CPU of choice if you want great performance, awesome overclockability (better than A64) and low price.
But for the price of the A64 4000+, I think you'd be better off adding some more $$$ and getting a Dual Core (DC) Opteron 165 (if you can find it) or a 170. These will own any single core system in everyday use, it will overclock like no other, it will be plenty fast for any current game. And another thing with a DC chip you're also future-proofing your system, there are already some multithreaded games and nvidia already has multithreaded drivers out for their cards, so a DC Opteron is a way better buy than a single core chip, if you can afford it.
The only reason for going single core right now would be if you can't afford a dual core (even by cutting corners).

Dual Core was the future a year ago, right now its becoming the present, don't get stuck in the past.

I stand corrected but evey place has the 1XX S939 listed as Venus...

 

[lordkosc]

I stand corrected but evey place has the 1XX S939 listed as Venus...

My opteron 170 is a Denmark... right????

 

[Rattle]

my 146 says venus in cpu-z all the singles are venus I believe and the 1xx duals are denmarks

 

[The Coolest]

I stand corrected but evey place has the 1XX S939 listed as Venus...

Well every place is wrong then, BN suffix stands for San Diego.

My opteron 170 is a Denmark... right????

No, all s939 DC Opterons are Toledo. CD suffix stands for Toledo.

my 146 says venus in cpu-z all the singles are venus I believe and the 1xx duals are denmarks

CPUz is wrong. s940 1xx single core are Venus and dual cores are Denmarks. on s939 code names are different. The only major thing that diffrintiates a Toledo from a Denmark, for example, is the need for registered RAM (might also be an option in memory controller) and the extra pin.

 

[Rattle]

yes it does and they are all OSA14XDAA5BN's x being a 6 in my case. SO i guess they are san diegos that are renamed venus for the opties then ?

 

[lordkosc]

Well every place is wrong then, BN suffix stands for San Diego.



No, all s939 DC Opterons are Toledo. CD suffix stands for Toledo.



CPUz is wrong. s940 1xx single core are Venus and dual cores are Denmarks. on s939 code names are different. The only major thing that diffrintiates a Toledo from a Denmark, for example, is the need for registered RAM (might also be an option in memory controller) and the extra pin.

Ok so my DUAL CORE OPTERON 170 Socket 939 is a DENMARK ?

 

[The Coolest]

They are not renamed. s939 simply has different code names for the cores. It's like a P4 and a XEON, two different socket, basically the same CPU, two different code names.
This is why a s939 SC Opteron is San Diego and a s939 DC Opteron is Toledo, just like A64s.

 

[Rattle]

They are not renamed. s939 simply has different code names for the cores. It's like a P4 and a XEON, two different socket, basically the same CPU, two different code names.
This is why a s939 SC Opteron is San Diego and a s939 DC Opteron is Toledo, just like A64s.

exactly they just come up as venus and denmark lol

 

[lordkosc]

exactly they just come up as venus and denmark lol

To add confusion I found the FULL name of the OPTERON 170 Dual Core:

AMD Opteron 170 Denmark "JackHammer" Socket939

Anyone know what the JACKHAMMER stands for?

 

[The Coolest]

Ok here's the code name list. hope this helps you all figure things out.
For a minute ignore the actual designation of a chip (A64, A64 X2, Opteron, etc).

[u][b]Socket 939 Rev E:[/u][/b]

SC 1MB L2 = SanDiego
SC 512KB L2 = Venice

DC 2x1MB L2 = Toledo
DC 2x512KB L2 = Manchester

[u][b]Socket 940 Rev E:[/u][/b]

[u]1xx:[/u]

SC 1MB L2 = Venus

DC 2x1MB L2 = Denmark

[u]2xx:[/u]

SC 1MB L2 = Troy

DC 2x1MB L2 = Italy

[u]8xx:[/u]

SC 1MB L2 = Athens

DC 2x1MB L2 = Egypt

So basically any socket 939 processor with 1MB L2 will be San Diego, and any socket 939 processor with 2x1MB L2 will be Toledo.
And that means:
s939 Single Core Opteron = San Diego
s940 Single Core 1xx Opteron = Venus

s939 Dual Core Opteron = Toledo
s940 Dual Core 1xx Opteron = Denmark

 

[lordkosc]

Ok here's the code name list. hope this helps you all figure things out.
For a minute ignore the actual designation of a chip (A64, A64 X2, Opteron, etc).

[u][b]Socket 939 Rev E:[/u][/b]

SC 1MB L2 = SanDiego
SC 512KB L2 = Venice

DC 2x1MB L2 = Toledo
DC 2x512KB L2 = Manchester

[u][b]Socket 940 Rev E:[/u][/b]

[u]1xx:[/u]

SC 1MB L2 = Venus

DC 2x1MB L2 = Denmark

[u]2xx:[/u]

SC 1MB L2 = Troy

DC 2x1MB L2 = Italy

[u]8xx:[/u]

SC 1MB L2 = Athens

DC 2x1MB L2 = Egypt

So basically any socket 939 processor with 1MB L2 will be San Diego, and any socket 939 processor with 2x1MB L2 will be Toledo

Oooh thanks for the clarification!

 

[IWasHungry]

Yes, in that same vain, if you can't find an an Opteron, I have seen the 3800 X2 for as low as $290. Yes, it has a smaller cache(2X512) and does not OC as well as the Sandy, but still it's a damn good CPU. All of the A64's run pretty cool. Add some good air cooling and you have a lot of potential.

Good info right thur. At this point, there's not much point going single core.

 

[Gig-O-Ram]

Thanks eveyone, for the advice. I will consider the dual core Opterons, and price may or may not be an issue at this point. The 4000+ I was looking at is already over $300, so maybe another $50 or $100 won't matter. Well, it will, but I will still give them due consideration. I know so little about the AMD chips, and I was thinking that the A64's were the way to go, or the Athlon XP's, and I thought that maybe the Opterons were lesser chips, similar to Celerons.

I stand corrected.

 

[Careface]

ah lol, well.. iirc, the old style opterons when used for gaming were basically the celerons of gaming, but now with these new san diego (best a64 core) cored opterons, they are now the best for gaming, and for serving (if thats the verb ).. id definately go with a dual core opteron though, especially now since they are so hot overclocking wise.. they might end up like the Venice cores and be worse at clocking with newer steppings/weeks than the old steppings/weeks. good luck with whatever you end up buying though and I hope AMD serves you well

Careface*

 

[Gig-O-Ram]

ah lol, well.. iirc, the old style opterons when used for gaming were basically the celerons of gaming, but now with these new san diego (best a64 core) cored opterons, they are now the best for gaming, and for serving (if thats the verb ).. id definately go with a dual core opteron though, especially now since they are so hot overclocking wise.. they might end up like the Venice cores and be worse at clocking with newer steppings/weeks than the old steppings/weeks. good luck with whatever you end up buying though and I hope AMD serves you well

Careface*

Thank you. I hope I get good results on AMD I kind of understand steppings...sort of like timings for the CPU - is that right?? What did you mean by steppings/weeks?

Anyway, is having an actual dual core chip, rated at, say 2.4Ghz, like having 2x 2.4Ghz chips? Like basically having a 4.8Ghz chip? If that is true, then that would rule! Or is it more like having the 2.4Ghz with two cores, to spread out the processing over the cores?

 

[Careface]

Thank you. I hope I get good results on AMD I kind of understand steppings...sort of like timings for the CPU - is that right?? What did you mean by steppings/weeks?

I guess thats one way of putting it, i never really thought about it that way lol. what i was meaning by steppings is that iirc, there were numerous threads about which of the Venice (when they first came out)'s steppings was the best. the common ones were LBBLE and CBBLE. in the end i believe that LBBLE was the better overclocker, but at the least it was the most common stepping.

what i meant by weeks was, it appeared that more of the earlier produced Venice's (say, week 15-17) were ocing better than their later partners (say, 22-25).. im not sure whether this applies now with the new opties, but I guess thats because they are new lol

Anyway, is having an actual dual core chip, rated at, say 2.4Ghz, like having 2x 2.4Ghz chips? Like basically having a 4.8Ghz chip? If that is true, then that would rule! Or is it more like having the 2.4Ghz with two cores, to spread out the processing over the cores?

its basically like having 2*2.4ghz cores, but unless the program youre using has support for multithreading, you wont see much difference between a dual core and a single core. infact, in some cases it appears to be slower. however, if you were to run 2 of the same singlethreaded application (say, 2 instances of UT2k4) then there would be pretty much no speed decrease even though there are 2 games running. try doing that with a single core and see what happens

I hope this helped, its 2:45am here and i probably didnt explain it very well but hey

Careface*