Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 17 to 32 of 32

Thread: HEXUS.beans :: AMD Athlon 64 FX-64 Launch date?

  1. #17
    Flying prans are the flalalum Veles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Bristol/Cardiff (Uni), UK
    Posts
    1,333
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    3 times in 3 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert
    Yes, but AM2 isn't exactly that competitive to the conroe is it?
    It's not meant to be! Not yet at least.

    This is basically what intel did a while ago with socket LG774 or whatever it is. It's just a change to DDR2, no-one expected it to be AMDs conroe killer. They will release a new architecture that will rival conroe's core architecture for the AM2 platform.
    Last edited by Veles; 22-06-2006 at 01:20 PM.

  2. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    305
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    from gaming benchmarks it seems that you would need to get 2.4-2.6ghz out of a conroe to beat 2.8-2.9ghz out of an AMD, at current pricing that is impressive

    thats going to be a £300 chip beating a £600 chip which is good but given the overpricing of the FX chips, its not the revolution that the hype is suggesting

    if AMD sell their current dual core range at £150-300 (3800+ to 5000+) theyll be competitive and what is also important is that almost everyone has an AMD 939 now... of those the single-core users are the ones wholl NEED an upgrade an AMD x2 means spending money on a new chip, whereas conroe is a new chip, memory and motherboard all at once

    add to this, while theres still life in AMD single core chips, theres still a hell of a life left in dual core chips with multithreading soon... who is going to want to spend all that money on an entire barebones when it will barely make a difference without a new gpu

    conroe is great but why does anyone who is strapped for cash need it with GPU limitations as they are and will be for the foreseeable future?

  3. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    83
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked
    5 times in 3 posts
    • moshpit's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus TUF X570-Plus(WiFi)
      • CPU:
      • Ryzen 7 5800X
      • Memory:
      • 32Gb (4x8Gb) 3200mhz Corsair Vengeance RGB
      • Storage:
      • Corsair MP600 M.2 500Gb PCIe 4.0, Toshiba X300 6Tb SATA
      • Graphics card(s):
      • PNY RTX 3090 24Gb XLR8 Revel Epic-X
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX850i
      • Case:
      • Corsair Carbide C400
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Viewsonic XG2703-GS 1440p@165hz IPS Gsync
      • Internet:
      • d-220mbs/u-22mbs
    Reverse Hyperthreading could completely turn this equation around and at least appears to be coming MUCH sooner then many of us anticipated.

    http://babelfish.altavista.com/babel...%2F22558.shtml

    There's no question whatsoever that if this turns out to be true, Conroe would be in trouble before it even launches. AMD is keeping very mum on the subject tho, it's looking more and more like a sneak attack planned for launch alongside FX-64, but planned to support ALL AM2 X2's and FX's.

  4. #20
    rad
    rad is offline
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    54
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by -ChEM-
    from gaming benchmarks it seems that you would need to get 2.4-2.6ghz out of a conroe to beat 2.8-2.9ghz out of an AMD, at current pricing that is impressive

    thats going to be a £300 chip beating a £600 chip which is good but given the overpricing of the FX chips, its not the revolution that the hype is suggesting

    if AMD sell their current dual core range at £150-300 (3800+ to 5000+) theyll be competitive and what is also important is that almost everyone has an AMD 939 now... of those the single-core users are the ones wholl NEED an upgrade an AMD x2 means spending money on a new chip, whereas conroe is a new chip, memory and motherboard all at once

    add to this, while theres still life in AMD single core chips, theres still a hell of a life left in dual core chips with multithreading soon... who is going to want to spend all that money on an entire barebones when it will barely make a difference without a new gpu

    conroe is great but why does anyone who is strapped for cash need it with GPU limitations as they are and will be for the foreseeable future?

    This is very sensible thinking.
    Last edited by rad; 23-06-2006 at 01:30 AM.

  5. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    14
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by rad
    I am confident Conroe will still outperform AMD, but not by much in games, espescially at high resolution (eg 1600 x 1200).
    My prediction is that it will only be 5-10%.
    But that's a given (and always has been) - once the bottleneck lies outside the CPU's domain, it can't do anything to speed things up.

  6. #22
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    14
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Veles
    It's not meant to be!
    (on how AM2 X2s don't compete well with Core 2 Duos)
    This is quite the rediculous statement, you can't seriously be thinking AMD didn't try for the lead with AM2?

    In fact, they did try, got the performance lead, and still have it for another few weeks, when Intel will one-up 'em. They'll have failed, ultimately, but they still tried.

  7. #23
    Banhammer in peace PeterB kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    31,023
    Thanks
    1,870
    Thanked
    3,381 times in 2,718 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 32GB DDR4 3200 CL16
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 970Evo+ NVMe
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGF
      • Internet:
      • rubbish
    Quote Originally Posted by Proesterchen
    This is quite the rediculous statement, you can't seriously be thinking AMD didn't try for the lead with AM2?
    Well I for one don't think AMD tried to beat conroe with AM2. I think they deliberately refreshed the A64 model with just an upgrade to the memory chip to support DDR2 because DDR2 is now the mainstream component choice. They also took the chance to change socket to one that better supports different coolers, given that people were going to have to have new boards for DDR2 memory anyway.

    I think AMD are a relatively innovative company and I don't believe all their efforts for x months would just result in the same chip with DDR2 support

  8. #24
    Registered+
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Guernsey CI
    Posts
    25
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by -ChEM-
    of those the single-core users are the ones wholl NEED an upgrade an AMD x2 means spending money on a new chip, whereas conroe is a new chip, memory and motherboard all at once
    I doubt AMD single core users will upgrade soon to the 939 x2 range. surely most would think of switching to AM2 or even wait a little longer for AMD to pull their 'secret' finger out.

    I Honestly think Conroe will actually convert a few AMD hillbillies, even if it does mean a new chip, memory and board. Time will tell i guess. Will be interesting to see how the .sharewatch looks from july-dec.
    And God said "Let there be light." But then the program crashed because he was trying to access the 'light' property of a NULL universe pointer.

  9. #25
    Registered+
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    23
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    • Cannyone's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI P7N Diamond
      • CPU:
      • Q9450
      • Memory:
      • OCZ DDR2-1000 - 4GB
      • Storage:
      • 4 each Seagte 7200.10s - 1.3TB total
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Palit 8800GT Sonic 1GB - 2 ea in SLI
      • PSU:
      • Antec 850W Quattro
      • Case:
      • Coolermaster Stacker 830 Evo
      • Operating System:
      • Vista 32 Ultimate
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung 245BW
      • Internet:
      • 7MB DSL - Qwest
    I was all excited about Conroe when it was first announced. And I even told a friend I'd never upgrade to 939-pin at one point (I've been using 754 pin for about 2 years). But recently I upgraded my memory and motherboards in my two main systems. The motherboards were largely intented to give me PCIe graphics and try something besides the ubiquitous Nvidia chipset. But along the way I discoverd that I didn't have to suffer some of the memory limitations imposed by Nvidia.

    Add to this the recent drops in prices on single core 939 pin CPUs, and I have decided to "upgrade". The key here is that I only need a motherboard and processor. So since I can get a combo deal that will give me better overclocking options, I simply can't pass it up.

    The bottom line for me is that I don't anticipate upgrading to Conroe/Core 2 Duo now, until at least the second half of next year. See I don't think of my PC as if it was an "ePenis". There isn't a significant amount of multi-threaded applications available at this point. And for games anything over 60fps is overkill! So if I can get a Venice Core to say 2.7-2.8 GHz, I'll be fine. Later this year, if the prices on a decent speed X2 become attractive I might make another upgrade, but I'm really not expecting that.

    I just know that a Core 2 Duo and a quality motherboard would cost me at least 2X what this current "upgrade" would cost, and that's not talking about the added cost of 2GB each of DDR2 (which won't really improve performance). At the same time I'm still very interested in Core 2 - having Intel's influence upon software developement will mean that 64-bit extensions and multi-threading will eventually become mainstream. Until then I will continue down the "low road" and it won't really matter.

  10. #26
    DR
    DR is offline
    on ye old ship HEXUS DR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    HEXUS HQ, Elstree
    Posts
    13,412
    Thanks
    1,060
    Thanked
    841 times in 373 posts
    Conroe is soo last week





    Clue CPU-Z doesn't detect the Cache properly... ;})
    Last edited by DR; 24-06-2006 at 10:23 AM.

  11. #27
    Banned Smokey21's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Stafford, Midlands
    Posts
    1,752
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    I can see Intel hiking up there Conroe prices.

    A Dual Core AMD at 3Ghz with 2x1Mb is pretty tasty, but not for the price you will pay.

  12. #28
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    8
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by David
    Conroe is soo last week





    Clue CPU-Z doesn't detect the Cache properly... ;})
    Yum! Looks like a Kentsfield processor!

  13. #29
    lazy student nvening's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    4,656
    Thanks
    196
    Thanked
    31 times in 30 posts
    I dont get the 4 cores???
    (\__/)
    (='.'=)
    (")_(")

  14. #30
    Moderator chuckskull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The Frozen North
    Posts
    7,713
    Thanks
    951
    Thanked
    690 times in 463 posts
    • chuckskull's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z77-D3H
      • CPU:
      • 3570k @ 4.7 - H100i
      • Memory:
      • 32GB XMS3 1600mhz
      • Storage:
      • 256GB Samsung 850 Pro + 3TB Seagate
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 980Ti Classified
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic M12 700W
      • Case:
      • Corsair 500R
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus VG278HE
      • Internet:
      • FTTC
    I'm not really expecting this generations chips diputes to be settled until we hit quad core.

    and then AMD's on chip memory controller plays more a spart in the speed stakes and this whole argument will start again.

    I'll just be taking advantage of reduced 939 X2's and waiting for all this to play out.

  15. #31
    Banhammer in peace PeterB kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    31,023
    Thanks
    1,870
    Thanked
    3,381 times in 2,718 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 32GB DDR4 3200 CL16
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 970Evo+ NVMe
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGF
      • Internet:
      • rubbish
    Quote Originally Posted by nvening
    I dont get the 4 cores???
    Do you understand dual cores? If so, just imagine two dual core chips on the same die and you've got four cores

    Kentsfield is nice, but there were some mutterings about how efficient various links were - the benchmarks certainly look nice but AMDs architecture should be more efficient at quad-core.

  16. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    83
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked
    5 times in 3 posts
    • moshpit's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus TUF X570-Plus(WiFi)
      • CPU:
      • Ryzen 7 5800X
      • Memory:
      • 32Gb (4x8Gb) 3200mhz Corsair Vengeance RGB
      • Storage:
      • Corsair MP600 M.2 500Gb PCIe 4.0, Toshiba X300 6Tb SATA
      • Graphics card(s):
      • PNY RTX 3090 24Gb XLR8 Revel Epic-X
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX850i
      • Case:
      • Corsair Carbide C400
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Viewsonic XG2703-GS 1440p@165hz IPS Gsync
      • Internet:
      • d-220mbs/u-22mbs
    Quad core won't be the gamers best friend until multithreading actually becomes common in gaming, which is a long way away still, or AMD gets RHT working, if ever...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. PSU Calculator
    By Hullz-Modz in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 146
    Last Post: 10-04-2008, 07:07 PM
  2. AMD Athlon FX-60 launch date confirmed
    By Steve in forum HEXUS News
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-12-2005, 01:44 PM
  3. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 20-04-2005, 08:40 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 13-04-2005, 10:50 PM
  5. Do you get an 'XP rating' applied when you o/c?
    By Austin in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 11-12-2003, 03:10 PM

Posting Permissions

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