AMD CPUs worth it?...

[retroborg]

Is the new AMD line of CPUs worth it compared to the Intel CPUs (Prescot & Extreme Edition)?

I noticed there are two different AMD CPUs.
AMD 64
AMD 64 FX
What’s the difference?

And 3 different slots: 754, 939, and 940
What are the main differences other than the pin numbers?

Are these two CPU types for all 3 of the slots?
Or is the AMD 64 for the Slot 754 & AMD 64 FX for Slot939 & 940?

Thanks in advance.

[8bit]

I'd have a Athlon64 over an Intel any day. The EE P4's are just way over priced for what you get. An Athlon64 has the benefit of being ready for 64 bit OS's and apps, games etc (Far Cry 64 is in development).

Basically it goes like this:
Socket 754 - entry level CPU's (Athlon64 2800, 3000, 3200, 3400)
Socket 939 - mid-high end units (Athlon64 3500, 3800, some FX-53's check if ordering)
Socket 940 - hi-end server and workstation units (Opteron, FX-51 and some FX-53s)

I'd recommend the socket 939 3500 or 3800 personally, the 939 FX-53 is only a little more powerful than the 3800 but a lot more expensive. The socket 940 FX's need registered memory, also expensive. If you're on a budget tho the S754 units will still give a lot of bang for your buck.

Also worth remembering is that Athlon64s don't overclock well, they get unstable very soon after the stock speeds

[DaftpuNk]

Socket Types:

The 940 pin socket is for opteron based processors, which are meant for the server segment of the market. Athlon 64 FX processors were also manufactured for this socket type, but will most likely only be on s939 now. The reason for not many people adopting the socket 940 boards was due to the fact that, although it has support for dual-channel memory, it requires ECC memory. (Error Checking Control)

Socket 754 will soon become the more value-based socket type, with the AMD sempron's (replacement for the budget duron range) migrating to this socket type within the forseeable future.

Socket 939 isn't a replacement for 940, but allows dual-channel capable AMD Athlon 64 processors, without the need for ECC registered DIMMs. This means you can use the standard RAM everyone normally buys for home.

Types:

The main difference between the normal Athlon 64 and the FX is that they have 512KB of L2 cache and 1MB of L2 cache respectively. Double the Static RAM for cache means lots more transistors, and therefore a heftier price tag!

Availability:

As above, semprons will become the 754 processors of choice, but I *think* normal Athlon 64's may continue to be produced for a time. FX's and 64's will stay on S939, and S940 will become the Opteron server socket type.

Feel free to correct me people, the 64-bit AMD processors are confusing stuff!

[Hottentot]

8bit has summed it up nicely.
Its not the best time to switch over to A64 at the moment unless you can't wait.
The mobos for A64 are a bit dodgy and the prices of the CPUs should take one more drop before Christmas.
You should wait for the 90nm CPUs to appear and hopefully the Nforce 4 mobos.

If you want to try the platform out then you can get a cheap 754 mobo and a A64 2800 for about £150 combined.

[BUFF]

8bit forgot the 3700+ for 754 (which also has 1Mb cache DaftpuNk).

& the more recent AMD64 cpu's whilst not overclocking in % terms as well as XP's are overclocking better than before - e.g XP3000+ 2.0GHz quite commonly goes to 2.4GHz

[retroborg]

754 Athlon 64
939 Athlon 64
So these 2 CPUs, Only support single-channel memory.
The best buy would be a 939 Athlon 64 FX CPU, with a lot of dual-channel unregistered memory.
Very helpful thanks.

Do you have a similar CPU diagram like this:
http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?im...RfMV84X2wuZ2lm

But for the Intel CPUs?

[BUFF]

754 Athlon 64
939 Athlon 64
So these 2 CPUs, Only support single-channel memory.

no, socket 754 is single channel & 939 is dual.
However, dual channel will give you under a 10% performance improvement - it's not like a P4.

The best buy would be a 939 Athlon 64 FX CPU, with a lot of dual-channel unregistered memory.

Well, it would be the most expensive buy
It depends what you want to use your system for & your plans on future upgrades. The socket 754 3700+ with it's 1 Mb cache will beat every 939 except the FX-53 in games/3D - but that is probably the most powerful processor that socket 754 will ever get whilst 939 will continue to get more powerful releases.

worth a read http://tech-report.com/reviews/2004q...0/index.x?pg=1

[Nomadd]

And, as ever, to add a little balance to the AMD Owners Club (and wind the AMD guys up! :-))

Go Intel!!!!!!! :-)

P4's drop in price next week (see The Inq.). They overclock like champs, and have *more* than enough power to handle *anything* you are going to throw at them. I have an Intel Northwood P4@3.5GHz, and it's very, very fast. Doom3, FarCry, HL2 - non-issue. My previous 3 systems have been AMD, so nothing against them.

So, don't just jump AMD for the sake of it. You can build a very fast Intel system for not much dough. Me, I'll look at AMD 64s next year, when NForce4 and dual-PCi has stabilised (and even then probably wait for dual-core).

In summary, unlike the posts above, I'm not saying you should buy Intel over AMD. Just have a look around and choose what's right for you. An Intel or an AMD will do the job.

Nomadd

[Zak33]

I'm an Athlon man through anf through, but right now because they have made it SO HARD to understand, and because 754 is LIKELY to die off soon, and all of them will be 939 , I'd go Intel for once.

Just to spite the buggers

[skattrd]

Intel are currently in the process of changing socket as well - but do you really want 775 ....

[Stoo]

Intel change their sockets just as often as AMD does, if not more so

[Kezzer]

Intel change their sockets just as often as AMD does, if not more so

lol, i hope that was a sarcastic post

[Aaron]

I'm just about to order a new system and I'm going for a A64 3500+.

My last purchase two years ago, a AMD XP 2200+, was done on value for money. This one is mainly due to the A64's 64-bit capabilities as I expect this computer to last a couple of years. The reason for the 3500+ chip in particular is the fact that it's socket 939 (a bit more future compatibility and dual-channel memory support).

[Stoo]

lol, i hope that was a sarcastic post

Not really

In recent history (before the A64/Opteron debacle) AMD have had 3 sockets, Socket 7, Slot A, and Socket A (4 if you count the old 486 clones).

Intel on the other hand, have had lots more:
Socket 7, Socket 8, Slot 1, Slot 2, Socket 370, Socket 423 and Socket 478 in the same time period, with Socket 775 now arriving..

Even if you include the most recent AMD sockets, they've still had less changes

[Zak33]

/\ he's got a point

[Kezzer]

Intel change their sockets just as often as AMD does, if not more so

You said just as often which is exactly why i thought you were being sarcastic. i.e. I KNOW that Intel have changed the socket types a LOT more than AMD has which is why I thought it was wrong to say that.