754 vs 939..some benchmarks

[pat]

What if you spend a bit more for your system now, so you wont have to upgrade parts from time to time and push your next upgradea bit further in time to save more money in order to upgrade to better performing parts. So, this way you always have good performing computer now and as long as you need it as opposed to adequate performing all the time.

Socket 754 give you more choice for motherboard at all range of price. for 50$ less, or even more, you can have a 754 system that outperform socket 939. from this point, that 50 or more $ can be better spent on a fast videocard to increase the performance lead even more. That performance edge you have now will make you keep your system longer.

IMHO, 939 with dual channel is just marketing because Intel has it. Fact is, because of Intel CPU desing, they really need bandwidth. Not AMD...But Intel has it. So we will have it too.

That wont be the same when dual core CPU will be there. That will take bandwidth ... like DDR2 667 will be able to give. That will take new mobo too... So, what will you do? Put a FX-5x CPU to keep your system up to date on that old mobo? Put your current cpu on a new DDR2 mobo, even if it wont run significantly faster? that is wasted money imho. Sell your current system and get a new one up to date, even if you have to wait a bit more( when you wait, you save money and price go down...) to get the extra money.

All the reason but futureproff are good to justify an upgrade.

-Always put the blame on you first, then on the hardware !!!

 

[Starfishy]

Alright, I will agree with all of that. I guess the way that pat has presented this point is very valid. I am really just trying to justify why I just bought a 939?? Hmmmm... I guess I will have to search harder for the answer to this question which is now going to haunt my dreams. Although, I have upgraded my CPU without upgrading my mobo, which is possible and I'm surprised that more of you have not ever done this... I like keeping all of my parts that I have floating around compatible with eachother, so that I can mix and match in my old systems as well, and keep them as up to date as possible with my old parts. So for me in this way it might be nice in the future, as I don't sell my old systems to make back the cash on my upgrades (I use them as paperweights).

 

[pat]

I've used a VIC-20 (cassette recorder), C64 (floppy), Amiga 500 (floppy), Amiga 1200 (80 megs HDD), 386 dx 40 (hdd 850 megs), 486 dx4 100 (850 megs + first CDROM(nec 4x4X)), Amiga4000(4.3 Gigs SCSI HDD and CDROM (40X)), AXP 1700+,(40 Gigs then another 40gigs for RAID0 (80 Gigs total +cd rw) AXP2500+(2x120 Gigs RAID0(240 gigs total)+cd rw and dvd rw) and now, A64 3000+
with 2 160 Gigs in RAID0 with a 40Gigs and and external 120 Gigs +cd rw and dvd rw...

I used the 386 and 486 with my A1200 because sometime, I needed something "compatible" and faster. I put my A4000 to rest in 2001, and then got my AXP1700+. The A4000, even with a Motorola 68060 50 MHz and 80 megs of RAM and 4.3 gigs SCSI HDD, met its match with mpeg video files... too much data to process for realtime playing and for flash content in WEB sites.

I miss it sometime. The OS (AmigaOS) was stable, responsive and simple. It was multitasking way better than Windows.

But good thing always come to an end.. But that was quite fun to remember all that!

-Always put the blame on you first, then on the hardware !!!

 

[slvr_phoenix]

Yeah, I miss the Amigas. 🙁 They were so much better than PCs in so many ways in their day. I suppose it's a good example of bad marketing of a superior product. (Kind of like AMD actually.)

Oh, and did I mention that my Tandy had an 80088 processor? **ROFL** It wasn't even an x86. It was fun to jump from that Tandy to a Pentium 90MHz, even if that <i>was</i> a Packard Hell box.

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>

 

[jlbigguy]

<font color=blue>"At least I've never programmed on paper cards. :\"</font color=blue>

Guilty. I have programmed on cards, had to use cards as output from one computer and input for another. I have also programmed with WIRE PLUG PANELS. What a joy!

My top 10 major upgrade milestones:

1. Going from single sided single density 5 1/4 floppies (90k) to dual density (180k).

2. Getting a SECOND 5 1/4" floppy drive for my TRS-80.

3. Going from single sided floppies to dual sided (360k).

4. PRINTERS! My first printer was a Radio Shack 9 pin printer, must have been close to $1000. But to be able to print at home and replace the typewriter, what a concept!

5. MS-DOS. My first IBM Compatible PC was in 1982, by a company called STEARNS. It featured an 8086 rather then the 8088 used by IBM. I always prefered my TRS-80 operating system (LDOS, NEWDOS) to MS-DOS.

6. Color monitor. Ok, only 4 colors, but WOW!

7. First hard drive - 5 meg.

8. Next hard drive - 10 meg. How would I ever need more?

9. Mouse. Sounds nutty, but the mouse was an incredible upgrade ($89.00), and not many DOS applications supported a mouse at that time.

10. Modem (1200 baud). Opened a whole new world of Bulletin boards and monster phone bills.

Of course, there are many more. But in my world, those are the top 10.


<font color=blue>This is a Forum, not a playground. Treat it with Respect.</font color=blue>

 

[slvr_phoenix]

10. Modem (1200 baud). Opened a whole new world of Bulletin boards and monster phone bills.

**ROFL** Oh yeah. I remember those days. I even remember having a list of boards that would let you reroute to another BBS (and the coveted toll-free BBS that would reroute) so that I could try to cut down that phone bill. I actually kind of miss those days. I don't miss the phone bills though.

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>

 

[jlbigguy]

Pat,

The benchmarks on the French site are comparing the .13 process 754 3000+ against the .09 process 939 3000+.

I just got my 754 3000+, and it is built on the .09 process. So, the newer socket 754 3000+ processors benefit from the die shrink as well, and gain 200mhz to boot.

It would be interesting to compare the .09 754 against the 939.


<font color=blue>This is a Forum, not a playground. Treat it with Respect.</font color=blue>

 

[endyen]

Are you sure it's 90 nanos? Sandra says my s754 3200+ is as well, but its 4 months old, so I know she's wrong again. I had heard that 90 nanos for 754 were still 6 months away.

 

[jlbigguy]

Not sure. Sandra says .09, CPU-Z says .13. Maybe its really .11

I will ask AMD support if there is any way to know, without having to remove the HSF.


<font color=blue>This is a Forum, not a playground. Treat it with Respect.</font color=blue>

 

[sobelizard]

Phial, your link contains a Trojan horse. [you(1).js

Maybe you think it's funny to infect others? Or is it an accident?

<font color=green><b><i>Lizards</font color=green></b> do <b>not</b> taste like <b><font color=yellow>chicken</font color=yellow></b>,<b> <font color=yellow>chicken</font color=yellow></b> tastes like <font color=green><b>lizard.</b></font color=green></i>

 

[endyen]

Too bad, Z is usually right, sysy is usually wrong. I had hopes of getting a 90 nano chip, and one of the new Abit nforce boards, I want to try the board out.

 

[pat]

is your 3000+ .09 is still running a 2GHz or they lowered the clock as they did on 939? mine is a .13 at 2.0 ghz

-Always put the blame on you first, then on the hardware !!!

 

[jlbigguy]

Pat,

My 754 3000+ must be a .13 process, based on its vcore voltage of 1.5v. The .09 would be 1.4v.

Shame on Sisoft for reporting the wrong process!

<font color=blue>This is a Forum, not a playground. Treat it with Respect.</font color=blue>

 

[Spitfire_x86]

The "Trojan Horse" from Phial's sig is practically harmless. If it could run, then it would only throw your IE window around the screen few times, nothing else.

I think it got labeled as malware for it's annoyance factor. But if you use Mozilla Firefox, these scripts can never run.


------------
<font color=orange><b><A HREF="http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox" target="_new">Rediscover the web</A></b></font color=orange>