I'm sure AMD fans would be interested to know that AM2 may support DDR2 1066. I bolded may, because the information was obtained via a very circumstantial means.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30221
Now in terms of whether DDR2 1066 will be supported. My personal view is that it probably won't be at launch. Going from DDR 400 to DDR2 800 is already a massive bandwidth increase and I doubt going to DDR2 1066 will make much of a difference in comparison. There is also no reason for AMD to be using up their revision headroom so early. Obviously DDR2 1066 will be added later, which is why they are telling motherboard makers to over-design now, but I'm sure most mainstream to high-end makers would have already done so anyways.
DDR2 1066 will probably be unofficially supported by the OMC much like DDR 500 is supported now.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2469&p=1
Looking at that article again, makes me wonder how much of an improvement AM2 will really bring. It's an age old debate of course, but realistically the major advantage of AM2 is DDR2 whose main feature is more bandwidth. I just don't see K8 being bandwidth starved right now, which is of course the feature which AMD makes fun of Intel (in Netburst at least) for. If K8 was so bandwidth starved, it would have gobbled every bit of additional bandwidth going from DDR 400 to DDR 480, but in reality there was only a 3-5% performance increase on the X2 4800+.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2469&p=5
Single-cores benefit even less, with the FX-57 increasing between 0-3%.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2469&p=7
The article also offers great praise for AMD:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30221
First of all, whether that was the sole reason for the delay or not, there is something wrong with the memory controller which has been independantly reported by The Inquirer, THG, and Anandtech. DDR2 800 support was probably added because the delay to fix the memory controller gave them time to, not adding DDR2 800 gave them the delay. In any case, DDR2 800 was always going to be added to AM2, it was just a matter of when.Our source claims that AMD's Socket AM2 delay is actually the by-product of "engineering change at (the) last moment". He claims his company has to redesign the PCB more than "others", since they need to support DDR-II 800 and DDR-II 1066 memory standards.
Now in terms of whether DDR2 1066 will be supported. My personal view is that it probably won't be at launch. Going from DDR 400 to DDR2 800 is already a massive bandwidth increase and I doubt going to DDR2 1066 will make much of a difference in comparison. There is also no reason for AMD to be using up their revision headroom so early. Obviously DDR2 1066 will be added later, which is why they are telling motherboard makers to over-design now, but I'm sure most mainstream to high-end makers would have already done so anyways.
DDR2 1066 will probably be unofficially supported by the OMC much like DDR 500 is supported now.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2469&p=1
Looking at that article again, makes me wonder how much of an improvement AM2 will really bring. It's an age old debate of course, but realistically the major advantage of AM2 is DDR2 whose main feature is more bandwidth. I just don't see K8 being bandwidth starved right now, which is of course the feature which AMD makes fun of Intel (in Netburst at least) for. If K8 was so bandwidth starved, it would have gobbled every bit of additional bandwidth going from DDR 400 to DDR 480, but in reality there was only a 3-5% performance increase on the X2 4800+.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2469&p=5
Single-cores benefit even less, with the FX-57 increasing between 0-3%.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2469&p=7
The article also offers great praise for AMD:
Based on the tests that we’ve seen here today, AMD’s reluctance to move to higher bandwidth DDR2 offerings makes a lot more sense. The plain fact of the matter is that at the current clock speeds at which the Athlon 64 and X2 line are running, most desktop applications see virtually no benefit from higher bandwidth memory.