Can AMD salvage QFX with an in-house chipset?

[turpit]

So how does it feel to have a wife and kid and

NO LIFE?

You mean, how does it feel to get laid, without having to pay for it, or blow-up your partner(blow-up doll) ?

PS. It's nice, and if your personality ever changes for the better(unlikely), you might find out.

LOL Tanker,

But come on, lets be honest now, married=getting laid without paying for it? 8O
The new minivan, curtains, bed sets, end tables, jewelry, clothes, visits to the in-laws...cmon now, that consitutes paying for it

 

[elbert]

So how does it feel to have a wife and kid and

NO LIFE?

You mean, how does it feel to get laid, without having to pay for it, or blow-up your partner(blow-up doll) ?

PS. It's nice, and if your personality ever changes for the better(unlikely), you might find out.

LOL Tanker,

But come on, lets be honest now, married=getting laid without paying for it? 8O
The new minivan, curtains, bed sets, end tables, jewelry, clothes, visits to the in-laws...cmon now, that consitutes paying for it
OMG im lol and 😳 at the same time. So true because married just means paying more. I know this for a fact being married more than my far share.

 

[epsilon84]

Given right now the performance of a single FX isnt the same as the C2Q does but by summer the Agena FX should be about an equal to the C2Q. That said Intel should have an answer for 4X4 sometime so yes I see all but the cheapest motherboards being 2 socket. The server side will move to 4 sockets as some point. I agree as with "waiting vs investing now" as I have stated a 4X4 is a bad short term investment. The 65nm may help atleast in price and power requirements but even then a 4X4 on 1207+ is the best choice.

Ahh, well, there is the root of the discussion. Your are of the opinion that multisocket is the next step. My opinion is otherwise, at least for the next few years, so for us to continue debating that portion of the converstaion is circular.

However, as far as upgradability, I dont see single socket mobos being any less "upgradable" than multi socket. Yes, you can put 8 sticks of 2GB Ram in the 4x4 vs 4 sticks in the single, but if you are upgrading incrementally over time as your post seems to be saying, that seems to presume that mobo/chipset developement will stagnate. While Ive seen the "socketed" chipset concept batted about, I dont really see that as a viable option. So you seem to be of the mind that buying a mobo and expecting to be able to upgrade the hardware over a 4-6 year period based on capacity is more cost effective that upgrading a lower capacity system every 2-3 years. I would disagree with that based on the current rate of tech advance. Additionally, I see no reason why in the future, either near or far, mobo manufacturers cant or wont simply ad more I/O interfaces to support more system hardware. As such a single socket system designed for octocore should be just as incrementaly expadable as a dual socket system supporting quadcores.

Since I dont have any info as to what route Intel or AMD are going to take, the above argument also falls into the catagory of circular.

We are just going to have to wait and see which way the manufacturers go.
Currently you see proof due to while Intel losses 600MHz on the C2Q over the C2D's max OC. This is at the same nm which means alot as to which motherboards new CPU's are released. In trying to double the cores this will always occur on a single CPU and the Q6700 losses MHz to the top released C2D. AMD on the 4X4 gains 200MHz in refinements on their FX and 90nm by part using the 2 sockets. If AMD tryed 4 cores on the 90nm it would run about 1.4~1.6GHz. The 2 sockets is the only reason FX-7X's beat the C2D.

Your point is valid but only if you stay on the bleading tech edge as the second CPU and upgrade of RAM on a 2 socket motherboard would be much cheaper for about 2 times the performance.

No, The same time frame because waiting longer to upgrade the 2 socketed system would cost more as prices rise once you get near the end of CPU or memorys useful life. The 2 socket motherboard would be upgrade about 18 to 24 months for the best savings on the upgrades and stay in use for about 72 months.

True the AM2 can go to quad core but at the same time the 4X4 can go up to 2X quad cores.

Where is your proof that the overclock ceiling of C2Q is 600MHz lower than C2D? I've seen many C2Qs overclock to 3.5GHz, which is a similar figure to what many C2Ds are capable of.

AMD 'gained' 200MHz on the FX-74 because they are desperate for a competing solution. They have no other choice. Just look at the overclocking headroom (or lack of) on the FX-74 and you'll see how close to the architecture limit AMD is at. Typical overclocks range from ZERO to 200MHz tops.

Once K8L, or 'true' quad core is released next year, current QuadFX mobos will be obsolete, because they don't have the necessary HT 3.0 specs as well as individual core voltage adjustments. Any 'true' enthusiast would surely want the updated QuadFX platform instead of an obsolete one.

 

[elbert]

Given right now the performance of a single FX isnt the same as the C2Q does but by summer the Agena FX should be about an equal to the C2Q. That said Intel should have an answer for 4X4 sometime so yes I see all but the cheapest motherboards being 2 socket. The server side will move to 4 sockets as some point. I agree as with "waiting vs investing now" as I have stated a 4X4 is a bad short term investment. The 65nm may help atleast in price and power requirements but even then a 4X4 on 1207+ is the best choice.

Ahh, well, there is the root of the discussion. Your are of the opinion that multisocket is the next step. My opinion is otherwise, at least for the next few years, so for us to continue debating that portion of the converstaion is circular.

However, as far as upgradability, I dont see single socket mobos being any less "upgradable" than multi socket. Yes, you can put 8 sticks of 2GB Ram in the 4x4 vs 4 sticks in the single, but if you are upgrading incrementally over time as your post seems to be saying, that seems to presume that mobo/chipset developement will stagnate. While Ive seen the "socketed" chipset concept batted about, I dont really see that as a viable option. So you seem to be of the mind that buying a mobo and expecting to be able to upgrade the hardware over a 4-6 year period based on capacity is more cost effective that upgrading a lower capacity system every 2-3 years. I would disagree with that based on the current rate of tech advance. Additionally, I see no reason why in the future, either near or far, mobo manufacturers cant or wont simply ad more I/O interfaces to support more system hardware. As such a single socket system designed for octocore should be just as incrementaly expadable as a dual socket system supporting quadcores.

Since I dont have any info as to what route Intel or AMD are going to take, the above argument also falls into the catagory of circular.

We are just going to have to wait and see which way the manufacturers go.
Currently you see proof due to while Intel losses 600MHz on the C2Q over the C2D's max OC. This is at the same nm which means alot as to which motherboards new CPU's are released. In trying to double the cores this will always occur on a single CPU and the Q6700 losses MHz to the top released C2D. AMD on the 4X4 gains 200MHz in refinements on their FX and 90nm by part using the 2 sockets. If AMD tryed 4 cores on the 90nm it would run about 1.4~1.6GHz. The 2 sockets is the only reason FX-7X's beat the C2D.

Your point is valid but only if you stay on the bleading tech edge as the second CPU and upgrade of RAM on a 2 socket motherboard would be much cheaper for about 2 times the performance.

No, The same time frame because waiting longer to upgrade the 2 socketed system would cost more as prices rise once you get near the end of CPU or memorys useful life. The 2 socket motherboard would be upgrade about 18 to 24 months for the best savings on the upgrades and stay in use for about 72 months.

True the AM2 can go to quad core but at the same time the 4X4 can go up to 2X quad cores.

Where is your proof that the overclock ceiling of C2Q is 600MHz lower than C2D? I've seen many C2Qs overclock to 3.5GHz, which is a similar figure to what many C2Ds are capable of.

AMD 'gained' 200MHz on the FX-74 because they are desperate for a competing solution. They have no other choice. Just look at the overclocking headroom (or lack of) on the FX-74 and you'll see how close to the architecture limit AMD is at. Typical overclocks range from ZERO to 200MHz tops.

Once K8L, or 'true' quad core is released next year, current QuadFX mobos will be obsolete, because they don't have the necessary HT 3.0 specs as well as individual core voltage adjustments. Any 'true' enthusiast would surely want the updated QuadFX platform instead of an obsolete one.
I've seen close to 4.1GHz on C2D so about 600MHz less down to 3.4~3.5GHz for the C2Q. True the OC on the FX-7X's are about the same but again it is about the same. Not obsolete as the agena FX will work in the 1207 just the higher performance Agena FX's will see a bottleneck. That said I stated a bad shorter investment so the 1207+ would make for the best upgrade path. Who stated enthusiast because someone looking for a better upgrade path isnt an enthusiast. An enthusisast would slap in 2 of the fast CPU's right at the start.

 

[WR]

The reason C2Q overclocks less than C2D is simply that you have two heat-generating cores in such close proximity for the same heatsink solution to dissipate. The cores are otherwise almost identical - same process node with at most minor variances in the manufacturing technology. I very much doubt the thermal properties would be substantially different with a native quadcore design at 65nm.

The same people who use LN2 to get near 5.5GHz on C2D also manage to do that with C2Q. But to achieve the same overclocks with stock cooling in a poorly ventilated case is of course a different story.

That said, with the same process technology, the best quad-core Agenas won't overclock as high as the best dual-core versions of the chip simply due to thermal limitations. There is a small advantage in not having to duplicate the IMC, but a quad-core will still put out nearly double the heat at 100% load using the same clocks/voltages.

 

[1Tanker]

So how does it feel to have a wife and kid and

NO LIFE?

You mean, how does it feel to get laid, without having to pay for it, or blow-up your partner(blow-up doll) ?

PS. It's nice, and if your personality ever changes for the better(unlikely), you might find out.

LOL Tanker,

But come on, lets be honest now, married=getting laid without paying for it? 8O
The new minivan, curtains, bed sets, end tables, jewelry, clothes, visits to the in-laws...cmon now, that consitutes paying for it Yes and no. Yes, she gets the sheets, curtains..etc.etc, but it's not like sex is all i get. I get my toys, big-screen, etc. too. And best of all....when i have a cold, she waits on me hand & foot...just like mommy did. 😛

 

[elbert]

The reason C2Q overclocks less than C2D is simply that you have two heat-generating cores in such close proximity for the same heatsink solution to dissipate. The cores are otherwise almost identical - same process node with at most minor variances in the manufacturing technology. I very much doubt the thermal properties would be substantially different with a native quadcore design at 65nm.

The same people who use LN2 to get near 5.5GHz on C2D also manage to do that with C2Q. But to achieve the same overclocks with stock cooling in a poorly ventilated case is of course a different story.

That said, with the same process technology, the best quad-core Agenas won't overclock as high as the best dual-core versions of the chip simply due to thermal limitations. There is a small advantage in not having to duplicate the IMC, but a quad-core will still put out nearly double the heat at 100% load using the same clocks/voltages.

Thats true but just as much a disadvantage to Intels approach as memory latency is to AMD's 4X4 approach. Thats also true that the agena FX would see a lower clock but on that point they will have 4X4 so it can run as an 8 core system. Intel on the other hand will have to go 8 cores on single CPU or come with their own 2 socket motherboard which IMO they will do the 2 socketed approach. I believe this because Intel in already moving the memory controller on the die. This is no guarantee but does seem to indacate Intel going down the same path as AMD.

 

[cyborg_ninja-117]

Well, the QFX has been released and while certain scenarios show incredible promise, certain areas are also saddled with too much baggage.

The fact that the Opteron dual can be outfitted with SLI in a wksta and offer good perf without these power levels implies that the total package could have been done better.

The Opteron 285 runs at 2.6GHz and this graph shows that without the additional SLI power AMD runs at 322W and the dual 5160 runs at 267W (full load).

Looking at the varous articles around teh web, it seems as though only Anand managed to actually find suitable tasks that were reasonable for multi-tasking. In his case he used BluRay movies which totally killed all the dual core systems.

His power numbers were also at least 100W lower than other test sites. He turned on CnQ and got the idle temps down to within 4W of the C2Q system. Of course this didn't dent the 456W the system drew at "full load" with an 8800GTX ( which I believe draws 225W+ ).

And these are FX74 numbers. FX70 is shown to use even less so I believe OEMs can get reasonable wksta power levels out of it in teh next few months, especially if AMD releases a new rev( they sorely need to drop power by at least 10%- perhaps more and the lessons learned can help get Agena down below the reported 125W)

Hexus is also reporting that they can show a defect in the NUMA implementation of the Asus board BIOS ( this post was going to be called "Did Asus and nVidia drop the QFX ball") that maybe why games are suffering so much from latency problems.

One review ( most are posted at AMDZone) stated that AMD is reporting that the Interleave mode will need to be turned off for Vista and on for XP.

I believe AMD reported that they would release their own branded chipset and hopefully it will be less power hungry than the 680a, which is reported to use more power than even 975X. Having two of them surely doesn't help. nVidia does have a two socket SLI hipset in the 3600 and ASUS' implementation is only $300. Even the $400 Asus 680i for Intel implements less PCIe for less power reserves.

Because 7950GT and the probably forthcoming 8950GT only require two slots for Quad SLI. I can see the need for 4 low end GPUs for certain content creators but even 3 PCIe slots can't really be used right now as no "Havok" type apps or cards have been released, except for the server (AMD Stream).

Only time will tell if AMD had planned to create an entire reference system based on an Ati chipset while allowing nVidia to be the launch partner.

But the real judgement is that only expert builders will make QFX something not too loud or hot, while Vista X64 may do wonders for it in multithreaded apps so it is not yet ready for prime time.

Let's go AMD! Show your true potential.

.............,-~*'`¯lllllll`*~,._
..........,-~*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll¯`*-,
.....,-~*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll*-,
..,-*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll.\
;*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll,-~*~-,llllllllllllllllllll\
.\lllllllllllllllllllllllllll/.........\;;;;llllllllllll,-`~-,
..\lllllllllllllllllllll,-*...........`~-~-,...(.(¯`*,`,
..\llllllllllll,-~*.....................)_-\..*`*;..)
...\,-*`¯,*`)............,-~*`~................/.
....|/.../.../~,......-~*,-~*`;................/.\
..../.../.../.../..,-,..*~,.`*~*................*...\..
...|.../.../.../.*`...\...........................)....)¯`~,..
...|./.../..../.......)......,.)`*~-,............/....|..)...`~-,....
..././.../...,*`-,.....`-,...*`....,---......\..../...../..|.........¯```*~-,
...(..........)`*~-,....`*`.,-~*.,-*......|.../..../.../............\.........
.....*-,.......`*-,...`~,..``.,,,-*..........|.,*...,*...|..............\........
.........*,.........`-,...)-,..............,-*`...,-*....(`-,............\.......
............`-,.........`-,/...*-,___,,-~*....,-*......|...`-,..........\.......
............,~)...........)|............*,`*~--*........|......`-,.........\.....

/Fail.

 

[killmess]

Whats your obsession with men kissing you? Oh I see, its because you're gay. That explains a lot.

Read the forum's rules action, don't say gay, homosexual it's better. 8O

 

[killmess]

14 pages of BS?

 

[gOJDO]

14 pages of BS?

Yeap, whenever BaronBS joins a discussion it instantly becomes a BS.

 

[croc]

Having looked at 14 pages of BS ranging from various suppositions about various hypothetical CPU's that may or not be made, vs. the cost of being married or not...

Can anyone point me to a cost - benefit analysis of why I should buy 10000 of these systems vs the 10000 systems currently used?

Bottom line. If I can write them off, and improve effeciency, then good. If its just an upgrade that does not improve effenciency, bad.

 

[apache_lives]

And I hope OFX is not any indication of Agenas capabilities. Personally, I hope AMD has much greater goals/success in mind for Agena. For the time being, the old tactic of refinement will not serve them, they need to get K8L and 65nm out the door. Working to validate a concept with old tech is stealing resources from developing the new tech, and is not nessasarily a practical approach, nor may it provide conclusive results.

What I meant was that Agena will use one socket and 4 RAM slots so it won't be subject TO ANY LATENCY PENALTIES. WIth the "assumed" increased perf we can say that Agena will be to K8 what C2Q is to Core Duo.

I want 2 sockets without ECC and so do a lot of people. Thsi is a good step. If MAD keeps it as a staple platform then there will be new chipsets and mobos ( the first ones ALWAYS incurs R&D costs) that will be cheaper. Intel thought that Itanium would be the desktop 64bit OS but it turned out to be AMD64.

I think the high-end will follow this trend for 2008 since BullDozer will at least match Core 2 perf in most areas based on different analyses.

Firstly, Itanium wasnt for main stream and Intel knew the market wasnt ready for 64 bit, and the Itanium was a 64bit backward compatible cpu, it seems weak cause you cant compare it to a desktop machine, your common amd and intel are esentially 32 bit cpus foward compatible for future extended use.

Core duo and core 2 duo's performance doesnt jump by much, its all the little things and a higher clock speed (cpu and fsb) combind, the similar clocked cpus perform the same meaning that no optimisation that intel used is going to instantly save AMD - 4 ipc didnt do much, higher clock speed didnt do too much and twice the cache and shared cache didnt do much but all those together did alot compared to the p4. Before the c2d's were out the record holder cpu performance wise was the pentium m - at 2.5ghz it outpaced everything in gaming, super pi etc.

AMD's new cores are copying most of intels designs - combind cache etc

Intels core 2 duo isnt a first or 2nd gen product, this is a P6 design - Pentium Pro -> Pentium 2 -> Pentium 3 -> Pentium M -> Core Duo. AMD has never really beaten the design, they came close with the P3 cause of the late and crud P4 design and the old 180nm Coppermine core not budging past 1ghz (well atleast with the full 256k L2 running).

AMD has always delivered a strong alternative to the market, sometimes better, sometimes worse, no question about it, doesnt make AMD the god, nor Intel for that matter, dont get me wrong there!

Baron dude, u gotta face it, they made a dud and your ego wont let you admit they made a dud and you made a mistake. Your as bad as someone trying to sell a Smithfield over a A64 X2 saying the clock speed is better and the heat is justified, and atleast smithfield was CHEAPER!

So what if your 4x4 system is "300% faster" then your current rig, the C2Q is even faster, colder and cheaper, why ignore the better choice to follow a brand name that doesnt give a dam about you as a customer.

If AMD does come out with a faster, cheaper and efficent (within reason) cpu thats ~twice as fast as my current rig i wont hesitate to buy AMD, i dont have a problem cause i aint a fanboy, i dont owe Intel nothin.

Use that thing on your shoulders

Life is filled with people both smart and dumb, some people have to be dumb to make the other people look "smart", guess where u fit baron? give you a hint you dumb fcuk :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[BaronMatrix]

Having looked at 14 pages of BS ranging from various suppositions about various hypothetical CPU's that may or not be made, vs. the cost of being married or not...

Can anyone point me to a cost - benefit analysis of why I should buy 10000 of these systems vs the 10000 systems currently used?

Bottom line. If I can write them off, and improve effeciency, then good. If its just an upgrade that does not improve effenciency, bad.

I'd have to say that teh biggest argument for this is apps that are high-bandwidth multi-threaded in nature. becasue of the inherent increeased power of two chips, this is not an SLI gamer's platform.

Quadro Sli could be used for those heavy duty jobs where the brute force method helps get things done faster. In those cases saving a month is worth more than saving $25-50/ month extra electricity bill.

Though most reviews were with pre-release boards, Anand manged to get temps and power down significantly in his tests (456W vs 713W load). I think the link with the higher power was using 8800 SLI.

Another case where this would come in handy is for developers who don't need gaming graphics. If for whatever reason neither C2Q nor Opteron suit your needs or preference, this thing will chew through C# compiling like a fiend.

Again because most of the time you are actually writing code (or setting rendering options), you won't hit anywhere near load 75% of the time ( maybe more, maybe less)


It's still as good an idea as dual socket anything else or quad core anything else. I think it wil shape up to be a Vista monster by Feb.

 

[BaronMatrix]

Firstly, Itanium wasnt for main stream and Intel knew the market wasnt ready for 64 bit, and the Itanium was a 64bit backward compatible cpu, it seems weak cause you cant compare it to a desktop machine, your common amd and intel are esentially 32 bit cpus foward compatible for future extended use.

As a person who tested Itanium under XP Pro I can say that you're wrong. Intel wanted the entire industry to go to EPIC over a few years, but the lousy emulation of X86 doomed it.

QFX is not a dud. You're just biased. If you look back, I never though it would unseat C2Q and hopefully neither did AMD. It is a perfect upgrade for FX though, since once teh NUMA issues are straightened out and the RAM is kept closest to the executing processor, it should do SLIGHTLY better than FX62.

Most people just dont' understand what the first job of NUMA is. I just wish I could get my hands on a 2218 system with 8800 and see what happens with a Broadcom chipset or the nVidia single chip 3600.

Again, I don't expect it to overtake C2q, but to fix some of the single threaded issues.

And please dont' start with the usual. If all of the RAM is in the right socket, it can't (theoretically) be slower than FX62. Cross socket accesses are best used for globals in multi-threaded apps.

 

[mesarectifier]

QFX is not a dud. You're just biased.

Is there an irony in Baron calling someone biased the sentence after he bigs up an AMD product for which he has provided zero evidence to support in favour of it's competition?

 

[gOJDO]

Having looked at 14 pages of BS ranging from various suppositions about various hypothetical CPU's that may or not be made, vs. the cost of being married or not...

Can anyone point me to a cost - benefit analysis of why I should buy 10000 of these systems vs the 10000 systems currently used?

Bottom line. If I can write them off, and improve effeciency, then good. If its just an upgrade that does not improve effenciency, bad.

I'd have to say that teh biggest argument for this is apps that are high-bandwidth multi-threaded in nature. becasue of the inherent increeased power of two chips, this is not an SLI gamer's platform.

Quadro Sli could be used for those heavy duty jobs where the brute force method helps get things done faster. In those cases saving a month is worth more than saving $25-50/ month extra electricity bill.

Though most reviews were with pre-release boards, Anand manged to get temps and power down significantly in his tests (456W vs 713W load). I think the link with the higher power was using 8800 SLI.

Another case where this would come in handy is for developers who don't need gaming graphics. If for whatever reason neither C2Q nor Opteron suit your needs or preference, this thing will chew through C# compiling like a fiend.

Again because most of the time you are actually writing code (or setting rendering options), you won't hit anywhere near load 75% of the time ( maybe more, maybe less)


It's still as good an idea as dual socket anything else or quad core anything else. I think it wil shape up to be a Vista monster by Feb.
I dissagree, Zimbabwe has more than two million child orphans from aids. Every week 5000 people die of the disease. In some districts 40 percent of the adult women are infected.

In two months the disease kills more people than guns and grenades killed in fourteen years of liberation war. On the field medical doctors have been forbidden to inform about the disease and collect information statistics. Officially, all is well in Zimbabwe. Read more here.

 

[BaronMatrix]

QFX is not a dud. You're just biased.

Is there an irony in Baron calling someone biased the sentence after he bigs up an AMD product for which he has provided zero evidence to support in favour of it's competition?


My purchases are NOT based on the competition, they are based on my preferred CPU vendor having what I want, which int his case is two sockets.

Also, so you all know, AMDs design doesn NOT require two chipsets, so nVidia's implementation my be causing a bottleneck there also.

Note the single chipset in the diagram.

Like I said let's get a 2218 system and run XP game benchmarks on it. Most of the Opteron tests I have seen with gaming show that two socket systems do slightly better.


QFX rocks!!!

 

[BaronMatrix]

I dissagree, Zimbabwe has more than two million child orphans from aids. Every week 5000 people die of the disease. In some districts 40 percent of the adult women are infected.

WTF is that? Are you malfunctioning? QFX and Zimbabwe are not quite the same topic.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

QFX is not a dud. You're just biased.

Is there an irony in Baron calling someone biased the sentence after he bigs up an AMD product for which he has provided zero evidence to support in favour of it's competition?

I have to say I'm with Mesa on this one. Baron, I say this respectfully, but you are probably one of the most biased and polarized people here now that dvdpiddy is reformed/no longer here. You have a love for AMD that is only paralleled by Sharikou. No matter what AMD does you always try to spin it to be better than Intel. 4x4 is one of the greatest examples because of how bad the product is and how much it under-performs. 4x4 only has one thing going for it, and that is the possibility of a octo-core upgrade later.

I used to defend AMD back in the days of the Conroe wars when Intel said they had something that was X amount better but said it more than half a year before product release. Ycon would come in and say that Intel was the best because of some un-released product called Conroe. I defended AMD and that until Intel delivers on its promises that AMD was number one in my mind.

Well, Intel delivered and are, indeed, number one in my mind now. AMD promised with 4x4 but failed to deliver. 4x4 without octo-core is a dead product. Until it can offer something that an Intel system can't it's just simply a dead failure. No one will buy it. Gamers don't want it. The server market laughs at it. Mainstream can't afford it. Even enthusiasts don't want it because it can't outperform Intel. 4x4 has one market, that is the market of blind AMD followers that will buy 4x4 simply because AMD makes it.

 

[gOJDO]

I dissagree, Zimbabwe has more than two million child orphans from aids. Every week 5000 people die of the disease. In some districts 40 percent of the adult women are infected.

WTF is that? Are you malfunctioning? QFX and Zimbabwe are not quite the same topic.
I know, the sudden change in pitch of a car horn as a car passes by (source motion) or in the pitch of a boom box on the sidewalk as you drive by in your car (observer motion) was first explained in 1842 by Christian Doppler. His Doppler Effect is the shift in frequency and wavelength of waves which results from a source moving with respect to the medium, a receiver moving with respect to the medium, or even a moving medium.

The perceived frequency (f ´) is related to the actual frequency (f0) and the relative speeds of the source (vs), observer (vo), and the speed (v) of waves in the medium by

f' = f0 * [(v+-V0)/(v+-vs)]

The choice of using the plus (+) or minus (-) sign is made according to the convention that if the source and observer are moving towards each other the perceived frequency (f ´) is higher than the actual frequency (f0). Likewise, if the source and observer are moving away from each other the perceived frequency (f ´) is lower than the actual frequency (f0).

Although first discovered for sound waves, the Doppler effect holds true for all types of waves including light (and other electromagnetic waves). The Doppler effect for light waves is usually described in terms of colors rather than frequency. A red shift occurs when the source and observer are moving away from eachother, and a blue shift occurs when the source and observer are moving towards eachother. The red shift of light from remote galaxies is proof that the universe is expanding.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

My purchases are NOT based on the competition, they are based on my preferred CPU vendor having what I want, which int his case is two sockets.

Baron, this is why you're having so much trouble here with people flaming you. You aren't only purchasing 4x4 because of your AMD brand preference, but you're coming to a technology discussion forum and defending the product based on your brand preference and not on the merits of the technology being discussed.

You are here defending a failure of a technology to the death based on a brand preference. We continually take your spin information and dis-prove it. Many of us have proven that we are somewhat neutral and we try to make sure that things are openly debated and that misinformation (spin) isn't allowed to exist here un-disputed.

You know a technology is a failure when a company starts making up new words and purposes such as "megatasking" and "platformance". We simply don't care about the hype or a lot of the background facts, we care mainly about two things: price and performance. Intel's more simplistic approach is better than AMD's complicated approach in both price and performance.

So back to my main point: You can expect a lot of "forum tension" if you continue to defend something based on a brand preference rather than the facts and merits of the technology.

 

[BaronMatrix]

No matter what AMD does you always try to spin it to be better than Intel. 4x4 is one of the greatest examples because of how bad the product is and how much it under-performs. 4x4 only has one thing going for it, and that is the possibility of a octo-core upgrade later.

That is your opinion. All you fanboys are out in force makin people's lives miserable becaue it does indeed close the gap at the high and leaves X6800 in the dust- especially in 64-bit Vista.

You can't get me to say that two sockets with ECC, SCSI, SAS, PCI-X, Infiniband is a good idea but removing all of that is not.

This is not a server platform or a gaming platform. It is content professional platform and developer platform. Take away the 300W GPUs and you have an excellent dev box or even Cinebench @ 64bit.

Face it, if you don't buy it, it doesn't mean no one else will. I will definitely be getting it with Vista as my next upgrade. You shoudl all hoep that the NUMA WASN'T th eproblem cause if it was the rest of my prediction will come true (5% increase over FX62 in single threaded games).

 

[gOJDO]

No matter what AMD does you always try to spin it to be better than Intel. 4x4 is one of the greatest examples because of how bad the product is and how much it under-performs. 4x4 only has one thing going for it, and that is the possibility of a octo-core upgrade later.

That is your opinion. All you fanboys are out in force makin people's lives miserable becaue it does indeed close the gap at the high and leaves X6800 in the dust- especially in 64-bit Vista.

You can't get me to say that two sockets with ECC, SCSI, SAS, PCI-X, Infiniband is a good idea but removing all of that is not.

This is not a server platform or a gaming platform. It is content professional platform and developer platform. Take away the 300W GPUs and you have an excellent dev box or even Cinebench @ 64bit.

Face it, if you don't buy it, it doesn't mean no one else will. I will definitely be getting it with Vista as my next upgrade. You shoudl all hoep that the NUMA WASN'T th eproblem cause if it was the rest of my prediction will come true (5% increase over FX62 in single threaded games).
In a normal electric circuit, an electric current powers an appliance, such as a refrigerator or TV. Every such appliance has a certain amount of resistance to the current flow, which keeps the current from reaching very large values. A short circuit occurs when the current finds a way to bypass the appliance on a path that has little or no resistance - for example, where frayed insulation bares a wire and allows it to touch the frame of the appliance, so the current can flow straight to ground. In this situation, a very large current can occur, producing a lot of heat and a fire hazard.

Although houses today often contain circuit breakers rather than fuses, fuses are still around. A fuse contains a thin strip of wire, somewhat like the thin iron wire in our experiment. The current that goes to appliances must also pass through this strip of wire. If a short circuit occurs - or even if too many appliances get hooked up to one wire, so that too much current flows - the wire in the fuse heats up quickly and melts, breaking the circuit and preventing a fire from breaking out.

 

[BaronMatrix]

Baron, this is why you're having so much trouble here with people flaming you. You aren't only purchasing 4x4 because of your AMD brand preference, but you're coming to a technology discussion forum and defending the product based on your brand preference and not on the merits of the technology being discussed.

Two sockets have already shown their usefulness, hence the market for two socket workstations.

I said it closed the gap between the high end of AMD /Intel. I said it scales excellently for 64bit multithreaded apps. I said I dont want it for games. i said it will be a crazy compiling box.

All of those seem to be reasons other than brand preference.

I could just a seasily get an FX62, C2Q or X2, but I want QFX. It already shows great scaling even with what may turn out to be a broken NUMA implementation.

Vista 64bit tests also improve the scores over 32bit XP.

There's a link in here somewhere.

So i guess you'll say none of that counts though right?