Can AMD salvage QFX with an in-house chipset?

[apache_lives]

I have never said that al of a sudden K8 wold faster core for core than C2.

LOL not even 2 can match C2 😉

It has shown it's great potential with future tech such as BluRay (AnandTech) and with Valve tests.

And Intels design has even better potential 😉



Alteast Prescott overclocked well and was cheap :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: , AMD's 4x4 ATM sucks, face it fanboy.

 

[TabrisDarkPeace]

The advantage of ECC Ram is reliability of data.
In fact such Ram stores redundant information and is able to auto-correct small errors (1 bit per byte) and detect more.
This is crucial for server / workstation apps, but it's typically not considered necessary for typical desktop usage.

Using x4 ECC DIMMs instead of x8 ECC DIMMs and a decent chipset you can detect quad bit errors, and correct double bit ones.

Google of "x4 ECC DIMM chipset" should give some good results.
or "IBM and ChipKill(tm)"

8)

 

[TabrisDarkPeace]

Baron, please provide a linke where a chipset has made more than a few % difference in raw performance. The chipset on an AMD platform has nothing to do with computation power, jeeeeeze do you not know anything??

Better yet: Please provide links to a demonstrated 'change of chipset' (revisions++ included) where the processors had integrated memory controllers already... making more than a 10% difference

I concur

8) - Tabris😀arkPeace

 

[gOJDO]

I've got an idea, don't buy it. You still haven't answered why they can't increase the perf with a newer chipset and drop power with a new Rev.

The MACHINE WASN'T OVERLY NOISY. Of course fans make noise. I think it's possible but either way the scaling for the Valve tests is impressive enough to warrant serious thought.

I mean 2X the VM power is not a joke for my purposes. I'll be doing my upgrade with the timing of Vista X64 and lower priced DX10 cards. Maybe an 80nm R600 will be a good thing for QFX.

You are ignoring every logical explanation that you don't like, but you will accept whatever crap speaks good about AMD.
The chipset can't improve the performance on the K8 system with whatever number of CPUs because K8 has integrated northbridge and memory controller. The chipset is not handling the communication between the CPUs and it is not handling the memory transactions and there is no ways and chances that the chipsets will improve the performance of the system. Do you realise that?
If no, enlight us how the chipset on the K8 system can improve the performance?

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Originally the Quad FX was supposed to be for enthusiasts such as gamers. Now that the benchmarks have come out and have proven the Quad FX to be a flop, crash, burn, failure, the AMD camp is now out to find whatever synthetic benchmark it does best in and try to create real-world uses.

Remember, this is not the first time someone has put two sockets on one board, so this isn't like a miracle breakthrough by any means. If you want a server board to run server applications, here's a thought: BUY A SERVER.

Quad FX manages to miss any market I can think of:

Gamers: Quad FX doesn't perform
Enthusiast: Quad FX doesn't perform
Mainstream: Quad FX is too expensive when compared to other solutions
AMD Fanboy: Quad FX is too expensive and requires me to ditch my old motherboard and processor
Server\Workstation: Quad FX doesn't perform and costs more than other solutions. Quad FX also uses much more power, in a 24/7 environment this will cost my company greatly over the life of the equipment

 

[killmess]

you would do well to join the rest and admonish AMD for such poor planning.939 wasnt that superior,at all and at the last stages intel was creeping up on amd,and AMD ignored it.rested on laurels.

I'm an amd fan, but I have to admit it, it's true.
I hope AMD don't make the same mistake in the future. :roll: :!:

 

[killmess]

Originally the Quad FX was supposed to be for enthusiasts such as gamers. Now that the benchmarks have come out and have proven the Quad FX to be a flop, crash, burn, failure, the AMD camp is now out to find whatever synthetic benchmark it does best in and try to create real-world uses.

Remember, this is not the first time someone has put two sockets on one board, so this isn't like a miracle breakthrough by any means. If you want a server board to run server applications, here's a thought: BUY A SERVER.

Quad FX manages to miss any market I can think of:

Gamers: Quad FX doesn't perform
Enthusiast: Quad FX doesn't perform
Mainstream: Quad FX is too expensive when compared to other solutions
AMD Fanboy: Quad FX is too expensive and requires me to ditch my old motherboard and processor
Server\Workstation: Quad FX doesn't perform and costs more than other solutions. Quad FX also uses much more power, in a 24/7 environment this will cost my company greatly over the life of the equipment

How much cost a server :?: :| :tongue: $$$$$ 8O and a Quad FX computer :?:
Does that answer your question?

 

[SMU_Pony]

its like watching the wac conference creep up on the bcs.

The problem with the WAC is that when it creeps up on the BCS, it gets put into a bowl game against the Big 12 😉 Not meaning take a shot at the WAC, but it really is rather weak - and I was a WAC-fan for quite some time (from 1996 until SMU jumped to C-USA)

 

[BaronMatrix]

I've got an idea, don't buy it. You still haven't answered why they can't increase the perf with a newer chipset and drop power with a new Rev.

Baron, please provide a link where a chipset has made more than a few % difference in raw performance. The chipset on an AMD platform has nothing to do with computational power, jeeeeeze do you not know anything??

What good will an in-house / new chipset do --- perhaps shave 20-40 watts off of the already massive 600 Watts this beast already chews up....

Just a quick lesson -- since you do not understand.

CPU connects to second CPU via HT, each CPU connects directly to memory through the on die memory controller. IO goes to the chipset, which connects to the graphics cards and HDs, which are not the part of the equation that makes this pile of crap suck.

He doesn't need to explain to you why a new chipset won't work, it is common knowledge aside from people as ignorant as you are.

Continue to live the fantasy that I give a crap. I try to be even handed when dealing with competing manufs.

The AMD/Intel issue seems to be a problem for most.

Hmmmmm!


BTW, Hexus, whom I believe is a pretty reputable org got nVidia to say there was a problem with the BIOS NUMA. Even C2Q gets less than C2D in dual threaded games and the pinnacle of power (600W min C2Q -SLI 8800GTX) is ridiculous without adding the second chip ( that is the only difference in power which says that nVidia can get TWO 590SLIs at almost exactly the same power as one 680i.

Since the only problem for the future is power and I never by SLI or the top end money-guzzling anything, I will be maybe a few bucks more a year but having QFX or C2Q means you have to REALLY TRY to get to 100% load of all cores.


That will only happen a maximum of 20% of the time the PC Is used and if productivity is increased at lower CPU % then you have more time to do the things you do.

GO QFX!!

 

[apache_lives]

I've got an idea, don't buy it. You still haven't answered why they can't increase the perf with a newer chipset and drop power with a new Rev.

Baron, please provide a link where a chipset has made more than a few % difference in raw performance. The chipset on an AMD platform has nothing to do with computational power, jeeeeeze do you not know anything??

What good will an in-house / new chipset do --- perhaps shave 20-40 watts off of the already massive 600 Watts this beast already chews up....

Just a quick lesson -- since you do not understand.

CPU connects to second CPU via HT, each CPU connects directly to memory through the on die memory controller. IO goes to the chipset, which connects to the graphics cards and HDs, which are not the part of the equation that makes this pile of crap suck.

He doesn't need to explain to you why a new chipset won't work, it is common knowledge aside from people as ignorant as you are.

Continue to live the fantasy that I give a crap. I try to be even handed when dealing with competing manufs.

The AMD/Intel issue seems to be a problem for most.

Hmmmmm!


BTW, Hexus, whom I believe is a pretty reputable org got nVidia to say there was a problem with the BIOS NUMA. Even C2Q gets less than C2D in dual threaded games and the pinnacle of power (600W min C2Q -SLI 8800GTX) is ridiculous without adding the second chip ( that is the only difference in power which says that nVidia can get TWO 590SLIs at almost exactly the same power as one 680i.

Since the only problem for the future is power and I never by SLI or the top end money-guzzling anything, I will be maybe a few bucks more a year but having QFX or C2Q means you have to REALLY TRY to get to 100% load of all cores.


That will only happen a maximum of 20% of the time the PC Is used and if productivity is increased at lower CPU % then you have more time to do the things you do.

GO QFX!!

LOL! even you say 600w is rediculous! haha

Ofcourse C2Q is slower in games - ITS TOP SPEED IS 2.66GHZ IN COMPARISON TO THE FULL 2.93GHZ OF THE C2D (x6800) :roll:

and as for the "i dont use the cpu to 100% bs" - then why dont you use a AMD K6 for gaming?

OPEN YOUR FRIGGIN EYES MORON - 4x4 IS HOTTER, SLOWER AND MORE EXPENSIVE THEN INTELS SOLUTION, AND ONLY YOU DONT SEE THAT? AMD HAS RULED THE LAST FEW YEARS, NOT ANYMORE (for now anyhow)

 

[Action_Man]

Can AMD salvage QFX with an in-house chipset?

GO QFX!!

What a moron. Get back to cleaning toilets and stop pretending you know something.

 

[turpit]

Heck the likely do this too to get those powers down, since they are pushing a 2.6 GHz opteron, the volume will be very low and the price they can get will be relatively high....

The point is, it is nothing special like you are so ignorantly trying to say. In fact, you are fairly dimwittedly stupid.

When rational discussion fails, try name calling. You're now saying, I guess, that you didn't say they used 100nm spacing to get the power down? Just answer the question.

Well, I guess that means you have no rationale what so ever

You're a jackass. If you look at my numbers on Page 3 you will see I am comparing clock for clock 5200+ - FX70 and FX62 - FX72.

That makes them an a-hole. If someone wants to nitpick I will lose no sleep.

What is your malfunction numbnuts? Your calculation was the same as mine. It showed better than 100% scaling for QFX and 97% scaling for C2Q.

And thats just from this page of this thread.

 

[gOJDO]

GO QFX!!

 

[clairvoyant129]

Quad FX sucks. No boutique or well established gaming PC vendor like VoodooPC/HP, Dell/Alienware, Falcon NW wants it (they already selling Kentsfield OVERCLOCKED). Sucks big time in gaming!

They wouldn't touch 4x4 with a ten foot pole. Alienware abandoned it right after launch.

https://beta.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=18375538&postID=6897564205464927314

Give it up Barron, you're the only one who believes 4x4 is some innovative solution from AMD. It does not close the gap as you're comparing a FX-74 @ 3GHz to a QX6700 @ 2.66GHz.

4x4 = Abondonware

And in other news AMD is chaining two trucks together to make a quad truck! Of course it uses double the gasoline, but hey it is really innovative and the trucks can be later swapped out for bigger SUV's...

Of course it's performance is not as good as Intel's car, but hey it uses twice as much gasoline and for those megataskers who need to tow 5 cars behind them (which every truck enthusiast needs to do, no?), it can do that...I think they call it a 4x4?!?!? Oh and you probably will need a new radiator to keep the engine from overheating, but you can plug in 4 CD players and 12 cigarette lighters/power adapters...I hear the other car maker can only have 2 CD players and 4 cigarette lighter so you are quite limited listening to music while chain smoking....

:lol:

 

[WR]

Can AMD salvage QFX? Sure they can. But they need new processors to do this, not a chipset.

Chipset won't do a thing as we don't see a problem so far with the PCI-express or other onboard components. The 4x4 motherboard houses two southbridges - that's the "chipset" for all K8 motherboards. The performances problems we are seeing have to do with memory and core components, not PCI or SATA links.

The latency of the inter-CPU cHT link is a function of the circuitry within the socket 1207 K8s. If that's buggy, they need to redesign the CPU mask as this circuitry is on the same piece of silicon as the core. On the other hand, latency could also show up with poor driver or BIOS management of that link - that would be much easier to fix as it wouldn't involve replacing the CPUs.

 

[1Tanker]

Quad FX sucks. No boutique or well established gaming PC vendor like VoodooPC/HP, Dell/Alienware, Falcon NW wants it (they already selling Kentsfield OVERCLOCKED). Sucks big time in gaming!

They wouldn't touch 4x4 with a ten foot pole. Alienware abandoned it right after launch.

https://beta.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=18375538&postID=6897564205464927314

Give it up Barron, you're the only one who believes 4x4 is some innovative solution from AMD. It does not close the gap as you're comparing a FX-74 @ 3GHz to a QX6700 @ 2.66GHz.

4x4 = Abondonware

And in other news AMD is chaining two trucks together to make a quad truck! Of course it uses double the gasoline, but hey it is really innovative and the trucks can be later swapped out for bigger SUV's...

Of course it's performance is not as good as Intel's car, but hey it uses twice as much gasoline and for those megataskers who need to tow 5 cars behind them (which every truck enthusiast needs to do, no?), it can do that...I think they call it a 4x4?!?!? Oh and you probably will need a new radiator to keep the engine from overheating, but you can plug in 4 CD players and 12 cigarette lighters/power adapters...I hear the other car maker can only have 2 CD players and 4 cigarette lighter so you are quite limited listening to music while chain smoking....

:lol:I think AMD would have gladly let 4x4 fall by the wayside, and disappear like a bad rumour....if Baron Matrix hadn't heard about it!! Once he heard about it, AMD had no choice, but to see this through, as Baron Matrix is a one-man AMD ad machine. Once he hears a rumour about AMD, he relentlously pushes it on any, and everyone he possibly can(while proclaiming it to be his idea). Poor AMD....what do you do when you have a stalker/Fanboy who does you more harm than good?

 

[wolverinero79]

Heck the likely do this too to get those powers down, since they are pushing a 2.6 GHz opteron, the volume will be very low and the price they can get will be relatively high....

The point is, it is nothing special like you are so ignorantly trying to say. In fact, you are fairly dimwittedly stupid.

When rational discussion fails, try name calling. You're now saying, I guess, that you didn't say they used 100nm spacing to get the power down? Just answer the question.

Well, I guess that means you have no rationale what so ever

You're a jackass. If you look at my numbers on Page 3 you will see I am comparing clock for clock 5200+ - FX70 and FX62 - FX72.

That makes them an a-hole. If someone wants to nitpick I will lose no sleep.

What is your malfunction numbnuts? Your calculation was the same as mine. It showed better than 100% scaling for QFX and 97% scaling for C2Q.

And thats just from this page of this thread.

I guess I wasn't the only one to notice this

 

[enforcer22]

encoding 4 video clips, and playing 2 games at the same time..... quote]

Im one of those few 😉 i would love to encode as many videos at the same time as i possibly could while still doing what i want to like playing games.

Also when it comes to MMO games i tend to run hte game at least 4 times at once which is why i got a dual core at the same time.

Anyways thats the only thing i wanted to comment about. I dont actualy care about the release of any quad core cpus or what platform they are on at this time.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Baron's my forumz buddy and all, but I must say, if you buy QuadFX you will regret it.

Quad FX is inferior in just about every single way. Quad FX is one of the most overwhelming failures I have ever seen.

I know you'll never buy an Intel machine, but do your wallet a favor and hold off on AMD quad until they actually make a quad core processor.

Over on the site which I cannot and will not name I will quote the following that made me wee myself:

An Intel system doesn't have enough bandwidth to handle DDR2 800. The 4x4 can allow 4 gamers play 4 different games at the same time without a glitch.

WHY THE (BLEEP) WOULD SOMEONE WANT TO RUN FOUR INSTANCES OF THE SAME GAME? WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO RUN ANYTHING MORE THAN ONE INSTANCE OF A GAME?

I expect Quad FX to become a cheaper server alternative. 12 SATA drives, 8TB, cheap ram, one such beast can handle 8000 Google mail users or more. With 100,000 such machines, you can kill Google.

I don't even know what the hell that means. Wouldn't Google run their servers on...um... SERVERS? And haven't we had huge multi-processor servers for years?

But true multitasking benchmarks would show Quad FX fragging anything Intel has in stock. As I said long time ago, the right way to measure multitasking performance is to launch multiple instances of the same program and measure the completion time. In this case, one should launch four copies of the same program at the same time.

Who the hell runs the same thing four times over? There's very few instances where one would do that. Basically, Shakira is trying to CREATE ARTIFICIAL BENCHMARKS that somehow put Quad FX on top of Core 2 Quad.

 

[1Tanker]

Baron's my forumz buddy and all, but I must say, if you buy QuadFX you will regret it.

Quad FX is inferior in just about every single way. Quad FX is one of the most overwhelming failures I have ever seen.

I know you'll never buy an Intel machine, but do your wallet a favor and hold off on AMD quad until they actually make a quad core processor.

Over on the site which I cannot and will not name I will quote the following that made me wee myself:

An Intel system doesn't have enough bandwidth to handle DDR2 800. The 4x4 can allow 4 gamers play 4 different games at the same time without a glitch.

WHY THE (BLEEP) WOULD SOMEONE WANT TO RUN FOUR INSTANCES OF THE SAME GAME? WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO RUN ANYTHING MORE THAN ONE INSTANCE OF A GAME?

I expect Quad FX to become a cheaper server alternative. 12 SATA drives, 8TB, cheap ram, one such beast can handle 8000 Google mail users or more. With 100,000 such machines, you can kill Google.

I don't even know what the hell that means. Wouldn't Google run their servers on...um... SERVERS? And haven't we had huge multi-processor servers for years?

But true multitasking benchmarks would show Quad FX fragging anything Intel has in stock. As I said long time ago, the right way to measure multitasking performance is to launch multiple instances of the same program and measure the completion time. In this case, one should launch four copies of the same program at the same time.

Who the hell runs the same thing four times over? There's very few instances where one would do that. Basically, Shakira is trying to CREATE ARTIFICIAL BENCHMARKS that somehow put Quad FX on top of Core 2 Quad.4 browser windows!! What, are ya new, or something?

 

[enforcer22]

only 4 windows? hell just surfing toms i can have at least 12 open 😀

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

browser windows!! What, are ya new, or something?

Yes, but Shakira is talking about 4 challenging tasks. Like who opens up four instances of Battlefield 2 and really uses all four at once. Shakria is full of it. You can open up 4 instances of IE on a Pentium III processor with little to no delay.

 

[1Tanker]

i was just teasing ya, bud.

 

[mesarectifier]

Every so often I am reminded to go back to Sharikou's blog. Here is what I find on the subject of 4x4:

Quad FX is never designed to be a little sports car for ladies in pink. Quad FX is for big masculine men who like to drive Hummers which can last 10 years under combat conditions. Gas mileage is a non issue in this case. It's horse power, torque and towing weight that matter.

Errrr, yuh, okay. So what he's saying is that the only two people in the world who are going to buy 4x4 are Arnold Schwarzenegger and Dog the Bounty Hunter, because we're all cissy boys. Or am I missing something?

I love the part about 'combat conditions', too. Perhaps it's his way of encouraging us to take a gun to our new 4x4 rigs?

You can't compare a Ford F150 truck (AMD 4x4) to a Volkswagen (Intel) by speed alone.

No. God forbid someone compare two CPUs on...speed? Speed doesn't matter! What Kind of a fool compares CPUs on their speed. Some people.

These are different parts from the entry TC has already posted, btw.

Not related at all, but I love this picture on his homepage at the moment.

"* Estimated performance by AMD internal measurements and/or indicators" I believe it says. So some real rock-solid stuff then!

 

[gOJDO]

Who the hell runs the same thing four times over?

Shakira will connect 4 monitors to 4x4 and it'll watch 4 gay-porno HDVD movies at same time. Menwhile it will masturbrate on 4x4.