Can AMD salvage QFX with an in-house chipset?

[BaronMatrix]

You're wrong.

Oh yeah....Everybody is wrong, except you BaronBS!

I'm wrong sometimes. Everyone is. This is not my job so I don't have to be right all the time and neither does anyone else.

Show me where you have been right?
I have read this entire thread, and I have seen reaaly poor argumentation from your side:
Your math is FLAWED!
Your nLogic© is FLAWED!
Your argumentation(Argumentum ad ignorantiam) is FLAWED!
Hell, even your "conclusions" are FLAWED!

Terra - Do you have a mental disorder I should beware of?


I was right that I would get so far under your skin that you would give me my own trademark.

 

[dasickninja]

I'm regretting posting here. This thread has gone to the dogs. God I've gotta stop being introspective.

 

[Terracide]

I was right that I would get so far under your skin that you would give me my own trademark.

I didn't give you anything, again you live in anther reality.
I didn't come up with the nLogic© *slaps forehead*
Even your rebuttals are FLAWED! :roll:

Terra - I would have named you BaronBullShit© if anything

 

[Terracide]

I'm regretting posting here. This thread has gone to the dogs. God I've gotta stop being introspective.

This thread went to the dogs with the first post, don't feel sorry 😉

Terra - It's the OP that should feel sorry...but that would be hoping to much

 

[Dahak]

I believe that with the right partners and a great think tank,they should be able to utilize all performance aspects of the quadfx.I wish them luck.I was considering building a quadfx system until I saw the performance reviews.An in-house chipset should be able to work.

Dahak

 

[WR]

HE = high efficiency?
EE = energy efficient?
LV = low voltage?

The marketing acronyms don't matter as the concept is the same. In the enthusiast/overclocking world the term used is "undervolting," which is closely reflected in the phrase "low-voltage" or the commonly used acronym LV. AMD may be using different terms to convey that it's doing something on top of reducing input voltage, but I assure you that the primary cause of the much lower TDPs is a lower voltage.

The reason o/c'ers don't talk directly in terms of efficiency is that the performance-per-watt of a processor depends tremendously on the input voltage, which o/c'ers manually adjust. Within the same processor family, you can see great swings in efficiency merely from adjusting voltage.

 

[Stevemeister]

I think as you that the current offering is only halfway on the raod to where things will go. AMD now have 65nm technology and it won't be long before they have quad core in a single processor at which point with 2 processors you have 8 cores on one board. If they can do this such that the existing FX70's can be upgraded simply by replacing them with quadcore versions they will have a big coup - always assuming Intel don;t do the same thing and make a board with 2 QX6700's on it

 

[BaronMatrix]

I'm regretting posting here. This thread has gone to the dogs. God I've gotta stop being introspective.

This thread went to the dogs with the first post, don't feel sorry 😉

Terra - It's the OP that should feel sorry...but that would be hoping to much

It would , wouldn't it? I saw INCREDIBLE SCALING. I saw QFX in some cases SIGNIFICANTLY CLOSE THE GAP between the high end AMD and Intel desktops. I saw both platforms using 550W+ with DX10 SLI.
I saw that the onley power difference bwetween the two platforms was the power for the extra chip (alleviated were QFX under 65nm - ummm, hey Dirk). I saw that the aforementioned was such even considering that QFX uses


TWO CHIPSETS.


Does that talk to the efficiency of IMC and HT or am I just spreading FUD again?

K8 is known for its scalability. Optimiations from AMD have shown to lower power AND raise perf under the same node.

Intel is pushing themselves and the entire industry towrds smaller nodes(read:ASPs) while customers constantly have to change platforms to keep up (due to voltage/clock speed necessities).

Since AMD made 90nm into 55W server chips, they could definitely get 65nm down to 30W within a year (I see peopel creeping up on me).


Again I will reserve judgement since neither Vista nor AMDs chipset have been released, but fror my needs I will LOVE this platform. Most of my usage will be relative to CnQ and even a slower FX 62 is faster than a 4400+ so my current games will fly and DX10 will be



I can't even think of a word.

Vista will turn out to be something else for multi-core. MS DOES HAVE SOME BRILLIANT DEVS IN WINDOWS.

 

[BaronMatrix]

Yes you are speaking FUD again... the chipset has no bearing on the peformance of the IMC nor the speed at which HT can run and shuttle data.

Power, performance, which one will I complain about in this post.

 

[1Tanker]

Well Baron:

If I were to be around after you buy your megamonster machine and it were to catch on fire, I would definently pee on you to make sure you would not get burned. The boys at Intel would just sit there and watch you go up in flames. They are a cold hearted bunch.

I don't like to speak for everyone but I bet most people here would pee on you if you were to catch on fire, so even though they are in support of Intel's superior products at this time they would give up a few quarts of urine to assure that AMD will have at least one voice of support.

I'd go one step further, and pee on him in advance(i'm a nice guy). That way there will be no chance of him catching on fire.

***Pats self on the back*** 😛

 

[Terracide]

I'm regretting posting here. This thread has gone to the dogs. God I've gotta stop being introspective.

This thread went to the dogs with the first post, don't feel sorry 😉

Terra - It's the OP that should feel sorry...but that would be hoping to much

It would , wouldn't it? I saw INCREDIBLE SCALING. I saw QFX in some cases SIGNIFICANTLY CLOSE THE GAP between the high end AMD and Intel desktops. I saw both platforms using 550W+ with DX10 SLI.
I saw that the onley power difference bwetween the two platforms was the power for the extra chip (alleviated were QFX under 65nm - ummm, hey Dirk). I saw that the aforementioned was such even considering that QFX uses


TWO CHIPSETS.


Does that talk to the efficiency of IMC and HT or am I just spreading FUD again?

K8 is known for its scalability. Optimiations from AMD have shown to lower power AND raise perf under the same node.

Intel is pushing themselves and the entire industry towrds smaller nodes(read:ASPs) while customers constantly have to change platforms to keep up (due to voltage/clock speed necessities).

Since AMD made 90nm into 55W server chips, they could definitely get 65nm down to 30W within a year (I see peopel creeping up on me).


Again I will reserve judgement since neither Vista nor AMDs chipset have been released, but fror my needs I will LOVE this platform. Most of my usage will be relative to CnQ and even a slower FX 62 is faster than a 4400+ so my current games will fly and DX10 will be



I can't even think of a word.

Vista will turn out to be something else for multi-core. MS DOES HAVE SOME BRILLIANT DEVS IN WINDOWS.

Just when I thought you coulnd't possible post anything dumber...you go and amaze me.
Are you a paid marketing shill?

Wake up and smell the roses...4x4 has made a big *THUMP*..and a big hole in theground.

And after reading more post here I can see that even your predictions are FLAWED!
You sure got that powerconsumption wrong eh?
And the preformance too...

Terra - You remind of a bungie-jumper...with no cord...*THUMP*

 

[turpit]

When Porsche releases a new engine it isn't to be faster than Ferrari's new engine, it's to be faster than Porsche's old engine.

Baron, I live in two miles north of Eight Mile (remember that movie?). So I'm just north of Detroit and let's say we know a little something about the automotive industry. Automotive companies don't compete with themselves, they compete with each other. Why does GM have a research and development facility that takes up two square miles of the city I live in (Warren, Michigan)? It's to make better products than what their competitors make.

All companies are like that. Intel drives AMD to be better and AMD drives Intel to be better.


You're wrong.

Wow.

Just wow.

Like a pre teen child, in response to "my daddy's better than your daddy". I can almost see his lower lip quivering in uncertainty and doubt as his eyes well up with tears.

It OK Baron....calm down....take a deep breath and let it all out. You're right....AMD really isnt in business to make money, they're just here to provide deserving children with christmas/kwanza/hanukkah/birthday/>insert your own holiday here< presents at no cost to anyone out of the pure goodness of their hearts.



And the Tooth Fairy really exists too.

 

[intelamduser]

With this show of attention you could end up with a friend for life.

 

[TabrisDarkPeace]

.....further cementing his reputation as a guy who just doesn't give a crap.

- about some of BaronMatrix's posts, yes - you are actually right for once in this thread. - 8O

Enjoy:

I sold it to someone in Melbourne who prob' caused it to explode, but it funded 2 new PCs, an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+ (Socket AM2) and an Intel Core 2 Duo (3000/1333) which outperforms my old quad-core Opteron.

Go back to your 'games' applications BaronMatrix, there is simply no way you use your PC in such a way that you'll need 4 Athlon 64-FX cores. (Anyone that does seeks Registered ECC memory - so this platform is nearly pointless).

 

[TabrisDarkPeace]

I will never buy Intel. They don't play well with others. They don't deserve anymore praise than the company that created the two-chip 4 bit microprocessor,...

AMD are not playing well with their mainboard partners.
Only Asus will be making Quad-FX boards.

Some vendors got a little angry at this, but since Quad-FX is now considered a "failure to launch" product, the vendors that missed out are not so angry any more, and Asus is feeling a bit stupid tarnishing their brand rep. - 😳 (@ Asus).

When Giga-byte (even though they share manufacturing facilities) was not going to risk it, it was fairly obvious that it wasn't going to work out.

:arrow: Tip of the day: From a user on this forum. - 8)

 

[BaronMatrix]

Just when I thought you coulnd't possible post anything dumber...you go and amaze me.
Are you a paid marketing shill?

Wake up and smell the roses...4x4 has made a big *THUMP*..and a big hole in theground.

And after reading more post here I can see that even your predictions are FLAWED!
You sure got that powerconsumption wrong eh?
And the preformance too...

Terra - You remind of a bungie-jumper...with no cord...*THUMP*

So don't buy it. It'll still compile as fast whether you think it's good or not. It'll still run crazy VMs whether or not you buy it. I guess QFX doesn't need you either.

 

[BaronMatrix]

I will never buy Intel. They don't play well with others. They don't deserve anymore praise than the company that created the two-chip 4 bit microprocessor,...

AMD are not playing well with their mainboard partners.
Only Asus will be making Quad-FX boards.

Some vendors got a little angry at this, but since Quad-FX is now considered a "failure to launch" product, the vendors that missed out are not so angry any more, and Asus is feeling a bit stupid tarnishing their brand rep. - 😳 (@ Asus).

When Giga-byte (even though they share manufacturing facilities) was not going to risk it, it was fairly obvious that it wasn't going to work out.

:arrow: Tip of the day: From a user on this forum. - 8)


Oh, shut up with your doom and gloom. You guys shuld start an Intel only Forum and hang there. Call it

Idiots in tights.

 

[BaronMatrix]

.....further cementing his reputation as a guy who just doesn't give a crap.

- about some of BaronMatrix's posts, yes - you are actually right for once in this thread. - 8O

Enjoy:

I sold it to someone in Melbourne who prob' caused it to explode, but it funded 2 new PCs, an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+ (Socket AM2) and an Intel Core 2 Duo (3000/1333) which outperforms my old quad-core Opteron.

Go back to your 'games' applications BaronMatrix, there is simply no way you use your PC in such a way that you'll need 4 Athlon 64-FX cores. (Anyone that does seeks Registered ECC memory - so this platform is nearly pointless).


You're an idiot. I am NOT , I REPEAT NOT buying this for games. It will do well in the multithreaded games but that's wat the DX10 GPU is for. The CPUs are for Visual Studio, SQL Server and Virtual Server.

These chips give me four cores of Virtualization. That's what I want.

I guess you judt shouldn't follow my purchase needs thugh, since the Intel club would drum you out.

 

[1Tanker]

Just when I thought you coulnd't possible post anything dumber...you go and amaze me.
Are you a paid marketing shill?

Wake up and smell the roses...4x4 has made a big *THUMP*..and a big hole in theground.

And after reading more post here I can see that even your predictions are FLAWED!
You sure got that powerconsumption wrong eh?
And the preformance too...

Terra - You remind of a bungie-jumper...with no cord...*THUMP*

So don't buy it. It'll still compile as fast whether you think it's good or not. It'll still run crazy VMs whether or not you buy it. I guess QFX doesn't need you either. :trophy: POST OF THE WEEK!!! :trophy: ****caution, extreme immaturity displayed**** :roll:

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Oh, shut up with your doom and gloom. You guys shuld start an Intel only Forum and hang there. Call it

Idiots in tights.

Duuuuude. This was basically an AMD fanboy forum before Conroe was release and AMD ruled. Times have changed, and so have the fanboys. Most of the AMD guys are switching camps until AMD can come up with something better.

It's not that we hate AMD, or that we love Intel. Intel simply has better products and we can't allow someone to come here and dispense flawed advice.

 

[boduke]

The fact that you just read around the precedent for 55W Opterons

Its called LV opterons moron, get over it intel has LV xeons as well.

Eat me.

Sorry I'm not gay but thanks for offering.

Oh yeah, I won't be buying because current G80s are too expensive and hot. I may wait for R600.

R600 will be just as hot noob.

Notice how his purchase date keeps getting pushed out further and further. Sort of like Sharidouche's bankruptcy predictions for Intel. Intersting similarities, don't you think?


I will not buy before DX10 and Vista. I was going to slap my fresh copy of XP X64 on it but I decided to wait for Vista.

Is that OK? Or does it denote a certain amount of uncertainty ( or would that be fear, uncertainty and doubt?)

Why can't you just accept that just like people bought Intel when they were slower (?) they will buy AMD even though they are slower?

Give it up. Get a life.......And other phrases meant to slap you into reality.

You're telling me to get a life? Thats laughable. This was my last post before I left my office, picked up my wife, spending an enjoyable night at the theater.

What did you do? You spent your evening on this board arguing, again, with people who you claim you don't care what they think, yet you argue with same rabidity that GWB argues his foriegn policy. (And doing about as well a job at it I might add)

So who needs to get a life again?

I also have to point this out...you say this:

I will never buy Intel. They don't play well with others. They don't deserve anymore praise....

After saying this:

I was going to slap my fresh copy of XP X64 on it but I decided to wait for Vista

Surely if you have such an issue with Intel playing well with others (and it certainly CAN'T be on a technical level, so it must be a moral level for you), then how on earth can you justify using any MS product?

Go, enjoy your 4x4, but make sure you install Linux on it, jr, or you are a hypocrite.

/exit thread

 

[atp777]

.....further cementing his reputation as a guy who just doesn't give a crap.

- about some of BaronMatrix's posts, yes - you are actually right for once in this thread. - 8O

Enjoy:

I sold it to someone in Melbourne who prob' caused it to explode, but it funded 2 new PCs, an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+ (Socket AM2) and an Intel Core 2 Duo (3000/1333) which outperforms my old quad-core Opteron.

Go back to your 'games' applications BaronMatrix, there is simply no way you use your PC in such a way that you'll need 4 Athlon 64-FX cores. (Anyone that does seeks Registered ECC memory - so this platform is nearly pointless).


You're an idiot. I am NOT , I REPEAT NOT buying this for games. It will do well in the multithreaded games but that's wat the DX10 GPU is for. The CPUs are for Visual Studio, SQL Server and Virtual Server.

These chips give me four cores of Virtualization. That's what I want.

I guess you judt shouldn't follow my purchase needs thugh, since the Intel club would drum you out.

Well... if you're not buying it to play games why is there the need for a DX10 GPU and why do you keep talking about Valve scaling so well?

 

[BaronMatrix]

It OK Baron....calm down....take a deep breath and let it all out. You're right....AMD really isnt in business to make money, they're just here to provide deserving children with christmas/kwanza/hanukkah/birthday/>insert your own holiday here< presents at no cost to anyone out of the pure goodness of their hearts.

You added the emphasis. I don't get mad I get QFX.

 

[BaronMatrix]

Oh, shut up with your doom and gloom. You guys shuld start an Intel only Forum and hang there. Call it

Idiots in tights.

Duuuuude. This was basically an AMD fanboy forum before Conroe was release and AMD ruled. Times have changed, and so have the fanboys. Most of the AMD guys are switching camps until AMD can come up with something better.

It's not that we hate AMD, or that we love Intel. Intel simply has better products and we can't allow someone to come here and dispense flawed advice.


I don't give out advice, dude. This was never an AMD fanboy Forum. Intel followers were always holier-than-thou (insert colorful adjective) s.

That's why I don't give any of you the benefit of the doubt. This is just for fun. It is not for edification (I hope) or advanced CPU theory.

Just for fun. I stll plan on buying the platform, regardless of what Intel has out. If I'm dumb for it, fine, I will never ask you to use the PC.

I mean why are you trying to tell me how to spend my money? I am paying so I buy what I want, not what the denziens of a public forum want.
Yes, C2Q is faster but both are faster than my 4400+ and I prefer AMD.

Again I find it amazing that no one catches on to the fact that people who buy this will be upgrading. This means that the average purchaser who has 939 or AM2 will get 60-200% perf increases, depending on where they started which FX and which app.

I can't wait for the first Vista multithreaded game to come out.

QFX will smoke. C2Q will smoke. Also, for those who say I'm giving people advice, how is that any different than you trying to talk me out of my purchase?

I guess we'll have to wait R600 and the RD600 chipset to see if my questions yields a positive. I think it will since NUMA is designed to put the memory nearest the chip.

It's obvious that the issues reported by Legit Review (IIRC) showed that it wasn't working so app data would get split amongst sockets.

Vista is said to improve this a lot while of course being based on multi-core. If they keep the OS in one socket, most apps will always fit in to the other banks. 2GB is a large process size.
Some complex apps WILL use sets that size but they are already multithreaded and perf should be nearly identical to the Opteron 2xxx with the same clock and amount of RAM.


All hail QFX.

 

[mesarectifier]

I don't get mad I get QFX.

Okay, now imagine, if you will, Arnold Schwarzenegger walking out of the massive explosion at the end of Predator and saying that.

There you go BM, send that off to AMD - you've got yourself an ad campaign!