Dual cores 64bit, 128bit, & MB memory support

[pkquat]

For desktop - personal systems, I have not seen much information or even speculation on how the AMD64, Intel Dual Core (DC), and AMD DC would compare on a 64 bit system. There have been reports that the AMD64 walks over Intels Single Core (SC) EMT64 32 bit processors running 64 bit programs and OS in most cases, and that there is little benefit to either brands DC's when running 32bit programs and OS.

Does anyone know where there is information or good speculation on the performance of these processors with 64 bit programs and OS for desktop systems. Intels drop in processor speed for DC's may level their current advantage for video and audio editing / processing.

AMD's DC processors are essentially 128bit correct? I have only seen information on this benefit for servers or workstation applications. I have not seen clear information that there is a significant advantage to AMD's dual core processors for current 32bit programs or OS. In theory it could almost double the performance for 32bit programs and OS, but it appears the processor architecture is not designed that way. Any more information would be appreciated.

There are now chipsets that will support Intels DC's processors. The 955X and Nvidia's nForce4 IE. For AMD DC's, it has been said that Nvidia's nForce4 chipset would only need a BOIS update. I have not seen any information from MB manufacturers regarding the ability to update the BIOS to support AMD dual cores. Any additoinal information would be appreciated.

Intel's site says the 955X chipset will support 8GB (with 4 DIMM's?) and Nvidia's site says the nForce4 IE will support 16GB with 4 DIMM's. I did not find any information on how much memory the AMD nForce4 will support. The information from MB manufacturers also appears sketchy on the maximum about of memory they support. I would assume they would meet the maximum of the chipset, at least for the 955, and the nForce4 IE. Any additional information regarding the nForce chipset for AMD would be appreciated.

I ask this in jest. Any rumours of a 955XE?

TIA

pkquat

 

[Schmide]

Well <A HREF="http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q2/opteron-x75/index.x?pg=1" target="_new">http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q2/opteron-x75/index.x?pg=1</A> used 64 bit windows and some compiled 64 bit binaries.

Dichromatic for your viewing plesure...

 

[Mephistopheles]

AMD's DC processors are essentially 128bit correct?

I don't quite know what you mean. No, they're extended to 64-bit, they're in no way 128 bit. A four-processor Opteron system isn't quite a 256 bit system either... Can't do this kind of math, sorry, it's just wrong...

As for 64 bit apps: A64s seem better equipped, as of now, to run those, but there hasn't been a lot of extensive testing yet. Hopefully with Win64's introduction...

As for DCs: in theory, AMD's DCs have better on-die integration and therefore offer better "move-to-dual-core" performance. In practice, that doesn't make any difference because essentially, the architectures themselves are so different that the core integration matters, as it would seem to this point, much less than architectural single-core features (ODMC, for instance).

Also, you seem very worried about motherboard support. Well, consider that dual-core mainstream processors haven't even been adequately launched yet (Intel's processors are slated for late May release, among with chipsets and probably mobos as well). AMD has no impending dual-core Athlon64 release (they actually announced it, but hey, the processors won't be available); they are positioning dual-core only for Opterons now. As for the actual motherboards, Intel will release dual-core compatible mobos simultaneously with dual-core processors, and all 90nm-compatible A64 S939 mobos will support dual-core A64s (may require a BIOS upgrade, but they will be supported nonetheless). The dual-core processors, though, will only start appearing in small quantities over the next several months... Probably appearing in greater quantities for Intel and in better quality and speed for AMD...<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Mephistopheles on 04/27/05 01:36 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[phial]

For desktop - personal systems, I have not seen much information or even speculation on how the AMD64, Intel Dual Core (DC), and AMD DC would compare on a 64 bit system. There have been reports that the AMD64 walks over Intels Single Core (SC) EMT64 32 bit processors running 64 bit programs and OS in most cases, and that there is little benefit to either brands DC's when running 32bit programs and OS.

Does anyone know where there is information or good speculation on the performance of these processors with 64 bit programs and OS for desktop systems. Intels drop in processor speed for DC's may level their current advantage for video and audio editing / processing.

AMD's DC processors are essentially 128bit correct? I have only seen information on this benefit for servers or workstation applications. I have not seen clear information that there is a significant advantage to AMD's dual core processors for current 32bit programs or OS. In theory it could almost double the performance for 32bit programs and OS, but it appears the processor architecture is not designed that way. Any more information would be appreciated.

There are now chipsets that will support Intels DC's processors. The 955X and Nvidia's nForce4 IE. For AMD DC's, it has been said that Nvidia's nForce4 chipset would only need a BOIS update. I have not seen any information from MB manufacturers regarding the ability to update the BIOS to support AMD dual cores. Any additoinal information would be appreciated.

Intel's site says the 955X chipset will support 8GB (with 4 DIMM's?) and Nvidia's site says the nForce4 IE will support 16GB with 4 DIMM's. I did not find any information on how much memory the AMD nForce4 will support. The information from MB manufacturers also appears sketchy on the maximum about of memory they support. I would assume they would meet the maximum of the chipset, at least for the 955, and the nForce4 IE. Any additional information regarding the nForce chipset for AMD would be appreciated.

I ask this in jest. Any rumours of a 955XE?

TIA

pkquat

your name is in teh upper left hand corner of your post, so you dont have to sign the bottom as if your writing old fashioned mail

-------
Work sucks.

 

[P4Man]

>We probably won't have any of those accessible anytime soon,
>unfortunately - not for A64s, anyway. Within a month or two
>from now, we might just be seeing the first
>dual-core-enabled
> mobos, but only for Intel...

Ahem.. hello ? AMD has stated over and over, dual core opterons work just fine in existing motherboards. only a bios update is required. Same applies for socket 939, exisiting motherboards will support A64 X2s.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

 

[Mephistopheles]

Sorry, that came out completely wrong... I wrote that post quickly and in haste because I was busy... Let me try to clear it up...

I corrected the post to something more like what I had originally in mind. As for mobo support, of course, I already knew that AMD needn't do an electrical overhaul like Intel; all mobos that support 90nm processors can be used with dual-core A64 X2s. When I said:

Within a month or two
>from now, we might just be seeing the first
>dual-core-enabled
> mobos, but only for Intel...

...I was referring to whole systems, not mobos. That was just a poor choice of words.

Now having said that, I do think you should try and take it easy... No need to "ahem... hello?" me here, it was only a mistake, and one I'd be glad to set straight. Sorry again.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Mephistopheles on 04/27/05 02:08 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[Crashman]

Maybe he's refering to bus width?

CPU's have used a 64-bit bus since the 486 days (remember pairing 32-bit 70-pin SIMMs?). And for that matter, since A64's have an internal FSB to the memory controller, aren't you limitted to calling them by their memory controller's bit width? And since 939's are dual channel directly from the CPU (since the memory controller is on the CPU), aren't they really using a 128-bit bus? Of course there's still the bridge to the chipset, but isn't that even faster, an HT bus? And isn't the HT bus narrow?

Ah, in the end, all our old definitions for bus width fail for the A64.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[pkquat]

Thanks for this information. That is what I was looking for. Hopefully they will add the AMD desktop DC's soon. I thought AMD had released some for reviews, but from the other posts I guess not.

 

[pkquat]

Thanks for all the information. I was hoping more testing had been done.

Crashman was right, I was refering to bus width - instruction set, as such. From what I have gathered AMD's 64bit DC's will toggle each set of 64bit instructions to each processor. It sounds like from what crashman said that the standard bus width is currently 64bit, so that is the limitation. I know a 128bit OS is not even on radar, but I was wondering if it would even be possible with the architecture of the AMD chip.

As for the motherboards. I was going to by a new system early last fall, but then the whole PCIe / 9XX / DDR2 / 754 / 939 stuff was going on. What a mess. I would like to get a system that is upgradable. I was wondering if the chipsets have atarted to settle down. I am mainly refering to Intel. I hope the 955X / nForce4 IE will be as long term as the 865 and 875. I was also wondering if there would be issues upgrading and AMD systems as well. Either a chipset revision or the MB mfg didn't activate a feature. Who knows. With all the changes its not as simple as it was 18 to 24 months ago.

I am looking to build an all around system for video editing, Media PC, CAD, and moderate gaming. Intel seems to be a better choice for that on the whole, but 64bit programs open up new possibilities for AMD in the future. AMD is less expensive, cooler, and Intel has lost some favor with me because of all their chipset changes.

 

[Rugger]

AMD has the gaming crown and it looks like Intel will lose the encoding/decoding crown to AMD with the dual core CPUs. Another benefit with AMD and s939, is that you can upgrade to a dual core CPU on a s939 mobo with a BIOS flash.

Edit: Intel is supposed to have the least expensive dual core CPU at around $250, but I haven't seen any good gaming benchmarks. I would expect that it wouldn't be spectacular, but it should acceptable for moderate gaming.

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by rugger on 04/27/05 03:58 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[P4Man]

>And you still haven't learnt how to use "

"! Hehe

I've learned proper quoting practices over 15 years ago, its sad everyone else seems to have forgotten how to quote .

Seriously, ">" quoting is just as clear, a de facto standard everywhere, easier (especially on non US keyboard) and quicker for short quotes -quotes should be kept short anyhow. It also doesn't rely on any server side logic, making it universal and portable

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =