FX at 2.8?

Frozen_Fallout

Distinguished
Jan 8, 2003
433
0
18,780
Ok how come the FX at 2.8 is so much better then the FX at 2.6? The reason I ask is because the FX at 2.6 isn't much better then the FX 53 just like the FX 53 isnt much better then the FX 51

Basicly the way I see it is like this

FX51 compared to AMD64 3400+ little jump
FX53 comapred to FX 51 little jump
FX 2.6 compared to the FX 53 little jump
FX 2.8 compared to the FX 2.6 is one big jump going from what Tom has said in his artical on the FX at 2.8

Now what I want to see is the FX 53 with this cooling system and see what 3ghz looks like for the FX :).

-------------------------------------------------
Remember what your fighting for, Remember why you even started fighting, and Remember who you are
 

gothitbycar

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2002
513
0
18,980
The reason it is so much faster is because its multiplier was set at 11x (the same as an FX51) and its frontside bus at 254.6mhz. A regular FX would have a higher multiplier and a 200mhz fsb.

There are a lot of discrepancies in that article, multiple times they say its on a 14x multiplier but the pictures say otherwise. Either way larger performance increases come from a higher FSB. Raising the mutliplier still increases performance but not as much as the FSB.

-----------------------
[mind went blank]
 

Frozen_Fallout

Distinguished
Jan 8, 2003
433
0
18,780
I think you mean Hypertransporting not the FSB

-------------------------------------------------
Remember what your fighting for, Remember why you even started fighting, and Remember who you are
 

Frozen_Fallout

Distinguished
Jan 8, 2003
433
0
18,780
So what your saying is that when the FX gets that 1000 HT we are going to see one major proformance boost? Because from what the artical basicly showed not just a small but a large jump over the FX at 2.6. I hope your right about the HT being the improver here because the FX is going to get a very high HT when it goes over to the 939s.

-------------------------------------------------
Remember what your fighting for, Remember why you even started fighting, and Remember who you are
 

Frozen_Fallout

Distinguished
Jan 8, 2003
433
0
18,780
>Socket 939 will still use DDR400. Jedec does not recognize DDR500. The memory bus will still be at 200 mhz but the HTT multiplier will increase
>to 5X from 4X.

In proformance terms what does this mean for the FX and Athlon64?

-------------------------------------------------
Remember what your fighting for, Remember why you even started fighting, and Remember who you are
 

phial

Splendid
Oct 29, 2002
6,757
0
25,780
not too much from what i gather, beacuse the HTT but already gives it way more bandwidth that it needs ... perhaps the higher clock will reduce latency?


remember tho that review that was out, comparing 800 to 1000mhz .. with the CPU at the same speed, wasnt much diff

-------
<A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">please dont click here! </A>
 

endyen

Splendid
Latency really is a non issue with the A64s. The integrated mem controller means a latency reduction of about 1/3. Aside from dual channel for the non FX A64s the move is to enhance stability, so there will be a slight hit on performance. The non-ECC memory will help the FX chips, dual channel for standard A64s.
 

P4Man

Distinguished
Feb 6, 2004
2,305
0
19,780
>In proformance terms what does this mean for the FX and
>Athlon64?

Considering there is hardly a measurable difference between nForoce 150 with is "crippled" 600 Mhz HTT bus and K8T800 and nForce250 with their full speed implementations, I'm not holding my breath. The 1 GHz HTT link wil give a tangible performance increase of multiway opterons though, especially the 4 way and up systems, but for a single cpu desktop ? Not much of an issue IMHO.

As for the 500 Mhz DDR, I'm fairly certain it will happen. Just like 400 Mhz, it will be non ratified standard ar first, but motherboards will support the speed "unofficially"; later on it will be ratified, and officially supported by AMD and the MB oem's. There is not much reason not to. As for performance boost of this.. Not sure; might be worth looking up some DDR333 versus DDR400 benchmarks to get an idea. Its probably going to allow K8 to continue its excellent scaling, without a huge bump, but that is just an unsubstantiated guess.

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

Mephistopheles

Distinguished
Feb 10, 2003
2,444
0
19,780
Agreed, a 1Ghz Hypertransport clock rate will not bring any increase in desktops at all. We've had someone around here benchmark a desktop using 400, 600 and 800Mhz HT bus and nothing changed. No noticeable performance difference.

So, while they will tout the 1Ghz bus because it's currently their only possible improvement to their processor lineup, this will not mean much. They will need to tout it however, because Intel will completely change their lineup within the next few months. <A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-ad-astra.html" target="_new">This article</A> from xbitlabs shows my point; while AMD is currently performance leader, Intel will be throwing new platforms and new technologies at them... And they have little else to add right now... So the true question is: will they <i>need</i> to add performance enhancements or will their current lineup hold the performance leadership?

Xbitlabs comes to the conclusion that the only thing they can possibly do is get HT to a full 1Ghz - which is, as far as I can tell, pretty useless.

But even having no new cards left to play, I think Intel will not manage to get the performance crown so easily. And even if they did, <b>there's still the 64 bit issue.... </b>

<i><font color=red>You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete</font color=red> - Buckminster Fuller </i><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Mephistopheles on 04/10/04 02:30 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

phial

Splendid
Oct 29, 2002
6,757
0
25,780
well no its not an issue, but lower is still better ;)


i just read an artical Spitfire just posted , and in there it says that the increase in HTT bus will reduce latency by like 25% or something


thats pretty damn good i guess

-------
<A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">please dont click here! </A>
 

P4Man

Distinguished
Feb 6, 2004
2,305
0
19,780
>So, while they will tout the 1Ghz bus because it's
>currently their only possible improvement to their
>processor lineup,

Hmm.. you may have missed the fact A64 will go dual channel a la FX; which, looking at the difference between the 3000+ and the 3200+, will most likely more than offset the halved cache for the bulk of applications. AMD will also support SSE3, another technology I'm not holding my breath for, but might be usefull in marketing. People like Kinney seem to fall for it, so why not do it? It seems not to require anything more than a microcode update.

> This article from xbitlabs shows my point

I personally found that article a bit dissapointing in both facts (and factual errors like claiming a dual core K8 would be twice as big a single core) and opinions. I do not think the 1 GHz hypertransport bus is merely a marketing gimmick; its something they needed for Opteron, and since opteron and A64 use the same HT bus, it simply makes sense to implement it on A64 as well, even on A64 before opteron to iron out the issues if needed. Even though I do not expect big improvements either, at least it won't hurt. I also don't think AMD needs to be desperate about new features to tout, they'll have a few new, and plenty "old" ones that are still unmatched by Intel (AMD64, Cool & Quiet, NX, ODMC,...). If AMD actually had a marketing department, that should be an easy sell, even without 64 bit windows for now.

Intel OTOH, I'm not sure how you can use a new socket for marketing, average consumers will not even know S775 is newer, and if they know, why would they care ? DDR-II OTOH, will might something of a trumph in marketing, but if the prices will indeed be >2x as high for lower performance for most of the year, it may not be the best thing to hype. Am I missing something else Intel will into ? (PCI-E and "1 GHz FSBs" will be touted by both)

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

Mephistopheles

Distinguished
Feb 10, 2003
2,444
0
19,780
Hmm.. you may have missed the fact A64 will go dual channel a la FX; which, looking at the difference between the 3000+ and the 3200
Erm... actually, you're right, I forgot that one... Ooops, sorry. This will make the A64 stronger indeed.

Are the S939 already SSE3-compatible? That one is a completely new one, I didn't read that anywhere... Are you sure? Any links?

<i><font color=red>You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete</font color=red> - Buckminster Fuller </i>
 

P4Man

Distinguished
Feb 6, 2004
2,305
0
19,780
>Are the S939 already SSE3-compatible? That one is a
>completely new one, I didn't read that anywhere... Are you
>sure? Any links?

No, not 100% sure, and no proof, but an AMD guy was taped saying SSE3 "was done" a couple of months ago and it would be released in the next respin of the K8. too me it sounded even like he meant in the next stepping, so I figured it might have made it even into the CG stepping (possibly disabled ?), if not, Newcasttle or whatever S939 chips are called should have it. SSE3 is small change really, like I said, probably just a microcode update, no need to even touch the core and execution units themselves.

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

P4Man

Distinguished
Feb 6, 2004
2,305
0
19,780
> it says that the increase in HTT bus will reduce latency
>by like 25% or something

Yes and increase "bandwith" by 25% as well ! Thing is, its not memory latency or bandwith that will be improved, since on A64 memory is linked directly to the CPU. HTT is only used to connect AGP/PCI/PCI-E, and there even 800 MHz is *plenty*. You'd have a hard time maxing it out, you'd have to combine a GB ethernet, RAID 0 stripeset and AGP intensive app for it to ever be a bottleneck.

This is quite different with P4 where the FSB is shared by the memory controller as well as AGP/PCI/PCI-E.

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

Frozen_Fallout

Distinguished
Jan 8, 2003
433
0
18,780
Yeah I saw that review and I was wondering the same. I am just really confused by the proformance boost from 2.6 to 2.8 and Im wondering why the review made it look like 2.8 was going to be un beatable and now that the 2.6 (if you OC) is out and about how come it isn't that great and it looks like a normal FX clocked at 2.8 isn't going to be that great. I am just trying to find out if the Review on the FX 2.8 OC was creditable and if so why?

-------------------------------------------------
Remember what your fighting for, Remember why you even started fighting, and Remember who you are
 

phial

Splendid
Oct 29, 2002
6,757
0
25,780
i see what your saying, mocking the dumbing down of terms



hmm , i admit i was thinking of it reducing latency with the ram.. didnt realize that the cpu-memory link wsnt across the HTT bus ;)

-------
<A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">please dont click here! </A>
 

Frozen_Fallout

Distinguished
Jan 8, 2003
433
0
18,780
AH ok I understand now. I cant wait for PCI express then and a really power vid card. This is when AMD is going to pull ahead of Intel if Intel doesn't get their FSB way up there. And now I understand why the P4 needs so much bandwith. That is if I understand this correctly.

-------------------------------------------------
Remember what your fighting for, Remember why you even started fighting, and Remember who you are
 

Frozen_Fallout

Distinguished
Jan 8, 2003
433
0
18,780
Just wondering Can the Athlon64 run a 500mhz stick of ram at 500mhz with a Hyperthreading of 800? And what do you multiply the Multiplier with the Ram or the Hyperthreading?

I need to get my self a Athlon64 soon so I can answer my own questions by playing with this stuff. Now that would be fun.

-------------------------------------------------
Remember what your fighting for, Remember why you even started fighting, and Remember who you are
 

Frozen_Fallout

Distinguished
Jan 8, 2003
433
0
18,780
With that wouldn't it be a good Idea to hold off a quick by because of the PCI express on the S939. I know that right now PCI express isn't going to be much but in the long run PCI express + an Athlon64 or FX could be really powerful.

-------------------------------------------------
Remember what your fighting for, Remember why you even started fighting, and Remember who you are
 

Frozen_Fallout

Distinguished
Jan 8, 2003
433
0
18,780
Just wondering for CPU-Z would the FSB be the Hypertransporting or the Memory speed?

-------------------------------------------------
Remember what your fighting for, Remember why you even started fighting, and Remember who you are<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Frozen_Fallout on 04/11/04 04:34 PM.</EM></FONT></P>