New AMD system

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit (More info?)

I am looking to build a new AMD system. My first question: is AMD Socket 939 the
way to go ? Are these 64-bit systems reliable ? Or should I stick with AMD
Socket A systems ?

My impression is that Socket A systems are at the end of their line and that
Socket 939 systems are what all the new AMD systems will use. Am I wrong ?

I am much more interested in reliability than speed, while at the same time I
want to naturally build a system that is using the latest technologies and will
last. I am not looking for a gaming/multimedia system but rather a developer system.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit (More info?)

On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 13:17:10 +0000, Edward Diener No Spam wrote:

> I am looking to build a new AMD system. My first question: is AMD Socket
> 939 the way to go ? Are these 64-bit systems reliable ? Or should I
> stick with AMD Socket A systems ?
>
The new A64 is much better, cooler, and faster.

> My impression is that Socket A systems are at the end of their line and
> that Socket 939 systems are what all the new AMD systems will use. Am I
> wrong ?
>
Socket A is completely dead as for as new cpu's go. Socket 939 will be
replaced next year with socket M or something like that when AMD starts
building the K8's with a new memory controller for DDR2. Don't let that
worry you. DDR2 isn't any fatser than DDR.

> I am much more interested in reliability than speed, while at the same
> time I want to naturally build a system that is using the latest
> technologies and will last. I am not looking for a gaming/multimedia
> system but rather a developer system.

The K8 cpu's are more solid than the older K7's IMO.

--
KT133 MB, CPU @2400MHz (24x100): SIS755 MB CPU @2330MHz (10x233)
Need good help? Provide all system info with question.
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
Verizon server http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit (More info?)

Wes Newell wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 13:17:10 +0000, Edward Diener No Spam wrote:
>
>
>>I am looking to build a new AMD system. My first question: is AMD Socket
>>939 the way to go ? Are these 64-bit systems reliable ? Or should I
>>stick with AMD Socket A systems ?
>>
>
> The new A64 is much better, cooler, and faster.

Meaning the AMD Athlon 64 ? The AMD Socket 939 design in general ? Or the
particular Abit 939 mobos ?

>
>
>>My impression is that Socket A systems are at the end of their line and
>>that Socket 939 systems are what all the new AMD systems will use. Am I
>>wrong ?
>>
>
> Socket A is completely dead as for as new cpu's go. Socket 939 will be
> replaced next year with socket M or something like that when AMD starts
> building the K8's with a new memory controller for DDR2. Don't let that
> worry you. DDR2 isn't any fatser than DDR.

So all future AMD cpus will be hosted on socket 939 or socket M boards ? It
sounds like getting a socket 939 mobo is the way to go since they theoretically
offer upgradability to AMD's future cpus ( I know this often does not happen
anyway because of mobo limitations ), while the socket A mobos will not be able
to support future AMD cpus. As I understand it, however, because the AMD Opteron
is a dual-core, it does run on socket A mobos. Does that mean that future
Opterons are still supposed to support socket A ?

>
>
>>I am much more interested in reliability than speed, while at the same
>>time I want to naturally build a system that is using the latest
>>technologies and will last. I am not looking for a gaming/multimedia
>>system but rather a developer system.
>
>
> The K8 cpu's are more solid than the older K7's IMO.

OK, thanks ! It sounds like the choice is socket A, with possible support for
future Opterons at best, and socket 939, with support for all future AMD cpus.
At this juncture, one of the Abit socket 939 mobos sounds like the right choice.
Thanks for your information.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit (More info?)

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 00:26:51 +0000, Edward Diener No Spam wrote:

> Wes Newell wrote:
>> On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 13:17:10 +0000, Edward Diener No Spam wrote:
>>>I am looking to build a new AMD system. My first question: is AMD
>>>Socket 939 the way to go ? Are these 64-bit systems reliable ? Or
>>>should I stick with AMD Socket A systems ?
>>>
>> The new A64 is much better, cooler, and faster.
>
> Meaning the AMD Athlon 64 ? The AMD Socket 939 design in general ? Or
> the particular Abit 939 mobos ?
>
Meaning all the K8 cpu's, 754, 940, or 939.

>>>My impression is that Socket A systems are at the end of their line and
>>>that Socket 939 systems are what all the new AMD systems will use. Am I
>>>wrong ?
>>>
>>>
>> Socket A is completely dead as for as new cpu's go. Socket 939 will be
>> replaced next year with socket M or something like that when AMD starts
>> building the K8's with a new memory controller for DDR2. Don't let that
>> worry you. DDR2 isn't any fatser than DDR.
>
> So all future AMD cpus will be hosted on socket 939 or socket M boards ?
> It sounds like getting a socket 939 mobo is the way to go since they
> theoretically offer upgradability to AMD's future cpus ( I know this
> often does not happen anyway because of mobo limitations ), while the
> socket A mobos will not be able to support future AMD cpus. As I
> understand it, however, because the AMD Opteron is a dual-core, it does
> run on socket A mobos. Does that mean that future Opterons are still
> supposed to support socket A ?
>
None of the K8 cpu's will run on socket A. I don't know where you came up
with that. Forget the future of the MB you buy and get what you need
today. A year from now, there will be new boards with a different socket
and newer boards for the same socket. If you don't think you'll be
spending several hundred bucks fro a dual core cpu any time soon, then
even a socket 754 board is good and cheaper than 939 cpu's, and clock for
clock, the 939's aren't that much faster. Look at some of the benchmarks.

>>>I am much more interested in reliability than speed, while at the same
>>>time I want to naturally build a system that is using the latest
>>>technologies and will last. I am not looking for a gaming/multimedia
>>>system but rather a developer system.
>>
>>
>> The K8 cpu's are more solid than the older K7's IMO.
>
> OK, thanks ! It sounds like the choice is socket A, with possible
> support for future Opterons at best, and socket 939, with support for
> all future AMD cpus. At this juncture, one of the Abit socket 939 mobos
> sounds like the right choice. Thanks for your information.

Again, not socket A, and 939's will never support Opterons to my
knowledge. They do support X2's (dual core) though.

--
KT133 MB, CPU @2400MHz (24x100): SIS755 MB CPU @2330MHz (10x233)
Need good help? Provide all system info with question.
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
Verizon server http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm

 

[frodo]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit (More info?)

it really comes down to the current market price:

Socket A can still be competitive performance-wise, but they are pricy
today because they're getting scarce. 754 Athalons are almost as good as
939, and until recently they were a tad cheaper, but today the 939 is
cheaper, again due to availability and it's the current model rolling off
the lines in quantity. 754 is all Semperons nowadays. MB prices are
pretty stable, w/ 754 about $15 less than 939.

The Intel world is similar - socket 478 has gotten to be more expensive
than 775, even tho it's the older technology. Try and find a cool-running
Northwood core nowadays - big price premium.

It's surprising how the latest technology is in fact the cheapest too,
simply because that's where the supplies are.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit (More info?)

"" wrote:
> I am looking to build a new AMD system. My first question: is
> AMD Socket 939 the
> way to go ? Are these 64-bit systems reliable ? Or should I
> stick with AMD
> Socket A systems ?
>
> My impression is that Socket A systems are at the end of their
> line and that
> Socket 939 systems are what all the new AMD systems will use.
> Am I wrong ?
>
> I am much more interested in reliability than speed, while at
> the same time I
> want to naturally build a system that is using the latest
> technologies and will
> last. I am not looking for a gaming/multimedia system but
> rather a developer system.

I’ve recently upgraded and TBH I didn’t even consider anything other
than socket 939.

I only usually upgrade once every few years (apart from perhaps adding
more RAM) so it was an obvious choice to go with 939. Whether it is
better than 754 or A is entirely subjective (i.e. what are your
requirements in a PC?) but 939 has more of a future.

There is one definate selling point for 939, it is unbelievably easy
to attach the cooler to the socket!

--
Posted using the http://www.hardwareforumz.com interface, at author's request
Articles individually checked for conformance to usenet standards
Topic URL: http://www.hardwareforumz.com/ABIT-AMD-system-ftopict60210.html
Visit Topic URL to contact author (reg. req'd). Report abuse: http://www.hardwareforumz.com/eform.php?p=304954

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit (More info?)

VinylPusher wrote:
> "" wrote:
> > I am looking to build a new AMD system. My first question: is
> > AMD Socket 939 the
> > way to go ? Are these 64-bit systems reliable ? Or should I
> > stick with AMD
> > Socket A systems ?
> >
> > My impression is that Socket A systems are at the end of their
> > line and that
> > Socket 939 systems are what all the new AMD systems will use.
> > Am I wrong ?
> >
> > I am much more interested in reliability than speed, while at
> > the same time I
> > want to naturally build a system that is using the latest
> > technologies and will
> > last. I am not looking for a gaming/multimedia system but
> > rather a developer system.
>
> I’ve recently upgraded and TBH I didn’t even consider anything other
> than socket 939.
>
> I only usually upgrade once every few years (apart from perhaps adding
> more RAM) so it was an obvious choice to go with 939. Whether it is
> better than 754 or A is entirely subjective (i.e. what are your
> requirements in a PC?) but 939 has more of a future.

My requirements are stability rather than speed, and future upgradability.

>
> There is one definate selling point for 939, it is unbelievably easy
> to attach the cooler to the socket!

Good to hear, although I had no problem doing this in my socket A system.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit (More info?)

The thing about stability is that there is no easy way to quantify
(put into numbers) how close to instability you are operating at.
About all you have is reputation of stability.

If speed really is not a concern then I would avoid a major
uncertainty (with essentially no reputation) in your new system
proposal : 64 bit technology.

From a hardware perspective alone, *and not a software perspective*,
merely lower your system's FSB 5 or 10 % below normal speed to gain
additional stability.

Forrest

Motherboard Help By HAL web site:
http://home.comcast.net/~mobo.help/


On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 15:41:31 GMT, Edward Diener No Spam
<eldiener_no_spam_here@earthlink.net> wrote:

< snip >
>
>My requirements are stability rather than speed, and future upgradability.
>
< snip >