Opteron and Athlon 64 FX

Printable View

09-24-2003, 07:09 PM
sna

Opteron and Athlon 64 FX

Hi,

I have some questions here

1.with the new AMD64 fx released does it mean that it will replace the opteron???

2.is the AMD64 100% 64bit??? or just a work around?

3.which one is realy better the AMD64 or the Intel Itanium2 other than 32bit operation...

4.is there any mainstream 64bit INTEL processor coming soon? also any secret chipset?? I cant Imagine Intel staying behind.. the P4 extreme r still p4 nothing new, AMD can still add l3 cache to their new athlons 64 this was a big joke from Intel (consider the price difference too)

5.when the windows XP64 comes out what other 64bit software will be released at the time??? is there any MS office64 or divx64 etc??? and how much more performance gain???

6.DO WE REALLY NEED 64bit now? or is it the next 2 years... I fear the 64bit thing from AMD is mainly commercial issue without support

7.which chipset is better the nforce3 or via800...?

8.if I buy an aMD64 do I need 64bit drivers for my hardware?

9.If I use the AMD at 32bit is there any ANY hidden bugs or do u expect some?

thanx
09-24-2003, 07:36 PM
nForcer

Re: Opteron and Athlon 64 FX

Quote:

Originally posted by sna
Hi,

I have some questions here

1.with the new AMD64 fx released does it mean that it will replace the opteron???

2.is the AMD64 100% 64bit??? or just a work around?

3.which one is realy better the AMD64 or the Intel Itanium2 other than 32bit operation...

4.is there any mainstream 64bit INTEL processor coming soon? also any secret chipset?? I cant Imagine Intel staying behind.. the P4 extreme r still p4 nothing new, AMD can still add l3 cache to their new athlons 64 this was a big joke from Intel (consider the price difference too)

5.when the windows XP64 comes out what other 64bit software will be released at the time??? is there any MS office64 or divx64 etc??? and how much more performance gain???

6.DO WE REALLY NEED 64bit now? or is it the next 2 years... I fear the 64bit thing from AMD is mainly commercial issue without support

7.which chipset is better the nforce3 or via800...?

8.if I buy an aMD64 do I need 64bit drivers for my hardware?

9.If I use the AMD at 32bit is there any ANY hidden bugs or do u expect some?

thanx

Answers:

1. Nope the Current FX line will co-exist with Opterons.

2.As far as I know it 100% 64-Bit thats backwards comaptible with 32-Bit. Thats why AMD calls it x86-64.

3. Opterons advantage is that it runs 64-Bit and 32-bit natively. Itanium is a 64-Bit chip but needs to emulate 32-Bit to run...hence it will be slower Thats why companies are still using Opterons and Xeons rather than Itaniums.

4. No 64-Bit desktop chip from intel...although they say Prescot will have 64-Bit instructions even though its a 32-Bit chip...dont know how that works.

5. Some review sites say an Athlon 64 that runs on 64-Bit mode can go up to 34% faster...but I doubt office apps will benefit from that...Its media content and games that will benefit on 64-Bit.

6. Not realy...But hey its gotta start somewhere...There are a few 64-Bit apps and games out now. They have a demo of Americas Army 64-Bit and some demos on a local PC store here...Its pretty cool...I havent seen any slow downs.

7. Both chipsets are actualy good...It just depends what you realy want on the board.

8. Well if you buy now youll still be running it at 32-Bit(if you use windows)...Or you can downlaod WinXP 64 beta with request to microsoft. But even if you run 32-Bit youl still be taking advantage of some new features of AMD64.

9. Its hard to answer this one since it only came out yesterday...But so far reviews says its impresively stable considering its new.
09-24-2003, 08:07 PM
eshbach

Re: Re: Opteron and Athlon 64 FX

Quote:

Originally posted by nForcer
Answers:

1. Nope the Current FX line will co-exist with Opterons.

2.As far as I know it 100% 64-Bit thats backwards comaptible with 32-Bit. Thats why AMD calls it x86-64.

3. Opterons advantage is that it runs 64-Bit and 32-bit natively. Itanium is a 64-Bit chip but needs to emulate 32-Bit to run...hence it will be slower Thats why companies are still using Opterons and Xeons rather than Itaniums.

4. No 64-Bit desktop chip from intel...although they say Prescot will have 64-Bit instructions even though its a 32-Bit chip...dont know how that works.

5. Some review sites say an Athlon 64 that runs on 64-Bit mode can go up to 34% faster...but I doubt office apps will benefit from that...Its media content and games that will benefit on 64-Bit.

6. Not realy...But hey its gotta start somewhere...There are a few 64-Bit apps and games out now. They have a demo of Americas Army 64-Bit and some demos on a local PC store here...Its pretty cool...I havent seen any slow downs.

7. Both chipsets are actualy good...It just depends what you realy want on the board.

8. Well if you buy now youll still be running it at 32-Bit(if you use windows)...Or you can downlaod WinXP 64 beta with request to microsoft. But even if you run 32-Bit youl still be taking advantage of some new features of AMD64.

9. Its hard to answer this one since it only came out yesterday...But so far reviews says its impresively stable considering its new.

agreed, well done.
09-24-2003, 08:46 PM
sna

Thanx guys
Thank u

I think it is wiser to wait and see... man AMD did it this time for sure...cheaper, same speed of Intel extreme (almost) plus 64bit option...

may be in three months or so we can decide on this one
09-24-2003, 08:55 PM
russ_watters

Re: Opteron and Athlon 64 FX

Quote:

Originally posted by sna
9.If I use the AMD at 32bit is there any ANY hidden bugs or do u expect some?

thanx

With any new platform you should assume there will be bugs. From what I have heard, there are known nForce 3 bugs. For that reason plus cost, I never buy a product from a new line until its been out for a few months. Otherwise you could buy a product with a flaw that can't be fixed by a simple bios update.
09-24-2003, 08:58 PM
Colossus

Quote:

4.is there any mainstream 64bit INTEL processor coming soon? also any secret chipset?? I cant Imagine Intel staying behind.. the P4 extreme r still p4 nothing new, AMD can still add l3 cache to their new athlons 64 this was a big joke from Intel (consider the price difference too)

I dont agree with that statement... Yes the P4EE is basically a P4 with added Cache, but even if AMD adds extra L3.. It doesnt mean it will perform better... Look at the difference between the Barton and XP.. The performance for the added cache was less then 10% difference.. Intel with the added cache was much much more then that.. Around the range of 25% and up...

I havent seen any official retailer prices like mwave or newegg on the EE edition... It would be nice to know how much they are going to charge over the standard version...
09-24-2003, 09:51 PM
eshbach

Quote:

I dont agree with that statement... Yes the P4EE is basically a P4 with added Cache, but even if AMD adds extra L3.. It doesnt mean it will perform better... Look at the difference between the Barton and XP.. The performance for the added cache was less then 10% difference.. Intel with the added cache was much much more then that.. Around the range of 25% and up...

but... we don't have any real results for the EE yet either... iirc, when AMD released the Barton, everyone was proclaiming it's absolute superiority to the tbred chips, but if we look around, alot of people are scoring higher 3dmarks on tbreds then on bartons. I think until these chips get into our hands and we (the consumers) can OC them and tweak them for hours, we can't determine which chip is faster or how much better an EE or FX is.
09-24-2003, 11:41 PM
irwincur

Quote:

Intel with the added cache was much much more then that.. Around the range of 25% and up...

You are so full of ****. The average difference in normal operations is less than 5%, sure there are anomolies. But hell, the FX also had anomolies, like two 40+% whoopings of the EE - however, I find it odd that you overlook them.
09-24-2003, 11:53 PM
mark2e

lol...colossus was referring to when intel added cache to the pentium 4 (upgrading it from 256 to 512 L2 cache) not the pentium 4EE. Simply misunderstanding.
09-25-2003, 12:31 AM
Colossus

Quote:

Originally posted by mark2e
lol...colossus was referring to when intel added cache to the pentium 4 (upgrading it from 256 to 512 L2 cache) not the pentium 4EE. Simply misunderstanding.

Thankyou... Atleast someone is thinking :)

I was comparing the original P4 vs Northwood :)
09-25-2003, 12:50 AM
nForcer

P4's have huge memory bandwitdth so if cache is added it improvess performance on anything memory intensive apps...

Considering AMD64's high memory bandwidth adding more cache will probably significantly boos performance...

That built in memory controller on the core should also get rid of bottlenecks

But we have to wait and see:)
09-25-2003, 09:52 AM
irwincur

Quote:

I was comparing the original P4 vs Northwood

If that is the case, then you should also give a FSB increase some credit for the increased bandwidth also. I find it hard to believe that cache alone accounted for a consistant 25% boost.
09-25-2003, 10:28 AM
nForcer

Dont mind Colossus, hes an Intel Fan Boy or Man...hell say anything good about Intel...Even though Athlon 64's are faster than current Intel Offerings...and P4 EE wont be out four a few months but you can already get a FX-51 for the same price and performance right now.
09-25-2003, 01:01 PM
irwincur

I don't mind him, he consistantly makes a fool of himself. I find it entertaining.
09-25-2003, 01:24 PM
nForcer

Hahaha...I see you have Colossus Tattood on your sig...

Thats funny:D
09-25-2003, 02:42 PM
gurutoo

Quote:

Originally posted by irwincur
I don't mind him, he consistantly makes a fool of himself. I find it entertaining.

So do I.
EDIT: (Find him entertaining-not make a fool of myself) ;)