Amd 64 X2 5000+ & Fx-60

[Verran]

if the northwood is for rendering stuff.  and the fx for gaming.  the opteron for other workstation things. 

then why even go X2, or FX2

are the X2s better than the opteron, in workstation suff.

it like AMD made two workstationn chips, X2s, wich includes the FX2, and opteron.  why?

581120[/snapback]

My understanding is that the opertons (skt940) have been out a long time now, while X2s are obviously fairly new. They were server style chips because of the goofy slot. The X2 seemed to be aimed at more of a "home pc" market with it being 939. I believe the opterons took registered ram, while it seems that the X2s don't. Also most opteron 940s don't have SSE3 support, and X2 does.

 

As for why they decided to merge the Opterons over to 939, I don't know, but as you can see in my sig, I'm not arguing

[bigred]

the opterons on 939 are for the single processor workstation market. they are infact identical to the san diego athlon 64. the name is for marketing only. seeing as how the 940 1xx series opterons never took off... they were slower than a 939 or 754 processor of the same mhz due to thier registered ECC ram and cost 25% more. this way AMD can still make a "workstation" chip for single processor systems, and not have to do anything besides change the microcode tag... people who would normally be buying stuff like will associate the name and buy on that. though the enthusiast market will buy based on outcome not name... at least that's what should be going on... hell I'd buy a cpu called "el crapo" if I could get some awsome performance out of it.

 

as far as compairison of a 940 dual opteorn to an x2... that's just silly. the opteorns (which btw DO have SS3 on the latest models) do still require registered ECC ram, but they also have a split memory controller and dedicated HTT links between processors, something the X2's lack. and from exeprience with dual, quad and 8 processor opterons (my 8 way has 8 sockets filled with dual core chips... making it a 16 core system) I can tell you that a dual opteron will beat an X2 at the same mhz, but cost 50% more. this is where the X2 can hold it's own. it's more cost effective in the workstation market where cost is an issue for systems that are not always going to be taxing thier second CPU... the dual opteron option is still viable in systems where they will be running both CPU's hard for extended periods of time.

[hardnrg]

I still can't publically say what it'll do though

579942[/snapback]

lol... fair enough... can't be doing without them es chips eh (unless you wanna give one a uk home?)

 

the FX-57 is going up becauase it's "out of production" and suply is falling off.  not to mention it's still the fastest overall processor in performance right now (even against a dual core 4800+

580582[/snapback]

looking good in 3dsmax6... which is an app i use a lot... i'd still probably take a dual core 939 opteron like a 165 for the oc prospects (seen 3.0ghz per core on air)

 

even if it *does* cost more, i think the oc results would make the dual core opteron 939 better value in the end

[Kamikaze_Badger]

Think of the Opteron vs X2 thing as bigred's mammoth Catterpillar vs a skid steer.

 

The skid steer is much more affordable for farms and small construction jobs then a $100k mega dozer. But when you get into the big stuff, the mega dozer begins to show it's extreme, three googolian horsepower, 1 mile to the gallon strength, for huge jobs at quarries and stuff.

 

 

 

Yea, I probably screwed that up .

[bigred]

in the case of 3dstudio max a chip with a 1mb cache per core (single or dual) would be best.

 

now an X2 or dual core opteron 165 would perform exactly the same. seeing as how they're the same chip. 3ghz on a dual core like a 165 or any other X2 is pretty difficult to do. though anyone that can push a dual core to that kind of speed could easily get another 1ghz out of a single core chip. I have yet to push any dual core even my new FX-60 within 1400mhz of where I can push a single core chip... and that difference is more than enough to give the single core chip an advanatage over a dual core in most any app.