Originally posted by: Chosonman
Originally posted by: Zebo
I don't think AMD expected the on die memory controller to be as efficient as it is.
Aint that the truth. I have both 754 and 939. One at 2650Mhz, the other at 2655Mhz.. Performance is indescerable between the sockets without using select benchmarks. and even then only insignifigant in a couple tests...Mainly games.
Basically bandwith mean little to A64 due to it's incredibe low latency of it's architecture which benefits both sockets similarly.
You can see this in my 939 mem test thread where even PC3000@LL ~ PC4700 TCCD.
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=28&threadid=1475190&enterthread=y
Oh BTW price/performance always matters once you've settled on your minimum level of performance...since it's bascially indescerable between 754vs939 it's kinda violates cost/benefit to look 939s direction IMO.
jterrell,
I'm not going to keep repeating myself just to satisfy you.
Re-read the post. If it hurts your head to read what was written then I suggest you turn off your computer and get some excerise.
You chose one sentence out of a thread of about 30 pages which I posted on at the time it was written. Re-read the 30 pages or just hush up about it because you are cherry picking. It also says similarly not exactly the same. AND it notes games are where the differences show up.
You started this thread because you sought attention and I am giving it to you.
I asked a quite simple question that is central to this thread: What are your upgrade plans and how do you save more money then me???
After that we can compare screenshots of our current performance if you like as well.
For me this is about offering people good advise instead of letting someone mislead them and get them stuck with a system that is essentially a dead end that cant be sold for a good return.
There is a 6800 Ultra on agp for 350 bucks right now on the for sale forum, another for 320. Why are those cards being sold so cheaply? Because you are taking a big hit on features to go agp now that neither platform uses it going forward.
Not a single s754 person has ever suggested a good upgrade plan. Instead they cry that no upgrade ever exists which is simply not true. Half the folks making that argument are under 25 and haven't built enough pcs to have a clue. Their parents bought their last system and when they went to upgrade after 2 or 3 years they saw they needed to build an entirely new system so are limited to that view.
I have built servers using scsi and other technologies so understand the performance differences from real life examples.
------------------------
But since you want reviews and facts here ya go, this compares mostly 939 with intel chips but you can read where the 939 offers what the 754 doesn't:
Despite their lower PR ratings, the 3000+, 3200+ and 3500+ are the real stars of the Socket 939 show. These chips were first available based on the Newcastle core, but have been superceded over the past few weeks by models based on the Winchester core. The Winchester core doesn't add any new architectural features to the Athlon 64 family, so these three chips have the same 512KB of cache as the old Newcastle core models. What is different is how they are built. While all other Athlon 64 cores are made using a 130nm manufacturing process, Winchester cores are made using a 90nm process. This means that the transistors used in Winchester core Athlon 64s are smaller and more energy efficient. So not only is the core smaller, it can be run at a lower voltage, and produces far less waste energy. Older Athlon 64 cores ran at 1.55V but Winchester core chips only require 1.475V. To put AMD's claims to the test we ran a Newcastle core 3500+ in our test rig, and measured it running a full ten degrees hotter than the Winchester core 3500+. This means you could use a slower and quieter fan on the CPU HSF - yet another advantage over a sweaty old Pentium 4e.
The low-energy characteristics of the Winchester core also make these CPUs more easily overclockable than earlier Athlon 64 models. Just be aware that a lot of retailers still list Newcastle core Athlon 64 processors, so be extra careful when you're buying that you really are getting a Winchester core chip.
The Winchester core has the same memory and cache architecture as the Newcastle core, so the 3000+, 3200+ and 3500+ all perform just as well as their predecessors, which is very well indeed. In FPU-intensive applications such as 3D games, Socket 939 Athlon 64 is nigh on untouchable. For example, the 3500+ sped through the timedemo of Doom 3 at 1,280 x 1,024 with 2x AA and 2x AF at 68.5fps, while the extra £81 you'd have to spend on a 3.6GHz Pentium 4e would only buy you an additional 0.1fps, which is within the test's margin of error anyway.
Socket 939 Athlon 64 excels at almost every task except video encoding. Regardless of which encoder we use, we've always seen Athlon 64 lag behind Pentium 4e, partly because Hyper-Threading helps to improves the efficiency of Intel's processors.
In the last CPC CPU shootout there was a narrow but decisive gap in performance between Athlon 64 and Pentium 4e, with Pentium 4e edging slightly ahead. Up against highly overclockable and incredibly cool-running Winchester core Athlon 64 CPUs, Pentium 4e comes off looking decidedly crotchety and well past its sell-by date. The whole Socket 939 platform has several significant advantages over LGA775 too, including better security, SLI support and greater overclocking potential if you buy an nForce4 motherboard. As always, the decision is yours, but we know what we'll be spending our end-of-year bonus on.