Would you buy AM2?

[MDme]

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=460
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20060126111118.html


Would you still buy an AM2 based system if it isn't future-ready with quad core and possibly DDR3?

I think most enthusiasts will just buy a socket F system....

 

[kyparrish]

I think I'll be skipping AM2 unless it offers some HUGE feature that 939 doesn't have.

 

[MBrown]

If I was building new from an old computer I would.

 

[shinzwei]

I dont plan on upgrading to a new platform anytime soon. I'm still very happy with my current S754 system in my sig. I will have upgrade my video card soon. I have a 2nd rig which is S939 which has a 3700+ SD and an X8100XL. I will upgrade when I POSITIVELY have to. There are people out there still very happy with their AthlonXP setups. Why upgrade to a new platform just because its new?

 

[LumbergTech]

what the heck is this socket F they speak off

 

[shinzwei]

I think it has like over 1000 pins.

 

[Hard Ball]

1207 to be exact.

 

[TSS]

just bought a pc, save to say, im skipping it.

besides that im too unsure what its future will be. once K10's come out in 2007 we'll see. if their AM2, ill most likely consider it as a upgrade option. if they come out on the next socket, i'll consider that a upgrade option and be glad i skipped AM2.

 

[SynthDude2001]

I'm quite happy with my Opteron 170 and I've had it only since November, I have no plans to upgrade the CPU again any time in the next year. Additionally, I haven't heard a thing about M2 (AM2, whatever) that makes me interested in it over Socket 939.

 

[Viditor]

It depends...if I happen to have a need for a server with multiple CPUs and FBDIMMs (and of course many thousands of dollars), then of course I would get the Socket F. For a home system however, it makes no sense at all...

 

[MDme]

what kind of a performance impact will FB-DIMMs have? I think quad core capability would be nice to have since most programs will be migrating to multi-threading. will socket-F also have the eventual DDR3 support too?

 

[Maximilian]

Stuff it, im happy with 754.

 

[Rustler]

I have two PCs the one in my sig and this one

DFI LANPARTY UT nF4 Ultra-D,
A64 X2 4400 Toledo @ 2420MHz
MSI X800pro, Silent Boost Lapped
Maxtor 6Y120MO and 6Y160MO SATA HDs
Corsair 2x512-XMS-4000PRO v3.1
Vantec 520 Stealth PSU

I doubt I will be upgrading any time soon and I have a DFI SLI board and a CABYE 0543 I haven't begun playing with.

 

[imported_K3N]

i probably will. hopefully by then 2GB ddr2 sticks become affordable by then also..

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: MDme
what kind of a performance impact will FB-DIMMs have? I think quad core capability would be nice to have since most programs will be migrating to multi-threading. will socket-F also have the eventual DDR3 support too?

Pros
1. Greater density...Micron just showed their 4GB FBDIMM
2. Serialised for greater speed. You can perform reads and writes simultaneously
3. Can use any type of memory...DDR, DDR2, or DDR3

Cons
1. VERY expensive...more than twice the cost of equivalent standard Dimms
2. VERY hot...most FBDIMMs require active cooling (HSF)

Edit: I thought I'd add a link so you can read a bit more...

 

[Cooler]

im not geting an m2 later this year then if they wont last that long what a shame I will have to stick with my current rig.

 

[cr0ssfire]

M2? Nah, I think I'll stick with what I've got. I picked up an X2 3800+ for $248 and once I've got that, I'll be set for a while. Dual cores seem nice, but quad cores seem really unnecessary. I just can't see anyone but the most extreme multitaskers needing that much sheer power.

 

[starwars7]

I don't think I have enough information yet. I'm one of the people that still has an AMD XP, a mobo with just AGP capabilities, and PC2700 RAM.

So needless say, I'll be building an entire PC soon. In June I'll need to decide if the AM2 is worth it, or if I should cash in on the less expensive 939 products.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Cooler
im not geting an m2 later this year then if they wont last that long what a shame I will have to stick with my current rig.

Won't last long? I think people really are confusing Socket F Opterons with the current single socket Opterons...
A Socket F Quad core Opteron won't run games any faster, multitasking might get a 10% bump, and they won't be able to OC. But, for servers it will speed transactions and databases tremendously!
Keep in mind that a very basic QC Sckt F system will probably start at ~$5000 and go up from there...
My guess is that AMD will still produce AM2-based Opterons for single socket low-end servers as well, but these will be DC, not QC.

 

[R3MF]

i will get a sM2 motherboard and CPU >if< they will both support DDR2 800 in dual channel.

12.8GB/s bandwidth is mighty tempting.

 

[Dainas]

Nope, and the longer I can go without a socket change the better. I understand why AMD wanted to bring a new standard so it could have higher voltages for its FX line, however they could have done it so the lower AM2 and 939 processors were cross compatible. ever since they ditched socket A they have dabbled with tooo many standards at the expense of the consumer. 939 looked like the light at the end of that tunnel but AMD just wants to look busy in the face of Intel which had been screwing people over in the socket compatability department for years. Intel trained its recent northbriges to be able to use DDR or DRR2, there is no reason AMD can't make its new processor's on-die memory controller aswell.

 

[Brunnis]

I'm definately thinking of an AM2 system. I'm using a laptop as my main computer now and the last desktop I had was based around an AthlonXP-M. Socket M2 will offer a few nice improvements over S939:

- Higher memory bandwidth
- Cooler and higher clocking CPUs (since AMD have said that they'd update their 90nm process with some of the tech developed for 65nm)
- Slightly tweaked CPU core (okay, it's a rumor, but it's also quite likely)
- Accomodates future 65nm CPUs

The only downside I can see is a potential increase in memory access latency.

 

[Furen]

Originally posted by: Dainas
Nope, and the longer I can go without a socket change the better. I understand why AMD wanted to bring a new standard so it could have higher voltages for its FX line, however they could have done it so the lower AM2 and 939 processors were cross compatible. ever since they ditched socket A they have dabbled with tooo many standards at the expense of the consumer. 939 looked like the light at the end of that tunnel but AMD just wants to look busy in the face of Intel which had been screwing people over in the socket compatability department for years. Intel trained its recent northbriges to be able to use DDR or DRR2, there is no reason AMD can't make its new processor's on-die memory controller aswell.

Huh? Just how should AMD have made AM2 and 939 "cross compatible"? The only way to have possibly done this would be to have thrown 100+ extra pins on socket 939 back when it came out (remember that socket 939 is just socket 940 with one less pin, it's not really a package redesign) and an extra memory controller on AM2 CPUs...then again, you'd make older CPUs FIT socket AM2 but not work on it, so that wouldn't work too well either. Just because Intel can do something NOW does not mean AMD could have done it three years ago.

AMD needs to go to DDR2 right now because:
1) It's getting cheaper than DDR1.
2) It still has a long life ahead of it (Depending on Intel's DDR3 ramp DDR2 should last at least two years, considering how long DDR1 lasted after DDR2 came out I'd say closer to 4).
3) Lower power DDR2 is very useful in mobile situations (the biggest growing market).
4) Dual-core CPUs can actually benefit from added bandwidth.
5) Roughing it out with DDR 'till DDR3 would have probably kept Intel from adopting it too soon (why help push a tech AMD would sorely need by then), AMD would have been forced to use expensive memory (unless they actually waited for DDR3 prices to drop below DDR2, which could take anywhere from 3-4 years) and DDR1 would have become more expensive too.

 

[imported_ocyl]

Q: Would you buy AM2?

A: I am not interested in hardware DRM, no.

 

[RichUK]

I don?t think there was a physical constraint or a necessity for AMD to add an extra pin for AM2 functionality over the current s939. As about ~20% of the pins in the current s939 K8?s are redundant (they were there to allow for future expansion, DDR2? Well not anymore because of the introduction of s940 AM2). .

AM2 as far as I am aware is supposed to support a vast array of future expansion options. I cant see that extra pin counting for much, except for forced incompatibility with current s939 motherboards.

Dainas, I totally disagree with your statements. s939 has had a superb run, looking at a compatibility stand point, and this is all thanks to AMD?s intuitive decision to replace the northbridge chipset with an integrated on die variant. Intel have to change chipsets a lot which means new motherboard purchases just because the operating characteristics of certain processors change. Where as AMD have all of that incorporated on die, which means changes to the chip stay on die and do not effect Motherboard/Chipset support. AMD did not change the s939 operating frequency of the HTT, and also stuck with ?DDR? memory controllers, which resulted in pretty much motherboard support / compatibility across the whole s939 range (including the dual core migration). This means the only variable is the BIOS, and as most motherboard manufactures released compatible BIOS?s, this means that you can just about use most s939 motherboard?s with any s939 chip.

Some people don?t understand that the chipsets for example NF4 used on today?s s939 motherboards are literally just hubs, which allow all the motherboards I/O devices to communicate down one HTT tunnel. Which then allows for a more efficient motherboard design, and future designs for that matter, as PCB layers, tracers and electrical noise is reduced.