AM2 Predictions...

F

freeloader1969

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2003
Messages
2,238
Let's engage in total speculation just for the fun of it.

What performance difference between current Athlon 64's and AMD's new socket AM2 do you think we'll see? Assuming clock speeds are the same of course!

I'm betting we'll see a 3-4% speed increase by going to DDR2.

Anyone else care to take a stab at this?

P.S. I'm also hoping (but not counting on) AMD will make some enhancements to the core. :D
 
I don't think at the same clock speed it will be that drastic of an increase in performance, possibly better memory performance cause of the DDR2 and maybe an improved memory controller on the chip.
 
I am actually a little skeptical about it. DDR2 has been nothing special and that seems to be all that M2 will bring to the table. DDR2 800 or whatever is next will obviously help, but DDR2 at it's current speeds is weak. AMD systems do enjoy tight latencies and DDR2 has just the opposite. I trust in AMD though (I even own some of their stock...lucky me). Hopefully, they will make some core tweaks or maybe just better manufacturing that allows for better clocks. They have been having good luck with memory controler improvements in the past so I think they may continue that trend.
 
Does this mean NForce 5 chipsets!?

I think DDR2 sounds cool. Is AM2 like AMD part 2?
 
I haven't heard any rumors of a new AMD Chipset, though possibly there will be a new one when the 7900GTX comes out?
 
Too bad they don't find a way to incorporate both DDR1 and DDR2 memory capabilities into the memory controller and then keep rolling out chips in s939 :D.

I don't think the differences will be drastic right away. The move to 65nm is where there's going to be a lot of difference as clock speeds increase.
 
I was also thinking that AMD may add 1 or 2 extra instruction pipelines to scale speeds slightly. Again, just speculating. It could be possible to get upto 3 ghz using existing manufacturing technology.
 
i predict that AM2 will be the kick in the butt that DD2 needs for it to finally succeed DDR, since AMD's integrated mem controllers really help alleviate the high latency of DDR2s
 
Winchester1897 said:
I predict that the socket AM2 will be short lived and AMD will make the move to DDR3.
Click to expand...
Maybe soming like socket 754 to 939? Anyways, I have heard nothing about AM2, cept DDR 2 memory of course. I remember reading somewhere that AMD was gonna intergrate a PCIe contoller on the cpu, but it sounds like that is something of the future, past AM2.

BTW: Typing AM2 sucks for some reason, to long, M2 was better, I wish AMD would just say socket G or soming... :rolleyes:
 
MiXdNuTs said:
I am actually a little skeptical about it. DDR2 has been nothing special and that seems to be all that M2 will bring to the table. DDR2 800 or whatever is next will obviously help, but DDR2 at it's current speeds is weak. AMD systems do enjoy tight latencies and DDR2 has just the opposite. I trust in AMD though (I even own some of their stock...lucky me). Hopefully, they will make some core tweaks or maybe just better manufacturing that allows for better clocks. They have been having good luck with memory controler improvements in the past so I think they may continue that trend.
Click to expand...
Since the memory controller is on the CPU Die itself.. I highly doubt that the memory latency is going to do much, if anything to performance, nowhere to go but up.
 
Winchester1897 said:
I predict that the socket AM2 will be short lived and AMD will make the move to DDR3.
Click to expand...
GAH!

why does everyone want ddr3? before i go on to denounce it, explain why YOU think ddr3 is a good thing :eek:



warning: you better come up with something good, i won't go easy on you ;)
 
because the latency is triple of what ddr2 is! cause higher is better! in intels eyes :D

but time to be relevant and serious. i am betting dollars to donuts that AM2 will rock. DDR2 is awesome, and from what i hear the mem controller was built to do ddr1000 with ease, from its stock ddr667. its going to be impressive, no 4x512/1024mb 2t issues, all sorts of stuff. AM2 will entail some very nice things, im waiting patiently for it, as it should be worth it.
 
Everything I've been able to google on am2 points to April/May release .

There will be 13 cpus for the launch of Am2. Notice the FX-62, which will be @ 2.8ghz/core, and the X2 5000+ will essentially be an FX60 (2.6ghz/core 2x1mb cache). As for single core, the 4000+ will be the top dog running at 2.6ghz 512k cache.

Possibly the biggest boost for AMD and ddr2, is the integrated memory controller which could allow am2 to run
Cas 3 instead of Cas 4 which Intel currently employs.




And as long as we're speculating, the AMD in Dell computers are flying around again. This might explain the recent shotage of alot of favorite cpus like the 3000+.


 
DDR2's biggest benefit isn't that it's faster, because it really isn't by much. The major benefit comes from the power savings. DDR1 runs at 2.7v, DDR2 runs at 1.8v.
 
The one unfortunate thing about integrated memory controllers is just that, New chip designs to support new memory, and really, its not like memory isn't pretty fact these days.

Like YmkFX said, it really more about efficency than anything else.

It really looks like AMD doesn't have a lot on the plate to offer this year. Intel on the other hand has Conroe comming, which might put Intel back in the drivers seat. AMD's really gonna need 65mn and some serious clock speed bumps if they don't want tp start laging behind.

Presler easily reaches 4GHz+ and with hyperthreading, is very competitive with the Athlon. I guess we'll see!
 
heatlesssun said:
The one unfortunate thing about integrated memory controllers is just that, New chip designs to support new memory, and really, its not like memory isn't pretty fact these days.

Like YmkFX said, it really more about efficency than anything else.

It really looks like AMD doesn't have a lot on the plate to offer this year. Intel on the other hand has Conroe comming, which might put Intel back in the drivers seat. AMD's really gonna need 65mn and some serious clock speed bumps if they don't want tp start laging behind.

Presler easily reaches 4GHz+ and with hyperthreading, is very competitive with the Athlon. I guess we'll see!
Click to expand...

Conroe/Yonah (whatever the dual core version is) needs to be 3Ghz+ in order for me to actually go out and get one :). From what I've seen, they are pretty "equal" to current X2's clock for clock, but 65nm is going to be the difference.
 
Speculating of course...here's a way for AMD to definitely maintain it's lead over Intel.

65nm die shrink should include the following...

1-2 extra pipelines...
DDR2 memory support upto 1000mhz
200mhz - 1ghz speed increases...
Some of that Z-RAM, as much as 4mb L2 cache and some additional L1...
Further power savings if possible...
 
freeloader1969 said:
65nm die shrink should include the following...
Some of that Z-RAM, as much as 4mb L2 cache and some additional L1...
Click to expand...

they bought the company LAST WEEK and you are talking about chips that are supposed to be out this year. I am sure that you agree that designing a chip is a time-consuming process and that it is unlikely that last-minute changes will be incorporated unless they are needed for correct operation.
 
Or, maybe, just speculating beyond belief here, they intentionally infringed on the patent, realized it'd be cheaper just to buy the company and did it. :D

Anyway, I don't see a 2.8GHz CPU on AM2, ever ;)

Also, clock for clock, with DDR2-667 vs. DDR400, I'm guessing single core will be 1-2% slower and dual core will be 2-5% faster.
 
kirbyrj said:
Conroe/Yonah (whatever the dual core version is) needs to be 3Ghz+ in order for me to actually go out and get one :). From what I've seen, they are pretty "equal" to current X2's clock for clock, but 65nm is going to be the difference.
Click to expand...

You've seen Conroe in action? and yes there will be 3+GHz versions.
 
YmkFX said:
DDR2's biggest benefit isn't that it's faster, because it really isn't by much. The major benefit comes from the power savings. DDR1 runs at 2.7v, DDR2 runs at 1.8v.
Click to expand...

lies, pure lies, you are basing facts of comparing AMD to Intel here even though you dont know it. your used to high bandwidth with AMD because of the good memcontroller. intels is BAD, like 50% efficiency, thus making the benifits less of ddr2.

alright, imagine ddr600, you usually have around 85% effeciency, giving you 8000mb/s.

with intels mem controller, imagine ddr1000, with 50% effeciency, gives you 8000mb/s.

see how ddr2 looks like it does nothing?? take that same ddr2 and put it on AM2 with 80% effeciency, and what do you get?? 12800mb/s

so ddr2 will be better, and one thing to remember, lower volts doesnt mean less power, you gotta take into mind wattage and stuff.
 
As quoted by Drizzt81...

they bought the company LAST WEEK and you are talking about chips that are supposed to be out this year. I am sure that you agree that designing a chip is a time-consuming process and that it is unlikely that last-minute changes will be incorporated unless they are needed for correct operation
Click to expand...

AMD didn't purchase that company. They simply bought a license.

http://digg.com/hardware/AMD_signs_license_for_new_memory_technology

"AMD has signed a license for a memory technology from startup company Innovative Silicon. Innovative Silicon claims their ZRAM (zero capacitor) memory can acheive 5 times the density of traditional embedded SRAM, and roughly twice the density of embedded DRAM"

So only AMD knows how far along they are with this technology. This could be something that's been in the works for the last year or so. But we'll be on the cautious side and assume you're right. It would still be nice to see at some point in the future though! :D
 
CCUABIDExORxDIE said:
lies, pure lies, you are basing facts of comparing AMD to Intel here even though you dont know it. your used to high bandwidth with AMD because of the good memcontroller. intels is BAD, like 50% efficiency, thus making the benifits less of ddr2.

alright, imagine ddr600, you usually have around 85% effeciency, giving you 8000mb/s.

with intels mem controller, imagine ddr1000, with 50% effeciency, gives you 8000mb/s.

see how ddr2 looks like it does nothing?? take that same ddr2 and put it on AM2 with 80% effeciency, and what do you get?? 12800mb/s

so ddr2 will be better, and one thing to remember, lower volts doesnt mean less power, you gotta take into mind wattage and stuff.
Click to expand...
...speaking of pulling numbers out of your arse...
 
freeloader1969 said:
As quoted by Drizzt81...



AMD didn't purchase that company. They simply bought a license.

http://digg.com/hardware/AMD_signs_license_for_new_memory_technology

"AMD has signed a license for a memory technology from startup company Innovative Silicon. Innovative Silicon claims their ZRAM (zero capacitor) memory can acheive 5 times the density of traditional embedded SRAM, and roughly twice the density of embedded DRAM"

So only AMD knows how far along they are with this technology. This could be something that's been in the works for the last year or so. But we'll be on the cautious side and assume you're right. It would still be nice to see at some point in the future though! :D
Click to expand...

Last time I checked, AMD did things other than make CPU's.
 
RyanVM said:
...speaking of pulling numbers out of your arse...
Click to expand...
no, not really... though intel's memory controller is probably closer to 65% or so, he has a good point ;)
 
RyanVM said:
...speaking of pulling numbers out of your arse...
Click to expand...

if those numbers are SOOO BAD, then give me some better numbers.

i think someones just upset because their ram will never get close to 8000mb/s.

ohh yea, i was easy on intel.
pwned.jpg


bandwidth is also relying on CPU speed.
 
kirbyrj...please explain "Last time I checked, AMD did things other than make CPU's."...I'm sick as a dog and not quite as fast on the uptake as usual :(
 
freeloader1969 said:
kirbyrj...please explain "Last time I checked, AMD did things other than make CPU's."...I'm sick as a dog and not quite as fast on the uptake as usual :(
Click to expand...

AMD makes flash memory too. i think thats what he meant. they also made chipsets.
 
freeloader1969 said:
kirbyrj...please explain "Last time I checked, AMD did things other than make CPU's."...I'm sick as a dog and not quite as fast on the uptake as usual :(
Click to expand...


AMD doesnt make just CPUs man they make a whole lot more.
I originally was brought around their name with BIOS chips. It wasnt untill the K6 that I jumped on board the AMD CPU Bandwagon.
Im sure someone else can list everything they make LOL
 
They also have a self-proclaimed "leadership position in the NOR flash memory market." But last time I checked they weren't making a lot of money in flash memory.
 
I think all the AM2's will be faster than their respective Intel comepetitiors, Intel is now in the Mac's and they're still 32bit. I just can't forsee Intel having a Dual Core 64bit competitior.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top