• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Check this thread out...OPTERON DUAL CORE

i didn't read it and i won't. the toledo X2's and s939 dual core opterons are THE SAME THING down to the core itself. it's just a different name and "testing" method
 
I flipped through a couple pages of it and the guy who was making those claims does not understand the s939 opty at all (in fact, he speaks as if they don't exist...server boards...ECC RAM). What's worse is that he convinced a nOOb not to buy a Opty because it's a server chip.
 
Zebra is an absolute idiot. They cut Opterons off of the same wafers as Athlon 64's and FX's. They both have the same exact architecture. It's called hammer. If you can't comprehend this and are completely put off by the name of the chip, rather than what the chip is, then I'm sorry.
 
robberbaron said:
Zebra is an absolute idiot. They cut Opterons off of the same wafers as Athlon 64's and FX's.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing, but didn't feel like signing up to post in the thread :).
 
I'm reasonably the sure the guy keeps repeating himself saying that it's a enterprise server chip and not for fooling with and saying that it's like a gamer using a quadro doesn't realize that the 165 is S939 and a toledo core
 
Zebra seems like a semi-troll. Not worth your time, but not bad enough to want to ban.
 
kirbyrj said:
I was thinking the same thing, but didn't feel like signing up to post in the thread :).
Click to expand...
i just did. will post this as soon as i can post:

all right.. just wanted to say a few things. not sure how many of you guys go to [H]ard|OCP, but those of you who do, you might recognize my handle. i'm also ozzimark at XS.

that out of the way.. i almost puked at some of the things that were said earlier in the thread. how is it that the people who were going against zebra are required to show proof while zebra does not need any? something seems kinda unfair there.

but anyway, next topic. those benchmarks showing the opteron being "killed" by the a64's.. well, damn, who would have thought that a s940 opteron with REGISTERED memory would be just slightly slower than the s939 equivilents? if you ask me, it makes perfect sense. it's NOT BECAUSE the opteron is slower, it's because the memory subsystem for s940 is slower than s939. HOWEVER! this doesn't matter with the opterons in question, as we're comparing s939 to s939 now.

some of you might notice that the steppings that indicate what features and silicon are used (CABNE, CABYE, etc etc) are the same as FX, which means that it's the SAME EXACT cpu on the transistor level.
BUT WAIT! if what zebra is saying is true, then the FX, which is geared towards hardcore gamers and benchers, must also be optimized for the same thing as the opteron, and be slow in games? i think my logic just blew a fuse there, or else the opteron really is the same core as the a64
(which it is btw)

as for gaming performance..

http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q2/opteron-x50/index.x?pg=15
hey, what's this? looks like that 148 that runs at 2.2ghz on a slower memory subsystem, and is "inferior" in gaming to a64, is actually beating the 3400+'s performance, which has the same speed and cache.
as is expected, the 146 and 3200+ are basically equal too. WOW! :)
(also note the comment at the bottom, even TR recognizes that opterons and FX's are the same thing :) )
Click to expand...

talk about feeding the trolls ;)
 
(cf)Eclipse said:
i just did. will post this as soon as i can post:



talk about feeding the trolls ;)
Click to expand...

but it also gets the truth out there, and that's appreciated :)
 
(cf)Eclipse said:
i didn't read it and i won't. the toledo X2's and s939 dual core opterons are THE SAME THING down to the core itself. it's just a different name and "testing" method
Click to expand...

Talk about open for opinions lol... But you're right, he didn't know what he was talking about.
 
yeah, you guys know me, there's nothing i can't stand more than people who talk like they're right, but are actually wrong and don't take the hint.. i do recall getting into more than a few arguements here in the past because of it :p
 
(cf)Eclipse said:
yeah, you guys know me, there's nothing i can't stand more than people who talk like they're right, but are actually wrong and don't take the hint.. i do recall getting into more than a few arguements here in the past because of it :p
Click to expand...


Good times. Tsueh and I have had our fair share with guys like ZZZ.
 
(cf)Eclipse said:
yeah, you guys know me, there's nothing i can't stand more than people who talk like they're right, but are actually wrong and don't take the hint.. i do recall getting into more than a few arguements here in the past because of it :p
Click to expand...
That guy Zebra may have been almost partially accurate at least about intended marketing and such if it weren't for the fact that he seemed oblivious to the fact or chose to ignore the fact that the poster was refering to S939 1xx series opterons compared to the S940 SMP equipment he supposedly "went to conferences" about.
 
no, he was spewing nonsense. anyone with half a brain will know that the marketing behind something doesn't dictate performance.. plus, he was trying to say that the opteron's architecture was fundamentally different from a64's, when they're really identical
 
I read the beginning of that thread and I couldn't help but snicker at the ignorance of most of the people on that forum, I feel dirty now for making fun of the innocent who dont know any better.
 
One thing I gotta hand to Intel, they sure dont confuse people. I remember a lot of people getting confused like crazy with the Toledo 3800's, as if disabling bad cache was some new and mysterious thing with CPU's. Explaining to someone that an Opteron and Athlon64 are the same exact piece of silicon is a painful experience if they just dont get it.
 
robberbaron said:
One thing I gotta hand to Intel, they sure dont confuse people. I remember a lot of people getting confused like crazy with the Toledo 3800's, as if disabling bad cache was some new and mysterious thing with CPU's. Explaining to someone that an Opteron and Athlon64 are the same exact piece of silicon is a painful experience if they just dont get it.
Click to expand...
Intel's model number scheme though confuses the hell outta me.
I never deciphers the "c" "d" "e" on the end of the specs let alone now they're using the 3 digit codes and a letter.
 
(cf)Eclipse said:
no, he was spewing nonsense. anyone with half a brain will know that the marketing behind something doesn't dictate performance.. plus, he was trying to say that the opteron's architecture was fundamentally different from a64's, when they're really identical
Click to expand...
Like I said in my post.
The only portion he got right was the sector the chips were marketed towards.
 
That thread was hilarious! Too bad nobody could explain why it's impossible to run 4* X2 4800+ in one box to them in a way they would actually understand. It's quite simple, but naturally they will be insulted when a bunch of newbies come and personally insult an older member.

I'd go and do it, but I wasted enough of my work time reading.
 
Hmmm, check the motherboard forum MSI K8N NEO4 thread. It looks like the MSI boards don't support opteron processors. Hmmm...
 
dropadrop said:
That thread was hilarious! Too bad nobody could explain why it's impossible to run 4* X2 4800+ in one box to them in a way they would actually understand. It's quite simple, but naturally they will be insulted when a bunch of newbies come and personally insult an older member.
Click to expand...
well, technically it is doable to have 4 4800+'s, you just need a really... strange chipset. one i have never seen before ;)
 
(cf)Eclipse said:
well, technically it is doable to have 4 4800+'s, you just need a really... strange chipset. one i have never seen before ;)
Click to expand...
Maybe Zebra can help you with that and his *Mates* at AMD :D
He does go and talk to them in conferences a lot... maybe he can suggest it to them... thats if he understands us that is... :confused: :confused:

neo out
 
serbiaNem said:
Hmmm, check the motherboard forum MSI K8N NEO4 thread. It looks like the MSI boards don't support opteron processors. Hmmm...
Click to expand...

i don't know any current mobo manufacturers that offically support 939 Opties. They still work tho :)
 
someone needs to post that picture of the opt 170 hitting 2.925ghz per core, 6+ hours stable. That'll shut them up.
 
yea i want to see pics of this quad skt 939 mobo with out CPUS in it :rolleyes:
 
serbiaNem said:
Hmmm, check the motherboard forum MSI K8N NEO4 thread. It looks like the MSI boards don't support opteron processors. Hmmm...
Click to expand...

serbiaNem said:
Ok, asshat, you're opteron isn't dual-core.
Click to expand...

wtf is your point?
 
Nidhogg said:
wtf is your point?
Click to expand...

Dual core is different from single core, the dual-core opteron doesn't work.

You see, AMD started making single cores, then they put two on one chip and made dual-core :) It's called improving. Dual-cores have different HT lanes also.
 
Nidhogg said:
wtf is your point?
Click to expand...

I think it's obvious his point was that just because single-core Opterons work on that motherboard doesn't exactly mean that dual-core Opterons would.

Read what he said rather than snap off like that; post maturely.

Adam.
 
http://www.atomicmpc.com/forums.asp?s=2&c=8&t=15121

There is a similar thread that someone *cough* started about the single cores. Some of these guys have seen the light, however, many still think that the opteron 939s are "for servers and wokstations only" "not to be fucked with" and "shit for gaming" (those are quotes from other threads on that board in regards to Opeteron 939s)

Of course Zebra hasn't posted about this in a week. I don't know if he still thinks he's right about the 939s or if he doesn't want to admit that he was wrong. Either way it's chicken sh*t.
 
serbiaNem said:
Dual core is different from single core, the dual-core opteron doesn't work.

You see, AMD started making single cores, then they put two on one chip and made dual-core :) It's called improving. Dual-cores have different HT lanes also.
Click to expand...
I just put an Opteron 165 into my K8N Neo4 Platinum (non-SLI) and have had no problems - other than this board not wanting to go past about 275-280 HTT. (That's limiting my overclock to about 2.5GHz.) I don't think my HTT speed problem has anything to do specifically with this chip because I've also had a Venice 3200+ in here and it had the same issue.

So far I'm stable at this speed but I'm trying to figure out how low I can get the voltage. For some reason ClockGen for the NF4 stopped working when I installed the Opteron, so I'm doing it the tough way - just fiddling in the BIOS repeatedly.
 
I have a Shuttle SN95G5 v2 and it does'nt support Manchester or San Diego. E6 (Toledo) stepping processors work ok though. There's plenty of people who have San Diego's working, but also plenty who don't. Funny thing is, that Shuttle have announced support for dual-core opterons (in reference to somebody saying nobody has official support).
 
dropadrop said:
I have a Shuttle SN95G5 v2 and it does'nt support Manchester or San Diego. E6 (Toledo) stepping processors work ok though. There's plenty of people who have San Diego's working, but also plenty who don't. Funny thing is, that Shuttle have announced support for dual-core opterons (in reference to somebody saying nobody has official support).
Click to expand...
thats... odd.
:confused:
 
ScHpAnKy said:
thats... odd.
:confused:
Click to expand...

That's what I thought, but I think it's some fairly small problem. The first venice / San Diego processors have had something new in the design which some manufacturers can't cope with. I'd guess it would have to do with thermal sencing or something, but really I have no clue. The stranger thing ofcourse is that only part of the sn95g5 v 1.2 and v2 are affected, and then can be fixed pretty easily (by shuttle though).

I was pretty pissed off untill they managed to fix compatibility with E6. It's enough for me...
 
serbiaNem said:
Dual-cores have different HT lanes also.
Click to expand...
mmmmm, they might, but not too different if they are. the only chipset i know of that doesn't support dual core is the via k8t890

bios support is key :D
 
I ran into that thread seaching google for opteron info. Zebra is dumber than the grass he feeds on. I couldn't believe what I was reading.
 
yeah its funny, I've seen other zebra types go off on people in different forums. Its funny that they would have such a strong opinion yet know nothing about the chip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top