QUAD CORE AMD coming in a month! Motherboard showing off today

I love Serge84's posts...lol talk about f@nboyism, not to mention the worst grammar and spelling possible.

This dual socket AM2 will ONLY be successful if they allow non-FX processors to be used... because honestly, how many ppl here are willing to spend $1000 per CPU? Thats 2000 bucks worth of CPU right there + 200 dollar MB (at minimum), and you end up spending 2200 before you factor in the 1000 Crossfire/SLI, 200 for memory.....

Sheesh! Talk about expensive! I suspect the majority of users on these boards, even many AMD ones will jump to a single socket Conroe in the next year instead of pay for something this expensive and barely more useful.
 
I'm getting a lot of feedback from people who don't see the point of 4x4 vs. Opteron / Woodcrest. I think the reason many of you don't see the point is that you expect too much out of 4x4 and you are not considering all the consequences of a full-blown Opteron / Woodcrest solution.

Let's think about this from the desktop perspective:

Opteron / Woodcrest both require very expensive memory. Registered DDR2 800 is not cheap, and FBDIMMS are even more expensive. Second, Registered DDR2 is slow, and FBDIMMS can be even slower.

Score: 4x4: 2
Opteron/Woodcrest 0

Now, think about most server class boards. When you buy one of the most popular two-way workstation Opteron boards, the Tyan K8WE, you have to pay for a whole mess of PCI-X slots that only take up space because most desktop users will never touch them, a BIOS that can't do any overclocking, and only one standard PCI slot. This is jsut one example, but Opteron/Woodcrest boards are not built for the desktop gamer.

Score: 4x4: 3
Opteron/Woodcrest 0

----

Comparing 4x4 to a single socket system doesn't really make much sense. If you want a single socket system, go buy one. No one is stopping you from enjoying a higher price/performance ratio that comes with such a choice.

4x4 is a dual-socket setup, and as such, it should be compared to other dual-socket products. When one does a comparison between the other two-socket alternatives (Opteron/Woodcrest) with desktop use in mind, it is easy to see that 4x4 has some interesting advantages both with respect to performance and price.
 
Donnie27 said:
You're the type of person who's bad for not only the Processor market but to even AMD Fans. If they were all like you, AMD would still be selling AthlonXPs.

No it is not like cheering for the San Fran 49ers. The best way to be a 49ers Fan is to step away. Then they'd get better players. Cheering for a loser is not only stupid but counter-productive. If I need work done I get the best tool to do that work. Not take longer because I have some missed placed love for company like AMD or Intel. Neither gives me anything free. If you’re not a stock holder or employee, then your blind love for AMD is Crazy!

Sorry I'd rather push nothing. I want a working car for safe transportation and don't give flying flickering f@#$ who made it. I do like Chevy BTW LOL! Yet, if Chevy sucks I'm moving to something else. Like most folks here I own both Intel and AMD products and don't plan to buy second rate from either company out of some stupid loyalty.

I'm buying Conroe this time and if K8L kicks ass when I do to upgrade next time I'll buy it. I'm sorry if you can't understand that. I have an AMD based Gamer Rig and HTPC that’s Intel based downstairs in my Den. I’ am a Bandwagon jumping fence sitting Fan of my wallet.
Click to expand...

Well the 49ers win the Superbowl every year on my tv...

I guess we are our on different ends of the spectrum of how we like to spend our money, not a problem.. different strokes for different folks.




Visaris - thanks for all the great information you are providing I am enjoying your posts.
 
visaris said:
When talking about the FX line or the XE line, one does not typically put too much importance on price. Price is always an issue, but as has been said many times, there will always be people who want the best.

I would be very surprised if a single Conroe XE would outperform two FX-64s across the board. This puts the 4x4 platform as the best money can buy on the desktop. Conroe may still have the best price/performance ratio, and this may be even more true of lower clocked models, but the FX and XE lines are not about being the best price/performance. These lines are all about being the best performers.

It sounds to me like a lot of Conroe fans are upset because AMD just changed the rules. Too bad; Intel should have thought of it first. 4x4 is a little hackish, it is a stopgap, but it's an interesting idea that can bring some powerful results to a small group of people. Only time will tell if there is much interest in the area (though AMD did say this was something a lot of customers were interested in).
Click to expand...

Though I don't like this idea AMD came up with, I have to agree with you. There will be an E-Penis size factor here some folks will buy. I'd be shocked that if that tolly is more .001%. Even Woodcrest doesn't have the Video slots for Quad SLI and nVidia will help its old boss by doing what they already doing with the drivers. Aweeee but will they sell and nVidia Intel based board with similar features?

http://www.techreport.com/etc/2006q2/woodcrest/index.x?pg=1

The video Sub system will be the key to any advantage AMD will have here, NOT the processors. Unless many of you believe this was faked or poorly done as well.
 
i want pics..

and yes, having to use FX procs makes this thing completely out of reach and thus, uninteresting.

i really hope they will let us use any proc we want.
 
visaris said:
I'm getting a lot of feedback from people who don't see the point of 4x4 vs. Opteron / Woodcrest. I think the reason many of you don't see the point is that you expect too much out of 4x4 and you are not considering all the consequences of a full-blown Opteron / Woodcrest solution.

Let's think about this from the desktop perspective:

Opteron / Woodcrest both require very expensive memory. Registered DDR2 800 is not cheap, and FBDIMMS are even more expensive. Second, Registered DDR2 is slow, and FBDIMMS can be even slower.

Score: 4x4: 2
Opteron/Woodcrest 0

Now, think about most server class boards. When you buy one of the most popular two-way workstation Opteron boards, the Tyan K8WE, you have to pay for a whole mess of PCI-X slots that only take up space because most desktop users will never touch them, a BIOS that can't do any overclocking, and only one standard PCI slot. This is jsut one example, but Opteron/Woodcrest boards are not built for the desktop gamer.

Score: 4x4: 3
Opteron/Woodcrest 0

----

Comparing 4x4 to a single socket system doesn't really make much sense. If you want a single socket system, go buy one. No one is stopping you from enjoying a higher price/performance ratio that comes with such a choice.

4x4 is a dual-socket setup, and as such, it should be compared to other dual-socket products. When one does a comparison between the other two-socket alternatives (Opteron/Woodcrest) with desktop use in mind, it is easy to see that 4x4 has some interesting advantages both with respect to performance and price.
Click to expand...


I guess you have never seen the enthusiast line of opeteron products....


Step out and take a look at the world, there are quite a few out there... and a lot of them aren't stocked with pci-x slots, a lot of the modern opteron setups have pcie, sli, sata2, etc.

And ecc memory isn't that much more, secondly, the resale value is much better on ecc memory. Why the hell are you even comparing costs when you are talking about dual processor boards so people can stick their FX62's and 64's in there?!


Also, your opteron solution would be a much better in terms of stability and support and you can always upgrade whereas you are limited to two sockets on the am2 platform. Opteron you can have up to 8 using the right processor.
 
Tetrahedron said:
Well the 49ers win the Superbowl every year on my tv...

I guess we are our on different ends of the spectrum of how we like to spend our money, not a problem.. different strokes for different folks.

Visaris - thanks for all the great information you are providing I am enjoying your posts.
Click to expand...

If you say so.
 
OT.. if you guys think rooting for the 9ers is bad. try rooting for the royals. :D
 
Jason711 said:
OT.. if you guys think rooting for the 9ers is bad. try rooting for the royals. :D
Click to expand...

At least the Royals can say they're small market.
 
Jason711 said:
OT.. if you guys think rooting for the 9ers is bad. try rooting for the royals. :D
Click to expand...

I'm rooting for the royals; they've got a realistic shot to break the '62 Mets record for most loses in the modern ear.
 
Donnie27 said:
At least the Royals can say they're small market.
Click to expand...

lol.. true. doesnt make it any less embarassing though. ;)

man.. i REALLY hope they dont do it.. that would suck! :(
 
visaris said:
I'm getting a lot of feedback from people who don't see the point of 4x4 vs. Opteron / Woodcrest. I think the reason many of you don't see the point is that you expect too much out of 4x4 and you are not considering all the consequences of a full-blown Opteron / Woodcrest solution.

Let's think about this from the desktop perspective:

Opteron / Woodcrest both require very expensive memory. Registered DDR2 800 is not cheap, and FBDIMMS are even more expensive. Second, Registered DDR2 is slow, and FBDIMMS can be even slower.

Score: 4x4: 2
Opteron/Woodcrest 0

Now, think about most server class boards. When you buy one of the most popular two-way workstation Opteron boards, the Tyan K8WE, you have to pay for a whole mess of PCI-X slots that only take up space because most desktop users will never touch them, a BIOS that can't do any overclocking, and only one standard PCI slot. This is jsut one example, but Opteron/Woodcrest boards are not built for the desktop gamer.

Score: 4x4: 3
Opteron/Woodcrest 0

----

Comparing 4x4 to a single socket system doesn't really make much sense. If you want a single socket system, go buy one. No one is stopping you from enjoying a higher price/performance ratio that comes with such a choice.

4x4 is a dual-socket setup, and as such, it should be compared to other dual-socket products. When one does a comparison between the other two-socket alternatives (Opteron/Woodcrest) with desktop use in mind, it is easy to see that 4x4 has some interesting advantages both with respect to performance and price.
Click to expand...

perfectly valid points IMHO, as long as AMD does not make the 4x4 "FX-62 or better" only, which would kill off all possible cost advantages in comparison to woodcrest/opteron solutions right off the bat.

What I don't get - and I think this is the reason for the heated debate here - is why on earth AMD chose to market this as a gaming solution. The only obvious reason, as Donnie already stated, is going to be the average, uneducated cash-loaded dummy going for an Alienware e-penis configuration.

I don't think we would even have this discussion if AMD marketed it as a relatively cheap content-creation / video encoding platform - as these are the ppl who could really rejoice: An affordable platform that uses RAM most of us have at home anyways into which you can drop your normal A64 and overclock the snodd out of it - nice. In the end there is a lot of smaller studios looking at the processing power vs. price ratio, and this could be just as viable a solution as Opteron/Woodcrest platforms IMHO.
 
Serge84 said:
The cheapest dual socket ever made. :D Thats bloody freaken awesome. 2 cpus are better then one. Doesn't matter how good 1 cpu is. Its IMPOSSIBLE to be ahead of 2 with one.
Click to expand...
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I suggest actually looking into the subject matter before posting on it, because you are just making up whatever floats your boat. Many games do not take advantage of SMP and if they do the performance boost is not very large.

Serge84 said:
2 FX-62's vs 1 conroe. lol A conore is only 20% better at best agenst one in BENCHING not real world. Its not even out yet. But where does the 80% magicly come form with conore? This is something intels socket cant do. Even 2 semprons OCed would be better then buying a single dual core at the molment because they are so cheap and OC like its not even funny.
Click to expand...
The places where the Conroe destroys AMD is usually in the real world - game benchmarks. Two semprons would not be better, you are very misinformed.

Serge84 said:
But amd never made AM2 to combat conore in the 1st place. They could care less at the molment. All AM2 is now is to use DDR2. But this doesn't mean they can't do whatever they want to make the socket better. A new socket has unknown limits as well as the CPU's such as when the new arc comes out K8L. Who knows what could happen its all speculation. But what is not is if I buy some kick ass Opterons on a dual socket 940 and vs conore. Ta hahahaha good luck benching agenst ppl with 2 cpus on 4 cores in all with your preshis conore. Much less the new socket F quad sockets. lol Conore isn't a god, even conore has its "limits". :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You can make up whatever fantastic story you want in your head, but the facts are this: the AM2 will be competing against the Conroe. Maybe AMD didn't intend for it to go that way, maybe they did. It doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is that when you go to buy a new CPU you will be faced with 2 choices - AM2 or Conroe. And at the moment, there appears to be no reason to buy an AM2. Oh, and trust me - AMD cares. Any large business such as that cares. They don't just say "oh, we'll gladly accept the position of having value performance CPUs without the value price."
 
wizzackr said:
perfectly valid points IMHO, as long as AMD does not make the 4x4 "FX-62 or better" only, which would kill off all possible cost advantages in comparison to woodcrest/opteron solutions right off the bat.

What I don't get - and I think this is the reason for the heated debate here - is why on earth AMD chose to market this as a gaming solution. The only obvious reason, as Donnie already stated, is going to be the average, uneducated cash-loaded dummy going for an Alienware e-penis configuration.

I don't think we would even have this discussion if AMD marketed it as a relatively cheap content-creation / video encoding platform - as these are the ppl who could really rejoice: An affordable platform that uses RAM most of us have at home anyways into which you can drop your normal A64 and overclock the snodd out of it - nice. In the end there is a lot of smaller studios looking at the processing power vs. price ratio, and this could be just as viable a solution as Opteron/Woodcrest platforms IMHO.
Click to expand...


Exactly. It's almost as AMD is desperate for a quick grab at Intel.


I would have much rather seen their quad cores than dual socketed motherboards... or the quick advancement of their processors (skipping a few steps such as the FX62 and 64... go striaght to the 66 or 68).
 
Is all of this kinda like what was going on with razor blades...you know Mach 27 and all that shit. " "If 3 is good, then 4 is better, then 5, etc..." At some point it is all overkill as Intel saw with their Netburst architecture and the MHZ war of their p4's. Pushing raw clock speed didn't seem stupid at the time, because that's what comumers wanted and sought after. But, people got smarter, realizing that AMD was doing just as much with less (lower clocks). That is why Intel and AMD both are going for efficiency. The CPU's of the past were more power hungry and had a lot of leakage. That is why you see more cores showing up per chip. Much more efficient.

I see the new technology emphasizing this fact and, the new E-penises will have more stamina. " My E-penis is 12 " long...well mine can spin around and go all night, and I have 4 of them"
 
I'm all for it if it works out to our advantage. I would like to see it improve performance without a bunch of code optimizations. Just brute force horsepower... we'll see soon enough I guess.
 
Donnie27 said:
http://www.techreport.com/etc/2006q2/woodcrest/index.x?pg=1

The video Sub system will be the key to any advantage AMD will have here, NOT the processors. Unless many of you believe this was faked or poorly done as well.
Click to expand...

I didn't realize that Bensly can only offer a maximum of 24 lanes of PCIe. I don't see many people going with Woodcrest for gaming esspecially if 4x4 is out at the time, unless Intel can make a chipset with more O/I bandwidth available. You are right that the video subsystem is the major advantage here.

As for the review being "faked" or "poorly done": the review is acceptable. I would love to see more server-class benchmarks and less workstation / desktop benchmarks, but the review does give some insight. It is easy to see that Opteron on s940 scales better than Woodcrest on Bensley when adding threads; this is to be expected. Also, Woodcrest on Bensley is much faster with single-threaded tasks than Opteron on s940; this is to be expected as well. I will have to wait for Socket-F Opterons before I can say much more than that.
 
it still baffles me how ppl say a socket is competing against a processor. when socket T came out, i never compared the a64 to it, i compared the a64 to the p4 (which still sucked.. ;)). conroe will most like be the better processor for a while. not sure what the big deal is... :confused:
 
visaris said:
I'm getting a lot of feedback from people who don't see the point of 4x4 vs. Opteron / Woodcrest. I think the reason many of you don't see the point is that you expect too much out of 4x4 and you are not considering all the consequences of a full-blown Opteron / Woodcrest solution.

Let's think about this from the desktop perspective:

Opteron / Woodcrest both require very expensive memory. Registered DDR2 800 is not cheap, and FBDIMMS are even more expensive. Second, Registered DDR2 is slow, and FBDIMMS can be even slower.

Score: 4x4: 2
Opteron/Woodcrest 0

Now, think about most server class boards. When you buy one of the most popular two-way workstation Opteron boards, the Tyan K8WE, you have to pay for a whole mess of PCI-X slots that only take up space because most desktop users will never touch them, a BIOS that can't do any overclocking, and only one standard PCI slot. This is jsut one example, but Opteron/Woodcrest boards are not built for the desktop gamer.

Score: 4x4: 3
Opteron/Woodcrest 0

----

Comparing 4x4 to a single socket system doesn't really make much sense. If you want a single socket system, go buy one. No one is stopping you from enjoying a higher price/performance ratio that comes with such a choice.

4x4 is a dual-socket setup, and as such, it should be compared to other dual-socket products. When one does a comparison between the other two-socket alternatives (Opteron/Woodcrest) with desktop use in mind, it is easy to see that 4x4 has some interesting advantages both with respect to performance and price.
Click to expand...

you are commenting on price?
the dual socket by amd in only for the fx lines and their current price is sky high, not to mention that the new mobo has only been released..
perhaps before you comment on the matter of price, you could bring in some hard numbers. i am a newb on the opteron line, but if htey do what you are suggesting they do, the professionals who used quad cores are the ones who are smart enoug hto do a cost benefit analysis,
before you compare the cost of ram and usage of pcie, you should compare the price of a full setup to see which is more expensive.
i got the gut feeling that dual fx is gonna sink the dual socket by amd
 
fan_83 said:
you are commenting on price?
the dual socket by amd in only for the fx lines and their current price is sky high
Click to expand...

That's a rumor that got started earlier in this thread, no one has confirmed it yet.
 
fan_83 said:
you are commenting on price?
the dual socket by amd in only for the fx lines and their current price is sky high, not to mention that the new mobo has only been released..
perhaps before you comment on the matter of price, you could bring in some hard numbers. i am a newb on the opteron line, but if htey do what you are suggesting they do, the professionals who used quad cores are the ones who are smart enoug hto do a cost benefit analysis,
before you compare the cost of ram and usage of pcie, you should compare the price of a full setup to see which is more expensive.
i got the gut feeling that dual fx is gonna sink the dual socket by amd
Click to expand...

The Opteron 285 retails for a little over $1000 per chip. This is two cores at 2.6GHz. The FX-62 is a little over $1000 per chip at 2.8GHz. 4x4 would give you a 200MHz bump for free.

A Tyan K8WE sells for a little under 500$. There is no way a 4x4 board is going to cost around $500.

I really don't want to go through all the trouble of building the two systems and getting a total price, etc. However, I am confident the 4x4 system will cost less and perform better than Opterons on s940 and probably on socket F as well.
 
Jason711 said:
a rumor id like to see squashed.. quickly.
Click to expand...
I thought otherwise at first, but all of the AMD slides and press releases so far say FX on 4x4. I was hoping that it would be available on lower AM2 chips, but it's looking pretty unlikely now.
 
pxc said:
I thought otherwise at first, but all of the AMD slides and press releases so far say FX on 4x4. I was hoping that it would be available on lower AM2 chips, but it's looking pretty unlikely now.
Click to expand...

ohwell, no thank you.. then!! ;)
 
fan_83 said:
also: conroe is already on the market: ebay is selling the 6700 for around 300quid. so its not a paperlaunch, although the amd believers will call it engineering samples.
Click to expand...


Do you have links? I did a quick ebay search and found 2 Conroe processor auctions finished in the last 30 days, and both were clearly labeled engineering samples. Maybe I'm searching wrong, or maybe I'm just an AMD believer and ES doesn't actually stand for Engineering Sample.... maybe it's Extra Special. Extremely Speedy? Who knows.
 
Steve01S4 said:
Do you have links? I did a quick ebay search and found 2 Conroe processor auctions finished in the last 30 days, and both were clearly labeled engineering samples. Maybe I'm searching wrong, or maybe I'm just an AMD believer and ES doesn't actually stand for Engineering Sample.... maybe it's Extra Special. Extremely Speedy? Who knows.
Click to expand...

ebay is *the* market... dont you remember!?
 
visaris said:
The Opteron 285 retails for a little over $1000 per chip. This is two cores at 2.6GHz. The FX-62 is a little over $1000 per chip at 2.8GHz. 4x4 would give you a 200MHz bump for free.

A Tyan K8WE sells for a little under 500$. There is no way a 4x4 board is going to cost around $500.

I really don't want to go through all the trouble of building the two systems and getting a total price, etc. However, I am confident the 4x4 system will cost less and perform better than Opterons on s940 and probably on socket F as well.
Click to expand...


You are comparing current on the shelf technology to something thats not even on paper in our hands other than those articles for rumor.
 
pxc said:
I thought otherwise at first, but all of the AMD slides and press releases so far say FX on 4x4. I was hoping that it would be available on lower AM2 chips, but it's looking pretty unlikely now.
Click to expand...

The Daily Tech link from the Original Post says AM2 FX62 and higher.
 
ahh my bad then, cos i saw it on an ebay site where some guy is selling the conroes from malaysia. i think it was stolen from the factories but it seems i was mistaken

and i thought its now fact that amd is gonna release the dual socket fx62, to fight conroe. all the major sites seems to say the same thing
 
visaris said:
I didn't realize that Bensly can only offer a maximum of 24 lanes of PCIe. I don't see many people going with Woodcrest for gaming esspecially if 4x4 is out at the time, unless Intel can make a chipset with more O/I bandwidth available. You are right that the video subsystem is the major advantage here.

As for the review being "faked" or "poorly done": the review is acceptable. I would love to see more server-class benchmarks and less workstation / desktop benchmarks, but the review does give some insight. It is easy to see that Opteron on s940 scales better than Woodcrest on Bensley when adding threads; this is to be expected. Also, Woodcrest on Bensley is much faster with single-threaded tasks than Opteron on s940; this is to be expected as well. I will have to wait for Socket-F Opterons before I can say much more than that.
Click to expand...

But I was agreeing with you! With a Chipset and a PCI-E Bridge $X$, erum 4X4 should* have 32 lanes, not 24. This is the Video Sub System advantage AMD has unless nVidia does something similar Intel/Dell or etc... We can talk about scaling up to 8 processors or whatever but a Long time ago I told and you and Duby 4-Way would be less of a Problem for Intel as you think. Kentfield is closer than k8L and was already demoed, not just an XRay of a single non working sample.

No it is NOT easy to see how Opteron scales at THIS level, neither has took to mis-marketing 8 way systems to Gamers LOL! Bensley is a TWO-WAY system and that's what 4X4 is again and nothing is expected for Opteron to perform with TWO DC PROCESSORS. Cross the scaling to more processors bridge when you get to it, that has no place here. This is two Dual Core Processors vs. Two Dual Core processors subject, just two Core2 Duos. Bensley has TWO FSB's and up to 21GB of Bandwidth is NOT as Handicapped as many AMD folks have been lead to believe. Two independant FSB just as I said how many months ago?

Back to what I said at first. It is the Video Sub system and maybe board Layout that will prove to be a Clear advantage for folks Buying this system more than what processor is used. IMHO, it is an E-Penis thing gone wild. Aimming this at Gammers? Gimmick!
 
FreiDOg said:
Whether that means 'up to FX-62 and future parts that go faster' or 'FX-62 and newer', I won't claim to know.
Click to expand...

hahaha - good job on the wording, Dailytech - I always read it as if it was "only FX62 and better", as most of you seemed to as well, but you are right FreiDOg - could just as well be anything AM2-based up to FX62 and whatever comes past that. That would be more in line with what the TechReport reported... fingers crossed :p
 
The AMD slide calls it "Enthusiasts Platform".

DailyTech said:
However, AMD did assure DailyTech that the 65nm Brisbane-based FX processor will be compatible with 4x4
Click to expand...

Why is it necessary to emphasize "Brisbane-based FX" and not just say Brisbane?

DailyTech said:
In related AMD news, Dell recently announced that it will begin shipping Opteron systems, but the company also now owns Alienware, which produces and ships high-performance enthusiast machines in both AMD and Intel flavors
Click to expand...

Here we have "high-performance" modifying "enthusiast", which would seem to recognize that not all enthusiasts are $$- buyers. Or. It could be saying that "enthusiasts" are necessarily interested in performance.

But, all this tends to make me think that "enthusiast" is just a another word for gullible. Maybe, it's the truth.



Well, that's all marketing for you. Smoke and mirrors, leave some things in doubt, uncertain. DailyTech doesn't seem to know any better, or at least, Tuan Nguyen doesn't know any better because he didn't try to make it any clearer.

If we forget whatever AMD says and whatever DailyTech says and assume on a whim, without anything to back it up, that 4x4 is not just for FXs, or even Dual-Cores. Then I guess, maybe, a pair of semprons would be awfully tempting...or maybe not.
 
i dont see why any other AM2 chips wouldnt work baring the fact that it would then the ccHT links turned on

imo it would be a bad move on AMDs part to limit this to the uber highend with just FXs

if this mess works out i may stay with AMD if not Intel here i come
 
i quit reading after a couple pages...

but it seems to me that the AMD PR saying "were not worried about CONROE in the slightest" is a lie, and he is, in fact, pissing his pants.

AMD being not worried is completly impossible, as they are throwing this thing at us. four cores, sure that works, so thats what a grand total of how many threads? try finding a program that could use all that.... perhalps if you wanna run 3dmark 06, Doom3, HL2, Defragger, and Nortan all at the same time, you might have a need for this board, but i just dont see how the average gaming end user will benifet from such an obseane ammount of processing horsepower. with two FX-62's in the configuration they mentioned, the bottle neck would be on the graphics unit, even SLI/X-fire, hell even quad SLI would still provide for a bottle neck.

dual core processers, coupled with HT, already provide more then enough processing power, four cores, is not yet needed, on a PC.

sorry amd, you got me sold on M2, but the rest of this bunch, needs a really good excuse to buy an M2 board, and your not providing, conroe is horsewhipping you, AMD.
 
well Oblivion uses ATLEST 10 threads on my box when did some tests on the Quake4 patch it was using 6+ threads at any one time soo.... and then theres encoding i wouldnt mide having a 8 CPU PC
 
MrWizard6600 said:
AMD being not worried is completly impossible.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure. Never underestimate the power of phanboiism. Just as those of us who have been enthusiasts for 10 years or more are mentally hard-coded that Intel is always best, those that just got into the game in the last couple years are set to AMD-Rules mode. AMD has never had the mass-market appeal, but with their current line-up and high priced high-profit options like this, they will keep raking in the dough, regardless of what performs better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top