Socket 939 forecast?

Majeztik12

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
344
Are there going to be any futher proc releases for this series? Is the FX57 & FX-60 the last bit of s939 goodness???
 

newls1

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 8, 2003
Messages
4,527
From my understanding there will not be any "NEW" released chips for S939......
 

Serge84

Gawd
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
693
It was replaced by the better socket because of DDR2, greater AMP capabilities, and compatibility for better cpu desines... giving a single socket a longer future.
 

newls1

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 8, 2003
Messages
4,527
Serge84 said:
It was replaced by the better socket because of DDR2, greater AMP capabilities, and compatibility for better cpu desines... giving a single socket a longer future.
Well not that long, AM3 is due in about 9 months (I think)
 

(cf)Eclipse

Freelance Overclocker
Joined
Feb 18, 2003
Messages
30,027
newls1 said:
Well not that long, AM3 is due in about 9 months (I think)
i would expect quite a bit longer, since i don't see ddr3 being ready in 9 months. ddr3 socket comes AFTER the introduction of ddr3 memory, just as AM2 came after ddr2 was around for a bit.
 

joemama

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 13, 2000
Messages
9,576
She's dead Jim :(

However there are still good X2 processors out there and the mobo's are coming down in price if you want to stick with 939 and do a partial upgrade.
 

Majeztik12

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
344
I guess I'll O/C what proc I have ,and wait a year! Intel seems to be back inside! Thanks.
 

joemama

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 13, 2000
Messages
9,576
lol...just noticed you have a FX-60 so your upgrade window is already closed. :(
 

Tutelary

I'm a nice banned boy.
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
2,014
I wish I had an fx60 and was worried about upgrading again already. :rolleyes:
 

AdamNesvick

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 18, 2006
Messages
2,373
Tutelary said:
I wish I had an fx60 and was worried about upgrading again already. :rolleyes:

QFT, if you have that much money, buy me a Video card, my X800XL is on its last leg.
 

Kangg

Ad Blocker - Banned
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
1,994
There is supposed to be an Athlon 64 5200 Socket 939 part coming out Q1 of 07 clocked @ 3.0 GHZ According to My AMD rep at work.
 

harpoon

Gawd
Joined
Jul 14, 2006
Messages
829
Kangg said:
There is supposed to be an Athlon 64 5200 Socket 939 part coming out Q1 of 07 clocked @ 3.0 GHZ According to My AMD rep at work.

I honestly doubt it. S939 is EOL as of Q4 06. It's dead, finished, gone to heaven, whatever.
 

joemama

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 13, 2000
Messages
9,576
Kangg said:
There is supposed to be an Athlon 64 5200 Socket 939 part coming out Q1 of 07 clocked @ 3.0 GHZ According to My AMD rep at work.
I'll eat my underwear on streaming webcam if that comes out for socket 939..

and then rush out and buy one and say "to hell" with my Conroe plans. :D
 

Met-AL

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 9, 2002
Messages
7,889
newls1 said:
Well not that long, AM3 is due in about 9 months (I think)

...but AM3 CPU's will work in AM2 sockets. AM3 CPU's contain both a DDR2 and DDR3 controller.
 

Tutelary

I'm a nice banned boy.
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
2,014
joemama said:
I'll eat my underwear on streaming webcam if that comes out for socket 939..

and then rush out and buy one and say "to hell" with my Conroe plans. :D

only you could probably buy 3 conroes of equal performance for that amount.
 

Tutelary

I'm a nice banned boy.
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
2,014
Met-AL said:
...but AM3 CPU's will work in AM2 sockets. AM3 CPU's contain both a DDR2 and DDR3 controller.

DDR3 better be the absolute shit, because theres no real difference from the benches Ive seen between ddr400 and ddr2 667. (Havent seen benches for 800, but wouldnt expect much of that to change)
 

GonzoP

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 3, 2006
Messages
3,660
harpoon said:
I honestly doubt it. S939 is EOL as of Q4 06. It's dead, finished, gone to heaven, whatever.
Looks over at his socket A cpu - I know where they go ;)
 

Donnie27

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
5,616
joemama said:
I'll eat my underwear on streaming webcam if that comes out for socket 939..

and then rush out and buy one and say "to hell" with my Conroe plans. :D

Hehehehe! Without comment;

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=e6600&page=1

GamePC said:
The Final Word
As you can tell by the previous eleven pages, the Core 2 Duo E6600 is in our opinion, one of the best processors (if not the best) which Intel has released in the past five years. The Core 2 Duo E6600 mixes together excellent performance at stock clock speeds, low power consumption, a robust feature set and lots of overclocking potential all at a very tolerable price point. These are the kind of processors we should expect from a company with as much manpower and engineering knowledge as Intel has. If there was any doubt to the validity of the Core 2 architecture, our tests should clear those up. Across the board, the Core 2 Duo E6600 is a winner.

At this point in time, there is no processor on the market which has such an excellent price to performance ratio compared to the E6600. In terms of raw performance, the E6600 is certainly beatable, but only by the more expensive Core 2 Duo E6700 and Core 2 Extreme X6800 processors, which are both still nearly non-existent on the market today. AMD’s best processor, even when overclocked, still struggles to compete with Intel’s mid-range Core 2 Duo processor. The Core 2 Duo E6600 can deliver roughly the same performance as the Athlon64 FX-62 processor while costing roughly half as much, requiring 1/3rd less power, and remaining far more overclockable.

This certainly leaves AMD in a tough spot. Even their newly launched Socket-AM2 processor lineup is getting beat in terms of performance and price, and even after their massive price drops, enthusiasts are still flocking towards Intel. These are the same enthusiasts who were so adamant about using AMD products in their prior systems, and now we’re seeing a similar move towards Intel. AMD could drop prices even further, but this is unlikely to help much. AMD needs to provide a faster product to the market as soon as possible. With no such product in sight until the end of the year (or perhaps later), its Intel’s market to take at this point. As fast as they can pump out these Core 2 Duo products, it’s likely that they will be sold.

Unfortunately, supplies of Core 2 Duo E6600’s are slim right now, and the chips which do make it to market are being tagged with hefty premiums. Even with these premiums, the E6600 is still the best bang-for-the-buck chip on the market. Hopefully Intel will work to remedy these stock issues over the coming weeks and prices will drop back down to sub-$400 levels. We still have the Core 2 Duo E6700 and Extreme X6800 on the way, which no doubt will extend Intel’s performance lead even further. I’d imagine that it’s a good time to be on the blue team, right about now.

;)
 

HighTest

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 17, 2005
Messages
1,245
Yashu said:
What does that have to do with socket 939?

It was inevitable that some Intel fan would troll this thread. It would have only been relevant if they could show how you could place a Conroe processor into a socket 939 motherboard and have it work in a stable manner. :rolleyes:

As to Socket 939, as far as I know, the intention is not to release anything new beyond the FX-60. Of course this is up to AMD and could be subject to change but I doubt it as there has not been any hint of this on the released roadmaps.

But to put it into perspective, an FX-60 or for that mater any of the X2's along with 2GB of memory will run Windows Vista extremely well. I'd stick with your FX-60 for now and if you need additional performance look into overclocking it.

I use the following high performance memory and I'm getting extremely satisfying OC's when using this memory in combination with my X2 cpu: http://www.viperlair.com/reviews/memory/other/patriot/DDR/pc4000/

Note that I'm not debating the Conroe at all in this thread, I'm sure that we are all aware of it's performance, but I am responding to the OP's socket 939 topic. Start another thread if you want to debate the superiority of the Conroe series.
 

Donnie27

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
5,616
Yashu said:
What does that have to do with socket 939?

I'll eat my underwear on streaming webcam if that comes out for socket 939..

and then rush out and buy one and say "to hell" with my Conroe plans.

What does this have to do with Conroe? Simple fact that even at 3GHz, the reason for the link, it'd still get its ass handed to it.
 

Donnie27

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
5,616
HighTest said:
It was inevitable that some Intel fan would troll this thread. It would have only been relevant if they could show how you could place a Conroe processor into a socket 939 motherboard and have it work in a stable manner. :rolleyes:

Reality bites uh?
 

HighTest

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 17, 2005
Messages
1,245
Donnie27 said:
Reality bites uh?

An then I smack it with a newspaper. :D

While I've been aware of Conroe's performance for quite some time, I just purchased a little while ago an X2 3800+ for my system. One main reason is that nothing else in my system needed to be repurchased, just the proc. What the GamePC article misses when talking about price/performance is the upgrader. The article is based on purchasing a new system from scratch and not reusing any of the existing components. To go to Core 2 Duo or Extreme, I'd need the new proc, motherboard and memory. That reduces it's price/performance ratio for me due to the additional outlay of cash. As it stands, I'll eventually need to replace the whole rig anyways and can go Core 2 or K8L at that time and to who ever reigns supreme for price/performace at that point.

As the OP was wondering, what was the next possible proc for the 939 roadmap. It sure as heck aint the Conroe. Again, not to malign the performance capabilities of the Conroe or even if it makes since to upgrade to another 939 process, just to answer the OP's question in this thread. If you want to add to the 100's of Conroe versus AMD threads, start a new one and we can debate it there (although I'll agree that it's the top performer at this time).
 

Donnie27

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
5,616
HighTest said:
An then I smack it with a newspaper. :D

While I've been aware of Conroe's performance for quite some time, I just purchased a little while ago an X2 3800+ for my system. One main reason is that nothing else in my system needed to be repurchased, just the proc. What the GamePC article misses when talking about price/performance is the upgrader. The article is based on purchasing a new system from scratch and not reusing any of the existing components. To go to Core 2 Duo or Extreme, I'd need the new proc, motherboard and memory. That reduces it's price/performance ratio for me due to the additional outlay of cash. As it stands, I'll eventually need to replace the whole rig anyways and can go Core 2 or K8L at that time and to who ever reigns supreme for price/performace at that point.

As the OP was wondering, what was the next possible proc for the 939 roadmap. It sure as heck aint the Conroe. Again, not to malign the performance capabilities of the Conroe or even if it makes since to upgrade to another 939 process, just to answer the OP's question in this thread. If you want to add to the 100's of Conroe versus AMD threads, start a new one and we can debate it there (although I'll agree that it's the top performer at this time).

I have a Sc-939, Asus A8N-SLI and I thought about just doing a processor upgrade as well.
We, a 3 friends and tried out my Bud's system, an overclocked to a little over 3GHz to someone we know at Xtreme systems. All four of us have Conroe's now. Give a do over, I'd still get a Conroe not give a flip about a 3GHz AM2 or 939.
 

KenAF

Weaksauce
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
78
To go to Core 2 Duo or Extreme, I'd need the new proc, motherboard and memory. That reduces it's price/performance ratio for me due to the additional outlay of cash.
Don't know if you were aware, but there are motherboards for Core 2 Duo that support DDR400 (and faster) memory and AGP. These cost as little as $40.

That said, I am still holding out hope that AMD will price its processors more competitively. I have an Opteron 146 overclocked @ 2.4Ghz with DDR500, and I would like to upgrade to an X2 4800. But at $300, the X2 4800 just isn't competitive, particularly when overclocked $180 Core2 Duos with stock voltage are outperforming it by 20+%. I would like to see AMD drop the X2 4800 to the $180-$200 range.

Hopefully Intel's introduction of quad core processors on October 30 will encourage AMD to drop its prices to realistic levels.
 

Yashu

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,294
Simple fact that even at 3GHz, the reason for the link, it'd still get its ass handed to it.

Yawn, Not in 64bit apps... and 64bit is definately the future. AMD still holds strong in the 64bit world. Besides that, a 3ghz x2 is no slouch.

but there are motherboards for Core 2 Duo that support DDR400 (and faster) memory and AGP. These cost as little as $40.

These boards with ULI chipsets would not be a good investment. the problems are many, and nvidia (owner of ULI) does not seem interested in fixing the integrated drivers (AGP accel. does not even work on 64bit systems yet), or anything else. I would not put money into something ULI based until it was more clear what nvidia intends to do with them.

So you save a bit on the motherbaord, but must spend many many hours just getting everything working right... how much is your time worth?

My time is worth enough where it would be worth upgrading rather then scrapping everything.
 

LstBrunnenG

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 3, 2003
Messages
6,677
I know Conroe's faster. Given the chance to upgrade my whole system right now, I'd buy Conroe. That said, I'd rather buy a 3 GHz X2, because I don't have to buy a new motherboard or RAM. I've got 4 GB of DDR. It would cost a lot to get 4 GB of fast DDR2.

You're starting to remind me of the people in this forum two years ago. If you said you were buying an Intel chip for any reason whatsoever AMD fans would jump on the thread gleefully proclaiming the OP an idiot. It didn't matter if they were doing video encoding, which Intel actually had a slight advantage in, people acted like Intel processors couldn't even properly execute game code. You're doing the same thing, and it's starting to get just as annoying. A 3 GHz K8 would be a decent chip. It may lose a few benchmarks to the flagship Conroe, but it wouldn't make a bad system.
 

Tutelary

I'm a nice banned boy.
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
2,014
Yashu said:
Yawn, Not in 64bit apps... and 64bit is definately the future. AMD still holds strong in the 64bit world. Besides that, a 3ghz x2 is no slouch.



These boards with ULI chipsets would not be a good investment. the problems are many, and nvidia (owner of ULI) does not seem interested in fixing the integrated drivers (AGP accel. does not even work on 64bit systems yet), or anything else. I would not put money into something ULI based until it was more clear what nvidia intends to do with them.

So you save a bit on the motherbaord, but must spend many many hours just getting everything working right... how much is your time worth?

My time is worth enough where it would be worth upgrading rather then scrapping everything.

As an actual owner of an asrock uli board, I'd like to bluntly say you're full of it. How exactly does running a package installer (2.20) from nvidias site differ any from doing it for the nforce stuff? Oh wait, it doesn't. My system is rock solid with an x2 3800, a 7800gt, and 4x512 @ddr400.
 

Yashu

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,294
I am going to quote myself here since you didn't read everything the first time.

(AGP accel. does not even work on 64bit systems yet)

This is a fully documented problem with windows XP x64, there is no working AGP acceleration as of yet. The AGP slot works as a 66mhz PCI slot ONLY. The fact that it is taking this long makes me not want to trust them with vista support.

Please don't tell someone they are full of it without first checking the facts.

ON TOPIC: I would love to jump on an x2 4400 or even an FX60... I can't scale the HTT very far on this board... so the fx60 would be great... then I could just change the multi.
 

Tutelary

I'm a nice banned boy.
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
2,014
Yashu said:
I am going to quote myself here since you didn't read everything the first time.



This is a fully documented problem with windows XP x64, there is no working AGP acceleration as of yet. The AGP slot works as a 66mhz PCI slot ONLY. The fact that it is taking this long makes me not want to trust them with vista support.

Please don't tell someone they are full of it without first checking the facts.

The "facts" are that the agp on my asrock/uli 939 board works wonderfully :D . Making a blanket statement about uli because you are having some problem is crap. BTW: XP64 has never been worth installing.
 

Yashu

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,294
it is broken until it has 64bit support... Every other chipset maker has full 64bit support... ULI is nothing but a toy right now... They have no excuse... if they can't even roll out working x64 drivers, I do not trust them with supporting vista in a timely manor. I would never ever recomend you buy a nice new conroe processor and stick it in a board that may not work on your OS.

I own the board... and after I installed it and had to fresh install windows (it's SATA controller corrupted my MFT beyond repair), and then to find out that there was no x64 AGP support... I had to install all the old stuff again. I'd sell it but it's not worth enough for the effort... so I kept it incase I build a 32bit secondary machine.

if I ever upgrade my CPU to one of the 1mb cache per core chips I will have a CPU for the asrock.
 

Donnie27

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
5,616
Yashu said:
Yawn, Not in 64bit apps... and 64bit is definately the future. AMD still holds strong in the 64bit world. Besides that, a 3ghz x2 is no slouch.

It kicks the FX-62's ass in 64bit apps as well. Yes the FX-62 overclocked to 3GHz is slower in 32 and 64bit apps. :p Tech Report does all of the Conroe vs FX with WInXP 64, please try again?

Yashu said:
These boards with ULI chipsets would not be a good investment. the problems are many, and nvidia (owner of ULI) does not seem interested in fixing the integrated drivers (AGP accel. does not even work on 64bit systems yet), or anything else. I would not put money into something ULI based until it was more clear what nvidia intends to do with them.

Thank nVidia for killing off competition LOL!

Yashu said:
So you save a bit on the motherbaord, but must spend many many hours just getting everything working right... how much is your time worth?

My time is worth enough where it would be worth upgrading rather then scrapping everything.

That's true!
 

Donnie27

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
5,616
KenAF said:
Don't know if you were aware, but there are motherboards for Core 2 Duo that support DDR400 (and faster) memory and AGP. These cost as little as $40.

That said, I am still holding out hope that AMD will price its processors more competitively. I have an Opteron 146 overclocked @ 2.4Ghz with DDR500, and I would like to upgrade to an X2 4800. But at $300, the X2 4800 just isn't competitive, particularly when overclocked $180 Core2 Duos with stock voltage are outperforming it by 20+%. I would like to see AMD drop the X2 4800 to the $180-$200 range.

Hopefully Intel's introduction of quad core processors on October 30 will encourage AMD to drop its prices to realistic levels.

Smart move Ken, smart indeed! I have at least 3 buddies doing the same.
 

Met-AL

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 9, 2002
Messages
7,889
How come you guys have to come over here and crap on a thread about the future of S939 with all this Conroe stuff and then continue to argue it over and over?

Yea, we ALL know about Conroe. Still the the thread is about S939.
 

Yashu

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,294
It kicks the FX-62's ass in 64bit apps as well.

not exactly...

http://forums.pcper.com/showthread.php?t=425117

To me conroe is more bark then bite... and this is why I like my s939 just that much more... I don't run 32bit Os anyhow... so the % increase on 64bit apps is like icing on the cake.

I wish AMD didn't kill it off as fast as they have. a 3ghz s939 chip would be, well, awsome.
 

Donnie27

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
5,616
Met-AL said:
How come you guys have to come over here and crap on a thread about the future of S939 with all this Conroe stuff and then continue to argue it over and over?

Yea, we ALL know about Conroe. Still the the thread is about S939.

There's no crap to speak of. Crap is when someone lies or BS's about something that's not real, like fiction or etc...

There are hundreds of threads here where folks don't mention Intel, Conroe, or etc.. I and some of the others don't post in those threads. There are many of the same posters here who constantly post on the Intel side of the forum with any and even slightly good news about AMD.

Last but not least, there is no place to lie for AMD without being called on something. See my next post? The AMD side of the forum doesn't mean misinformation is passed off as fact and goes unchallenged..
 
Top