AM2 to wait or not to wait - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > New Systems | Building and Buying
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 02-27-2006, 06:24 AM   #1 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Nitestick's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: смерти для спаме
Posts: 8,473
Default AM2 to wait or not to wait

one of the most frequently mentioned topics on the forums at the moment is the up an coming AM2 socket. now i am going to post my opinion as to why it is not worth waiting for

Reasons not to wait:
1. current information suggests that the new memory controller is struggling with DDR2 support and that what has been developed so far only roughly equals current performance if not slightly lower

2. spending a lot of money on the latest technology based on faith is a big gamble, for anyone doubting me google "p4 willamette"

3. pricing will no doubt be higher than equivelant s939 cpu's

4. AM2 is only really a revision of current technology to include DDR2

5. DDR2 latencies are hideous and so far have shown unimpressive performance with the info floating around about AM2

6. why wait for something that could quite possibly be a flop rather than build something on proven technology currently available

7. again on DDR2: the AMD memory controller does not rely heavily on memory bandwidth so i believe that even once the controller has been improved it won't provide a significant performance boost

8. any issues with the cpu's will not be known until after they are released. if anyone can remember the entire shipment of pentium 3's intel managed to make that never worked and had to be recalled and more development done.

Reasons to wait:
1. Even though current benchmarks were disappointing for AM2, I will place a wager saying that the once the rev F chips are actually released, they will in fact beat rev. E's (clock for clock)

2. DDR2 has been progressing and certain chips can already run with fairly tight timings. I also think with AMD in the game, it will put more pressure on manufactures to create tighter timing DDR2 chips.

3. For future upgrade purposes, AMD does plan on scaling new chips higher, and other rev. changes most certainly will add efficiency and performance increases.

4. It is not necessarily only waiting for AM2, but Conroe will be released about the same time. Waiting would allow you to finally see what both chips actually end up doing. (no more guessing, yay!)

DDR2 info:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...ead.php?t=91005
this discusse that apparently tne next gen DDR2 will be CAS 3.
thanks idiotec

i just thought i'd bring this to everyones attention seeing as it is currently a hot topic. constructive posts for either reasons for or against waiting for AM2 are welcomed and if they are valid i'll add them to the list. i just think this needs to be openly discussed because in way too many threads people will say "wait for AM2" without justification. this is mostly my opinion (or the opinion of others) so either way it is not completely impartial so don't take it as fact just think of anything in this thread more as guide lines
__________________

Nitestick is offline  
Old 02-27-2006, 11:46 AM   #2 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,453
Send a message via AIM to FghtinIrshNvrDi Send a message via Yahoo to FghtinIrshNvrDi
Default

very well put together nitestick. I agree strongly on points 4 and 7. I smell another s754, but that's just me.

Ryan
__________________

__________________

<b>I'm an unhyphenated American.</b>
System Specs:
Intel Q6600 @ 3200 1.4v
Abit IP35 Pro "The Snake"
2x2gb A-Data @ 800
Diamond HD 3870 512mb


Great FORD TRUCK resource: http://www.fordtruckfanatics.com
FghtinIrshNvrDi is offline  
Old 02-27-2006, 12:14 PM   #3 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,327
Send a message via AIM to Flanker
Default

Nobody's going to bother to flame you, we're already noticed this. On top of the DDR2, remember the 333MHz HTT. May be significant, but I just find it annoying.
Flanker is offline  
Old 02-27-2006, 12:43 PM   #4 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,453
Send a message via AIM to FghtinIrshNvrDi Send a message via Yahoo to FghtinIrshNvrDi
Default

I think a lot of people that aren't on the bleeding edge of technology will be happy owners of socket 939 systems until socket F. It's nothing but speculations and 1200-some-odd pins, but it'll be another step.

Ryan
__________________

<b>I'm an unhyphenated American.</b>
System Specs:
Intel Q6600 @ 3200 1.4v
Abit IP35 Pro "The Snake"
2x2gb A-Data @ 800
Diamond HD 3870 512mb


Great FORD TRUCK resource: http://www.fordtruckfanatics.com
FghtinIrshNvrDi is offline  
Old 02-27-2006, 12:47 PM   #5 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,327
Send a message via AIM to Flanker
Default

Socket F is supposed to be only servers, isn't it?
Flanker is offline  
Old 02-27-2006, 12:54 PM   #6 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
idiotec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,748
Default

Just to play devils advocate for a second:

1. Even though current benchmarks were disappointing for AM2, I will place a wager saying that the once the rev F chips are actually released, they will in fact beat rev. E's (clock for clock)

2. DDR2 has been progressing and certain chips can already run with fairly tight timings. I also think with AMD in the game, it will put more pressure on manufactures to create tighter timing DDR2 chips.

3. For future upgrade purposes, AMD does plan on scaling new chips higher, and other rev. changes most certainly will add efficiency and performance increases.

4. It is not necessarily only waiting for AM2, but Conroe will be released about the same time. Waiting would allow you to finally see what both chips actually end up doing. (no more guessing, yay!)
__________________

BE HEARD - Techonvent
DS3 | E6400 - 3.2GHz 24/7 | 2GB OCZ PLat. PC6400 | 6800GT | Zippy 460W
What the world needs is more geniuses with humility, there are so few of us left.
idiotec is offline  
Old 02-27-2006, 04:54 PM   #7 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
BennyV04988's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,835
Default

I think AM2 is a waste.

1. socket F should be a much more valuable and justifiable upgrade. AM2 has done terrifically terrible on the new benchmarks.

2. 939s will be cheaper when AM2 comes out. This means you might be able to pick your dream CPU for a lot less cash.

3. Why bother with the bugs first round?

I know its all been said before but theres a reason for that! And as for socket F only being for servers...one word.


Opteron... Didn't they turn out handy!
__________________
3DMARK VANTAGE: 11,500
GPU: MSI GTX 260 @ 650MHz/1175MHz
CPU: Intel E6750 @ 3.4GHz/1.33v/60c
HSF: Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro
MOBO: MSI P6N SLI-FI 650i
RAM: G.SKILL 3x1GB DDR2 800
SND: Creative Audigy 4
SPK:Logtech X-540s
MOS: Logitech MX600 Wireless Laser
LCD: HANNS-G 28" Widescreen
BennyV04988 is offline  
Old 02-27-2006, 05:00 PM   #8 (permalink)
003
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,312
Default

If you are willing to wait for AM2, then you might also want to wait for conroe. Check this out:
http://www.techist.com/showthread.php?threadid=95180
__________________
so, umm, err yeah
003 is offline  
Old 02-27-2006, 07:50 PM   #9 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Nitestick's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: смерти для спаме
Posts: 8,473
Default

i was worried about flaming from die hard people who won't let the issue go and lord knows there is plenty of them. it is a good point though that s939 will reduce in price once AM2 hits so in that case it is worth waiting for AM2
Nitestick is offline  
Old 02-27-2006, 08:04 PM   #10 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,327
Send a message via AIM to Flanker
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by BennyV04988
And as for socket F only being for servers...one word.


Opteron... Didn't they turn out handy!
Yea, nice job sherlock.

Opterons were the EXACT same socket, and the EXACT same processors as Athlon 64s. How many people to you see walking about with Socket 940 Opteron 200s? A different socket, and a different type of processor won't go over as easily. Which is ALSO the reason that Intel's Quad-Core Woodcrest isn't going to become a viable processor for gaming.
__________________

Flanker is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.