http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20050706A2006.html
This means that the cheapest dual-cores will be available for about $500-550 CDN from AMD. This also means, with respect to the single-core AMD64 3200+ Venice cores, you're only paying a $100 premium for dual-core goodness as opposed to running two single-core machines. This obviously offsets the other concerns (remaining PC parts, heat, power costs).
Oh, and I need something to get stains out of my leather-ish office chair :P :ph34r:
I had a minor accident after reading that. :o
i dunno what was harder to read, your post or the news release!!!
happy gaming!!!
ZX5focused,Jul 6 2005, 02:32 PM Wrote:i dunno what was harder to read, your post or the news release!!!
happy gaming!!!
[right][snapback]119757[/snapback][/right]
Sorry, I sometimes have to de-tech myself before posting here. There's only a few IT guys that are members of FC.net.
Summary: stupid-good bargain on really cutting-edge technology.
i was able to understand it
but def tech talk!!!!
NOS2Go4Me,Jul 6 2005, 02:52 PM Wrote:Sorry, I sometimes have to de-tech myself before posting here. There's only a few IT guys that are members of FC.net.
Summary: stupid-good bargain on really cutting-edge technology.
[right][snapback]119759[/snapback][/right]
Stoopid good bargain that only offers incremental gains until 64 bit and dual CPU OS'es hit the mainstream, (which will be quite a while unless a "
killer app" comes along... and it ain't Longhorn :D)
Until that time its like having a V8 rammed into a bone stock Focus base model sedan. Lovely to look at and tell yer friends about, but its use is severely limited by its surrounding arcitecture.
NefCanuck
NefCanuck,Jul 6 2005, 03:07 PM Wrote:NOS2Go4Me,Jul 6 2005, 02:52 PM Wrote:Sorry, I sometimes have to de-tech myself before posting here. There's only a few IT guys that are members of FC.net.
Summary: stupid-good bargain on really cutting-edge technology.
[right][snapback]119759[/snapback][/right]
Stoopid good bargain that only offers incremental gains until 64 bit and dual CPU OS'es hit the mainstream, (which will be quite a while unless a "killer app" comes along... and it ain't Longhorn :D)
Until that time its like having a V8 rammed into a bone stock Focus base model sedan. Lovely to look at and tell yer friends about, but its use is severely limited by its surrounding arcitecture.
NefCanuck
[right][snapback]119764[/snapback][/right]
Ding! well said.
haha, this coming from a guy who bought an a64 almost 2 years ago
scoobasteve,Jul 6 2005, 03:11 PM Wrote:NefCanuck,Jul 6 2005, 03:07 PM Wrote:NOS2Go4Me,Jul 6 2005, 02:52 PM Wrote:Sorry, I sometimes have to de-tech myself before posting here. There's only a few IT guys that are members of FC.net.
Summary: stupid-good bargain on really cutting-edge technology.
[right][snapback]119759[/snapback][/right]
Stoopid good bargain that only offers incremental gains until 64 bit and dual CPU OS'es hit the mainstream, (which will be quite a while unless a "killer app" comes along... and it ain't Longhorn :D)
Until that time its like having a V8 rammed into a bone stock Focus base model sedan. Lovely to look at and tell yer friends about, but its use is severely limited by its surrounding arcitecture.
NefCanuck
[right][snapback]119764[/snapback][/right]
Ding! well said.
haha, this coming from a guy who bought an a64 almost 2 years ago
[right][snapback]119765[/snapback][/right]
Heh, yeah I've ben burned occassionally as well, spent the extra $ on an Intel 3GHz processor with "
Hyper-Threading Technology" at the time. Never ran across any software I use in my travels that actually makes any use of it <_<
NefCanuck
Uhm guys, I don't wanna sound ignorant or irate even... but are you f'ing serious?
Performance benefit NOW - on-die memory controller, low latency memory access, overclock hungry. When ANY P4 has nearly double the memory latency of the slowest of the A64s (single or dual-channel memory), you have to ask why run Intel (when speaking in a purely performance-oriented context)?
Performance benefit NOW - Greater FPU / X87 math proficiency by far over any Intel processor, including their dual-core heatfarms. More work done per clock cycle. PERIOD. Video rendering? Owned. Scientific research (including my
http://www.grid.org cancer DC work)? Owned. Gaming? Owned. Backing up DVDs? Owned. Pick something processor-intensive. Owned.
Performance benefit NOW - lower power consumption, especially when comparing per-cycle performance. A dual-core 90nm processor uses less power with BOTH cores loaded up than a 130nm A64, nevermind anything Intel pulls out. Also, CoolNQuiet clocks the processor down nicely and lowers the overall heat output (and power consumption) to the point of near-nothingness. Intel only adapted SpeedStep to reduce their heatblooms - the NSA was getting tired of looking for nuclear reactors and finding desktop computers.
Add in the fact that the entire X86-64 instruction subset was designed around AMD processors and their architecture to begin with (I'm not even touching the shipwreck that is Itanic... I mean Itanium)... it makes sense to adopt Athlon64s now.
I test rendered a video quite some time ago, took over 30 minutes on my Intel P4C 2.4GHz box. Rendered it again on my AMD XP 2500+ @ 2.2GHz - 24 minutes. Rendered it AGAIN for testing's sake on my A64 @ 2.5GHz - 16 minutes.
I'm happy to provide proof as to why ignoring the future is pointless. Just ask.
I'm done - where's my coffee?
NefCanuck,Jul 6 2005, 03:07 PM Wrote:Stoopid good bargain that only offers incremental gains until 64 bit and dual CPU OS'es hit the mainstream, (which will be quite a while unless a "killer app" comes along... and it ain't Longhorn :D)
Until that time its like having a V8 rammed into a bone stock Focus base model sedan. Lovely to look at and tell yer friends about, but its use is severely limited by its surrounding arcitecture.
NefCanuck
[right][snapback]119764[/snapback][/right]
You do know that XP Pro is dual-core aware and capable OOTB, right?
You also must be aware that there is a plethora of apps available right now in many fields for multi-core / multi-threaded use?
Also, killer app is one thing. MS's latest "bloaterating system" is hardly keeping 64-bit or dual-core / multi-core goodness from appearing. If nothing else, we'll get to enjoy a multi-core environment long before their logic vampires completely wreck the entire experience.
scoobasteve,Jul 6 2005, 03:11 PM Wrote:Ding! well said.
haha, this coming from a guy who bought an a64 almost 2 years ago
[right][snapback]119765[/snapback][/right]
So you bought a single-channel Clawhammer S754 system, right?
I praise you for being brave enough to be an early adopter when the chipsets were far from ideal, but at the same time - didn't you hear about all the grief? Why not wait for the cheap, plentiful dual-channel S939 stuff (i.e. the last year or so)?
There's lots of great, affordable S939 A64 stuff out there right now. You could probably sell your S754 desktop and not spend much more for a nicely-done S939 with 1GB of DDR400 in dual-channel mode.
Meh, i wanted a new computer. so i went out. got an a64 3000+ and the top rated MSI K8T at the same time. I'm still happy with it. Wiping the floor with my bros 3.0e P4 9 times out of 10.
I was thinking of upgrading to the 3500+... but i'll wait it out for dual core now :D
NOS2Go4Me,Jul 6 2005, 03:52 PM Wrote:NefCanuck,Jul 6 2005, 03:07 PM Wrote:Stoopid good bargain that only offers incremental gains until 64 bit and dual CPU OS'es hit the mainstream, (which will be quite a while unless a "killer app" comes along... and it ain't Longhorn :D)
Until that time its like having a V8 rammed into a bone stock Focus base model sedan. Lovely to look at and tell yer friends about, but its use is severely limited by its surrounding arcitecture.
NefCanuck
[right][snapback]119764[/snapback][/right]
You do know that XP Pro is dual-core aware and capable OOTB, right?
You also must be aware that there is a plethora of apps available right now in many fields for multi-core / multi-threaded use?
Also, killer app is one thing. MS's latest "bloaterating system" is hardly keeping 64-bit or dual-core / multi-core goodness from appearing. If nothing else, we'll get to enjoy a multi-core environment long before their logic vampires completely wreck the entire experience.
[right][snapback]119774[/snapback][/right]
Okay, I think I have to clairify things here, when I say
killer app I mean something that a sizeable chunk of
average computer users can see a demonstratable benefit from. Why do you think that both Intel & AMD are finding most of there action still in older chip designs? Sure cost is a factor, but does "Mr. & Mrs. Average Computer User"
need the latest whiz-bang CPU to do what they want to do?
My suggestion is no... hell, my father contiues to poke along with a P-166 w/96MB of RAM, I despise using his machine but it does
everything he needs to do"
If there was an app that
needed a high end processor that he needed to use for himself, he could easily afford to buy such a PC and would do so in a shot. Hell if they could ever get voice recognition software to the point where it understood every dialect and prononciation right outta the box
I'd cough up for a bleeding edge processor if that's what it took to run it.
Even for my own use, aside from the occasional game, I hardly feel the "Need For Speed" that I would have years ago when I see the latest CPU's being released. Faster CPU's benefit a segment of the computer using crowd I agree 100%, but until that segment gets large enough, it's like giving 80 year olds Focus SVT's to get their groceries.
NefCanuck
Windows 64 sucks. *thumbsdown*
(shameless I hate windows plug)
so run linux in 64bit... but don't expect alot of games to work
tdot-zx3,Jul 6 2005, 06: Wrote:Windows 64 sucks. *thumbsdown*
(shameless I hate windows plug)
[right][snapback]119819[/snapback][/right]
Actually Dan, if I could get ONE stable Linux distro to run all my shite in 64-bit mode
stable, I'd ditch Windows. Done. Like dinner.
The key words being stable. And Linux. And 64-bit. While allowing me to compile music videos / capture my miniDV feeds and run my cancer research DC project without the need for WiNE or anything else like that.
Macs for me!
I don't game though. :D
fack.. windows 64 is the worst POS ever. especially if youre trying to partition a new SATA drive when youre setting it up.
it doesnt have the SATA drivers. installed and when it partitions the drive it loses track that you installed the drivers off the floppy to begin with.
and then after you actually set it up. its unstable and couldnt access my drives on the raid channels! AWESOME. even after i installed 3 sets of raid drivers.
GOOOO MICROSOFT! its funny. itll take all 180 days of the trial to even get that damn OS to function properly
scoobasteve,Jul 7 2005, 12:10 PM Wrote:fack.. windows 64 is the worst POS ever. especially if youre trying to partition a new SATA drive when youre setting it up.
it doesnt have the SATA drivers. installed and when it partitions the drive it loses track that you installed the drivers off the floppy to begin with.
and then after you actually set it up. its unstable and couldnt access my drives on the raid channels! AWESOME. even after i installed 3 sets of raid drivers.
GOOOO MICROSOFT! its funny. itll take all 180 days of the trial to even get that damn OS to function properly
[right][snapback]119999[/snapback][/right]
They say most manufacturers have released correct drivers now, still waiting to test that theory now that the WinXP Pro 64-bit OEM version is available.
Macs with Intels? ew
moving away from that though...
I don't see a need to upgrade anymore. I don't game much anymore, I only play GTR FIA when I wanna drive the Nürburgring or something. The only place I see a need to upgrade, rather, expand, is harddrive space, I still gets tons of stuff. Also distributed computing, I run ClimatePrediction.Net, but even that I'm falling out of, I don't really care anymore. I certainly wont be buying any dedicated boxen anytime soon.
With the work, and the prospects of buying a car, my 3 computers are more than enough. Infact, I keep thinking of combining them into one and selling the rest. But I'm much too fond of my Dual 1.67 GHz to sell it and the 866 MHz Dell isn't worth anything, hell I got it free, with a monitor even.
My AMD XP 2500+ Barton is enough for me, though I did overclock it for a bit more. And if I stop gaming all together, or switch to consoles, I'll go straight to linux.
So yeah anyway, Dualcores, awesome, I'd love one, but I don't need the upgrade. It'll probably only happen when I find another $135 processor that offers the same as my current did when it was $135.
Edit: oops, it was actually $138 when I bought it, minor detail though.
![[Image: yelclap1.gif]](http://www.surromomsonline.com/support/images/smilies/yelclap1.gif)