AMD releases QuadFX platform - bit-tech.net Forums

WilHarris · 30th Nov 2006, 15:35

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/11...adFX_platform/

overdosedelusion · 30th Nov 2006, 15:39

its just a stop gap me thinks, just something to compete with kentsfield until their quad core chip is released

zoom314 · 30th Nov 2006, 15:57

Too expensive for Me, they may as well abort this one as It's a dead duck here.

TMM · 30th Nov 2006, 15:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by overdosedelusion

its just a stop gap me thinks, just something to compete with kentsfield until their quad core chip is released

I can't see why they would want to replace 4x4 with a quadcore CPU (other then the obvious cost benefits, but pfft this is AthlonFX, who cares?) - with 4x4 there is two memory controllers so you have twice the bandwidth available rather then having 4 cores all trying to access the same memory bus.

section8 · 30th Nov 2006, 16:00

I thought that the 4x4 chip was NOT going to be two cores strapped together?!?!?!? That was why AMD was going to be different from Intel? Maybe that was jsut a rumour...

_DTM2000_ · 30th Nov 2006, 16:00

You really do get the impression that this is just a knee jerk, cobbled together attempt to keep up with Intel. I have always preferred AMD over Intel but recently AMD seemed to have lost the plot a little. I really hope QuadFX is as overdosedelusion said just a stop gap to help AMD catch up in the processor race.

Mother-Goose · 30th Nov 2006, 16:02

Yeh, you think a quad intel costs a fair wack, then you look at 2 FX's, it is insane!

section8 · 30th Nov 2006, 16:04

Who has got them up for sale? Not yet surely?!

LoneArchon · 30th Nov 2006, 16:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mother-Gooser

Yeh, you think a quad intel costs a fair wack, then you look at 2 FX's, it is insane!

The new fx chips will ship in pairs so the price will not be to bad for each chip. Anandtech stated MSRP at $999 a pair for the FX-74. So the cost of the system will be around the same cost as the C2D X6800. Performance wise i think the extra memory bandwidth will help in some areas but I will wait and see the benchmarks to see how it will stacks up

section8 · 30th Nov 2006, 16:20

Hmmm I still think AMD are crapping out... Maybe just a little bit... I used to be a massive AMD fanboy... Not Conroe is looking sweeter! Still tho, COME ON AMD!!!

ychamp · 30th Nov 2006, 16:24

well i used to be an amd fanboy but now that my mobo got vurned i'm replacing my opteron with an e6300. sticking with amd doesn;t come over price per performance ratio

ChromeX · 30th Nov 2006, 16:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by _DTM2000_

I have always preferred AMD over Intel but recently AMD seemed to have lost the plot a little. I really hope QuadFX is as overdosedelusion said just a stop gap to help AMD catch up in the processor race.

To be honest i've always been an intel fanboy and its not that AMD have lost the plot, they're a damn good company, its just that intel have decided to do some work instead of living off there name. The prescott was a disaster and they're just showing they can do the business when they need to! Plus amd have been busy with the whole ati thing so thats not helped I guess.

Mother-Goose · 30th Nov 2006, 16:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoneArchon

The new fx chips will ship in pairs so the price will not be to bad for each chip. Anandtech stated MSRP at $999 a pair for the FX-74. So the cost of the system will be around the same cost as the C2D X6800. Performance wise i think the extra memory bandwidth will help in some areas but I will wait and see the benchmarks to see how it will stacks up

That, I did not realise. Thankyou for pointing it out

sicone · 30th Nov 2006, 16:31

I've just bought my first ever Intel chip in the 15years I've owned PC's and I have to say that even if the 4x4 was available (and I could afford it), I would still have gone with the Core 2

BlueDemon · 30th Nov 2006, 18:16

Another nice editorial can be found on PC Perspective: http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=329&type=expert

Power consumption appears to be ludicrously high for similar performance compared to Intel. This should scare away consumers and business users alike.

DXR_13KE · 30th Nov 2006, 18:42

useless.... pointless.... weak.... i hope AMD recovers soon.... i would hate to see intel have the monopoly of high end cpus.

aggies11 · 30th Nov 2006, 18:54

Read the Hard article.

Interesting.

Dual core Athlons can't really touch Conroe, but when you put two of them together they can make up alot of ground and come up pretty much even.

The biggest point here is then: AMD's architecture may scale better into the multi core realm? Ie. with the potential to drop in 2xquadcore chips, for a total of 8, the differences may be even more pronounced.

Of course few of us are running mega 3dstudio renders, so the benefits of 8 and n-core are largely abstract at this point.

The article makes a comparisson that the New 4x4 is much like the Hummer vehicles. Big, ugly, fuel innefficient, but powerfull. They really don't make much "sense", and yet they are strangely popular (In North America at least). Maybe AMD 4x4 will be the same?

Show me a majority of apps and games that will benefit totally from Dual-core, before I'll even blink at any of these *extreme* setups though.

Aggies

zoom314 · 30th Nov 2006, 19:08

Now since this quad fx(FX74) at 3.0GHz can't be overclocked very far(3.1 and crash Tom said. Maybe a better cooling setup would help, I don't know really), I'd get like Tom hardware said the FX70 package as It may overclock to 2.8, 2.9 or maybe 3.0 and It'll save $400, Of course one will need 4 ddr2-800 dimms, But then One can get what they need or think they need. But this will require a hefty psu between 750w and at least 1kw to power this beast.

Nikumba · 30th Nov 2006, 19:20

The thing is by the time AMD get their true quad core out the door, Intel with have there and be in the process of shunting their chip production of 65nm to 45nm.

To be honest the 4x4 should not be compared to the Kentsfield as its not really a like for like situation.

Better comparison would be against Clovertown Xeons as that would be dual core chip on a dual socket mobo, esp since the 4x4 is designed for the Opertrons

Kimbie

moshpit · 30th Nov 2006, 19:34

Boo on Quad FX! Boo, I tell ya! In the forums at HardOCP where they're discussing the [H]'s preview, their CPU editor mentions that the QuadFX killed one of their 500 watt PSU's he had sitting around to test with. Smoked it. Boo. Boo, AMD, just plain boo.

30th Nov 2006, 15:35	#1
WilHarris Just another nobody Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Oxford Posts: 2,671	AMD releases QuadFX platform http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/11...adFX_platform/

30th Nov 2006, 15:39	#2
overdosedelusion I mostly come at night, mostly.. Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Hampshire UK Posts: 1,275	its just a stop gap me thinks, just something to compete with kentsfield until their quad core chip is released __________________ Lian-LI PCA71B \| DFI DK X38-T2R \| q6600 G0 \| ATI 4870X2 \| 4GB 800MHz \| Enermax Galaxy \| Samsung 40" 1080p \| X-Fi Fatality Pro (Games) \| M-Audio 24/96 \| Musical Fidelity V-Dac \| Graham Slee Solo 2009 Headphone Amp \| AKG K701/Audio Technica ATH-W1000 \|

30th Nov 2006, 16:00	#5
section8 Multimodder Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: London, UK Posts: 161	I thought that the 4x4 chip was NOT going to be two cores strapped together?!?!?!? That was why AMD was going to be different from Intel? Maybe that was jsut a rumour... __________________ hey whoever said geeks like us arent nice or sociable then i will.... computer them to death..... yes.....

30th Nov 2006, 16:02	#7
Mother-Goose Tories ftw! Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: England - Surrey Posts: 3,750	Yeh, you think a quad intel costs a fair wack, then you look at 2 FX's, it is insane! __________________ Goose Q6600, Striker Extreme, 4GB 6400C4 Dominator DHX, Raptor X, 2x400GB spinpoints, BFG 8800GTX OC, Stacker 830 Evo, HX620, Nova T 500, Freezer 7 Pro

30th Nov 2006, 16:04	#8
section8 Multimodder Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: London, UK Posts: 161	Who has got them up for sale? Not yet surely?! __________________ hey whoever said geeks like us arent nice or sociable then i will.... computer them to death..... yes.....

30th Nov 2006, 15:57	#3
zoom314 Multimodder Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Yermo, CA, USA Posts: 174	Too expensive for Me, they may as well abort this one as It's a dead duck here.

30th Nov 2006, 16:00	#6
_DTM2000_ Senior Super Douche Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Sheffield, UK Posts: 229	You really do get the impression that this is just a knee jerk, cobbled together attempt to keep up with Intel. I have always preferred AMD over Intel but recently AMD seemed to have lost the plot a little. I really hope QuadFX is as overdosedelusion said just a stop gap to help AMD catch up in the processor race.

30th Nov 2006, 16:20	#10
section8 Multimodder Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: London, UK Posts: 161	Hmmm I still think AMD are crapping out... Maybe just a little bit... I used to be a massive AMD fanboy... Not Conroe is looking sweeter! Still tho, COME ON AMD!!! __________________ hey whoever said geeks like us arent nice or sociable then i will.... computer them to death..... yes.....

30th Nov 2006, 16:24	#11
ychamp Minimodder Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Washington D.C Posts: 35	well i used to be an amd fanboy but now that my mobo got vurned i'm replacing my opteron with an e6300. sticking with amd doesn;t come over price per performance ratio

30th Nov 2006, 16:31	#14
sicone Modder Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: London Posts: 52	I've just bought my first ever Intel chip in the 15years I've owned PC's and I have to say that even if the 4x4 was available (and I could afford it), I would still have gone with the Core 2 __________________ <Dougle>:Father Ted, you know that little red button that says "Do not push"? <Father Ted>:Yes Dougle <Dougle>:Well some idiot's only gone and pushed it! <Father Ted>:That wouldn't be you now would it? <Dougle>:errrr.........yes Ted! Project: Retro Tape Deck

30th Nov 2006, 18:16	#15
BlueDemon Modder Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Belgium Posts: 58	Another nice editorial can be found on PC Perspective: http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=329&type=expert Power consumption appears to be ludicrously high for similar performance compared to Intel. This should scare away consumers and business users alike. __________________ ..:: Now, and always ::..

30th Nov 2006, 18:42	#16
DXR_13KE Madeira's banana is the best!!! Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Madeira ; Portugal Posts: 6,485	useless.... pointless.... weak.... i hope AMD recovers soon.... i would hate to see intel have the monopoly of high end cpus. __________________ RENEGADE X CONTEST! <---- CLICK if you want to win a free Command & Conquer 4 beta key!

30th Nov 2006, 18:54	#17
aggies11 Multimodder Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 171	Read the Hard article. Interesting. Dual core Athlons can't really touch Conroe, but when you put two of them together they can make up alot of ground and come up pretty much even. The biggest point here is then: AMD's architecture may scale better into the multi core realm? Ie. with the potential to drop in 2xquadcore chips, for a total of 8, the differences may be even more pronounced. Of course few of us are running mega 3dstudio renders, so the benefits of 8 and n-core are largely abstract at this point. The article makes a comparisson that the New 4x4 is much like the Hummer vehicles. Big, ugly, fuel innefficient, but powerfull. They really don't make much "sense", and yet they are strangely popular (In North America at least). Maybe AMD 4x4 will be the same? Show me a majority of apps and games that will benefit totally from Dual-core, before I'll even blink at any of these extreme setups though. Aggies

30th Nov 2006, 19:08	#18
zoom314 Multimodder Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Yermo, CA, USA Posts: 174	Now since this quad fx(FX74) at 3.0GHz can't be overclocked very far(3.1 and crash Tom said. Maybe a better cooling setup would help, I don't know really), I'd get like Tom hardware said the FX70 package as It may overclock to 2.8, 2.9 or maybe 3.0 and It'll save $400, Of course one will need 4 ddr2-800 dimms, But then One can get what they need or think they need. But this will require a hefty psu between 750w and at least 1kw to power this beast.

30th Nov 2006, 19:20	#19
Nikumba Supermodder Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: The Dark Place Posts: 371	The thing is by the time AMD get their true quad core out the door, Intel with have there and be in the process of shunting their chip production of 65nm to 45nm. To be honest the 4x4 should not be compared to the Kentsfield as its not really a like for like situation. Better comparison would be against Clovertown Xeons as that would be dual core chip on a dual socket mobo, esp since the 4x4 is designed for the Opertrons Kimbie

30th Nov 2006, 19:34	#20
moshpit Minimodder Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Texas Posts: 49	Boo on Quad FX! Boo, I tell ya! In the forums at HardOCP where they're discussing the [H]'s preview, their CPU editor mentions that the QuadFX killed one of their 500 watt PSU's he had sitting around to test with. Smoked it. Boo. Boo, AMD, just plain boo.