Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AMD 760MP Reviews Galore

Posted by michael on from the drop-20-and-fire-for-effect dept.

Keith Whitsitt writes: "Well the NDA seems to be up on AMD's 760MP chipset, and several hardware sites have a review up. So far Anandtech, 2CPU, SimHQ, and Accelnation all have reviews up of this beast. It sure does look like the 760MP has shaped up to be all we expected it to be and more." Time-on-target hype.

2 of 78 comments (clear)

  1. Re:athlon servers by larien · · Score: 5
    Nothing against AMD, but for servers, I'd wait a couple of month to make sure there aren't any 'gotchas' in the new systems. Given the delays in shipping, I'm assuming(hoping?) that AMD have waited until they ironed out all the problems before releasing, but it's still largely untested in the wild.

    That said, I'm glad to see extra competition in the marketplace; CPU power has ramped up considerably since the Athlon debued and gave Intel a scare.

    Also, I'll probably end up buying a 760MP fairly soon :)
    --

  2. Why no HyperTransport? by Emil+Brink · · Score: 5

    After spending yesterday reading about all the good stuff Nvidia has crammed into the nForce, including the nice 800 MBps "HyperTransport" link between their versions of the north and south bridges, I threw myself over these long-awaited 760MP exposes, to see what AMD use. I'm more than a little surprised (and disappointed) to find that they went with the "good-old" PCI interconnect, limited to a measly 266 MBps (if it's 64-bit). The weirdness increases when you realise that Nvidia didn't actually develop HyperTransport themselves--it's licensed from (wait for it) AMD!

    I guess the reason is that HyperTransport is too recent a development for AMD to include it in the 760MP, which has been under development and testing for like two years, but still... It's a shame. It seems that even the upcoming "mainstream" SMP chipset, the 760MPX, won't include HyperTransport.

    --
    main(O){10<putchar(4^--O?77-(15&5128 >>4*O):10)&&main(2+O);}