Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is it a Good Time to Get an Athlon64?

Posted by Cliff on from the short-and-sweet dept.

City_Idiot asks: "I'm looking to upgrade my current P4 2.4Ghz and i'm giving serious thought to a Athlon64 3200+. The tests look good, and it gives a 3Ghz P4 a good run for its money but is the technology ready for end users?"

15 of 124 comments (clear)

  1. OS by quasarkitten · · Score: 2, Informative

    It depends on what OS you are using, if it is windows then you should just get whatever is cheaper because it can't HANDLE 64bit well yet (if ever). You need to make sure the OS you are going to use can handle 64bit. I like SuSE 9.0 Pro. 64bit edition $129 or free via ftp

    1. Re:OS by mOoZik · · Score: 4, Informative

      I have successfully installed and run a 64 bit version of Windows XP with no problems. To be uninformed is one thing, but to pass your disgust for Microsoft as fact is another.

      --
      A blog like any other.
    2. Re:OS by quasarkitten · · Score: 2, Informative

      It may work but your not going to pull out the performance that certain linux or BSD distros can give. --I type this on win xp but truth is truth

    3. Re:OS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      mOoZik: If you would be so kind to answer a couple questions...

      Did you run the beta of Windows XP 64-bit 2003, the AMD64 version of the Longhorn Alpha, an AMD64 Windows Server 2003 beta, or an internal release/something else? Also, which build/compile date was the OS, and how well did it run? notice ANY bugs/compatibility problems?

      TIA!
      -KayBo

      PS. Where did you get drivers?

    4. Re:OS by mOoZik · · Score: 2, Informative

      I ran the 64 bit version of Windows XP which I acquired though the MSDN. I did not say I ran it with AMD64, but rather, with Itanium. Since this was for a customer, I cannot give you the build/compile date for the operating system (not because it is a breach of privacy/condifentiality, but because I can't remember), but there was no instability in the operating system.

      --
      A blog like any other.
  2. run ordinary 32 bit linux on it for now? by anon+mouse-cow-aard · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yesterday's posting described issues with current
    AMD 64-bit linux distros. Can one just use
    a 32 bit one for now, and wait a while for the
    64 bit ones to mature?

    If not, it doesn't sound reasonable (as in, what?!!?
    Getting X to work is a challenge?)

    1. Re:run ordinary 32 bit linux on it for now? by Tuxinatorium · · Score: 4, Informative

      Of course. The athlon64 is backwards compatible with all 32 bit x86 instruction sets. In short, anything that can be run on an athlonXP can be run faster on an athlon64 without so much as a recompile. It still supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, 3dnow!... Unlike itanium it actually performs very well on 32 bit applications, in fact better than any other processor currently in existance, including the G5.

      --
      Repeal the DMCA!
  3. You should be running Vi instead by Tim_F · · Score: 0, Informative

    It runs on the command line, and isn't bogged down by all that graphical nonsense. Also, its editing mode is far superior to that of Emacs.

  4. Athlon64 3000+ by Laven · · Score: 4, Informative
    Take a look at the newly released Athlon64 3000+ processor which is compatible with the same socket as Athlon64 3200+. Both chips are 2.0GHz, but the 3000+ has 512KB L2 cache instead of 1024KB L2. The price is around around $220 vs $420, which is a significant difference.

    I personally bought the 3200+ two months ago, but I totally would have been happy with the 3000+.

    Also check out Fedora Core 1 preview release of AMD64. Official test1 release should be coming soon because they fixed the last blocker bug in pango.

  5. What most people forget is... by eWarz · · Score: 5, Informative

    What most people forget is, REGARDLESS of the 64 capabilities of the chip, the athlon64 is HANDS DOWN the FASTEST consumer processor money can buy. While i'd question you upgrading a p2 2.4 ghz, if you are just determined to have the fastest chip money can buy then the athlon64 is it. (get the FX51 if that's the case). However, if you are a gamer looking for more speed, upgrading your graphics card would do alot more, as a 2.4 ghz p4 is more then fast enough to handle today's games.

  6. Beware of the Slot1/A Syndrome. by driftwood · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here is a quick summary of the AMD64 line. It comes directly from an AMD Engineer working on the AMD64 projects. His recommendation was to wait for the 2nd generation motherboard chipsets sporting the 939-pin sockets.

    Current parts
    The processor cores for Athlon64/AthlonFX/Opteron are currently all the same.

    • Opteron
      940-pin Socket
      Dual channel DDR registered/ECC required.
      84X series are 1/2/4/8 way system certified.
      24X series are 1/2 way system certified.
      14X series are 1 way system certified ( same as AthlonFX51).

    • Athlon FX
      940-pin Socket
      The FX is simply a relabeled Opteron chip. This chip has pinout for dual channel DDR (needs to be registered/ECC and I believe buffered, yuck)

    • Athlon64
      754-pin Socket
      Opteron 14X but with single channel DDR Athlon64 comes in the 754 pin package now but only supports single channel DDR but can use unbuffered standard DDR.

    Future parts
    939 package Athlon64/FX is a new pinout to support dual channel unbuffered DDR, allows for 4 layer PCB motherboards (cheaper to make boards) and a faster HyperTransport external link.

    • Drill Hammer
      512kB cache instead of the 1MB on current products. Packaging should be same as other chips (754/939).

    • Claw Hammer
      256kB cache instead of the 1MB on current products. Packaging should be same as other chips (754/939).

    --
    Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket?
    1. Re:Beware of the Slot1/A Syndrome. by driftwood · · Score: 3, Informative

      What is the Slot1/A Syndrome?

      Intel originally issued the Pentium2 in a cartridge style using the 'Slot 1' interface. Intel stated that they would not change back to sockets. The major reason for the change was to move the L2 cache off the main processor die to improve manufacturing yields. AMD followed suit and announced 'Slot A' which was physically, but not electrically the same. Both AMD and Intel found that the overall system costs were substantially more that socket based processors and changed back to sockets within a few years.

      I can understand that the second generation chips support unbuffered RAM, but why would that be important? Given that it's hard to find a FX chip in the first place, how long should we expect to wait for a second generation chip?

      I'm not trying to be a smart-ass here, but I am looking at purchasing about 32 FX-based machines (the big draw is future 64-bit compatibility and >4GB RAM in our lab).

      Unbuffered RAM has much lower latencies which in turn improves performance. Also, unbuffered, non-ECC RAM has a much lower price.

      The initial impression that I received was that AMD is ready to go, and waiting on the third party chipset manufacturers (VIA, NVidia). We should see the 2nd generation AlthonFX and Athlon64 by the end of 2004Q2.

      If you are in need of AMD64 platform immediately, I would recommend going with the Opteron 24x series since the processor cores are all currently identical. The price is half as much as the AthlonFX and the same or less than the Opteron 14x series. Also, when you retire these workstations, you can use the Opteron 24x processors in dual CPU 940-pin motherboards which will be fully supported for at least the next 3-5 years.

      --
      Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket?
  7. Re:I too am planning an AMD64 home system.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I hope you read this... If you plan on buying that system to run 64bit Linux, last I checked ATI still had not released 64bit drivers for Linux. I know that card is a great performer, but MAKE SURE, you check with ATI before you buy that card. If it isn't available, I'd recommend an FX5900 or some such variation. The latest firmware updates have fixed alot o the issues people are aware of, and there are 64bit drivers available for it, and every other FX card, under Linux.

    I think you'll be okay with that SATA controller, but DOUBLE CHECK. My Via chipset does not have 64bit drivers available yet, so I'm stuck using an old ide drive. I just wanted to give you a heads up...

  8. Re:radeon not 3D accelerated? by damiam · · Score: 2, Informative

    Open-source Radeon drivers do 3D-accelleration for all Radeon cards except 9500 and greater. That means that everything from the original to the 9200 is fully supported by open-source drivers. To get 3D accelleration on the 9500, 9600, 9700, and 9800, you have to use ATI's binary drivers (although the open drivers still work fine if all you need is 2D).

    --
    It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  9. Re:I too am planning an AMD64 home system.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Do your homework on the power supply...It must be the new SSI EPS ATX power supply for the 940 pin processors. A regular ATX 20 pin power supply will not work. The EPS ATX has a 24 pin power connector and an 8 pin power connector, and both are required to be plugged into the motherboard. These are $120.00 power supplies and the retail stores do not have them yet. I know because I just built two real nice boxes for work for a sql and application server. See this for an example...http://store.yahoo.com/e-datatek/55antre psepo.html