Athlon 64 Launched

dylman · 23rd September 2003, 20:12

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTI0

http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1884

http://techreport.com/reviews/2003q3...4/index.x?pg=1

http://www.amdzone.com/articleview.cfm?ArticleID=1344

http://www.amdmb.com/article-display.php?ArticleID=259

And many many more.

Quick summary, courtesy of moi:

Two releases, The Athlon FX 51, and the Athlon 64 3200+. The main performing enhancing features of the two new chips are the on-die memory controllers (dual channel for the FX, single channel for the 3200+), and 1Mb of L2 cache. The FX is ruinously expensive, but overall appears to be the current best desktop processor in the world. The 3200+ is less expensive than the FX, but still too expensive for most. It is a good match for the P4 3.2 GHz, although the P4 still holds sway in it's traditional strong points, but the gap is much closer than before.

The P4 is pretty much destroyed in most gaming benchmarks. With Half Life 2 and Doom 3 just around the corner, this is likely to be a critical factor for many people building top end PCs for the latest games.

Both chips will be obsolete in around a year when the second generation socket 939 chips based around 90nm technology appear.

Intel's answer, the "Prescott" chip, will offer serious competition to the Athlon 64, but it has recently been delayed again to early December, amidst rumours of overheating problems.

edited

Atmo · 24th September 2003, 03:30

Here's a few more comparisons between the A64 & P4EE

http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=434

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...on64-fx51.html

I was expecting slightly better performance with 32bit apps, but the fact that the FX-51 variant was able to edge out the P4EE in just about everything should keep most AMD fans happy for now at least.

Wish · 24th September 2003, 18:33

P4 EE=Knee Jerk Reaction since Prescott got nice heat problems

The improvements from AthlonXP to Athlon64 is really nice.

Kudos AMD.

laz · 24th September 2003, 20:26

Now if they could move on to the 90nm process, and if they can get the speeds up, a lot. Then they will be saved for good. Like a 3ghz A64FX. That will be FAST!
Also, do not buy into the tech just yet, unless you have the money to burn. B/ the Athlon FX requires error correcting ram to run, and they cost a lot. And the normal A64 can not run duel channel ram, and that hurts preformace.
But GREAT WORK AMD! it really does good in the non-synthetic apps (they mean nothing anyways)

dylman · 24th September 2003, 20:33

I'm waiting until this time next year. Socket 939 90nm architecture, dual channel DDR2 memory, Windows XP 64bit, PCI Express video card, fast SATA hard drive(s).

Geek heaven, and a quantum leap above my current setup (Revolution, not evolution, baby!)

And since I'll be going for a complete platform change anyway, if Intel are better when the time comes I can join the dark side if necessary...

Starbucks · 24th September 2003, 21:21

I like the new scores for the 3200+ and the FX-51, but those integrated memory controllers have to be updated rather constantly, DDR2 is just around the corner too. The P4 still wins in the rendering and workstation area. But at $441, the 3200+ is a better buy than the 3.2 P4 which is at $600. I can't imagine how much the P4 Emergency Edition will cost.

I was hoping that the A64 would out perform the P4 signifigantly. Let's just hope that AMD and IBM can get that SOI process right so they get more than 60% yields.

Mr_007 · 25th September 2003, 14:04

Oh great cpu!

23rd September 2003, 20:12	#1
dylman Forum King Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Hawarden Posts: 2,115	Athlon 64 Launched http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTI0 http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1884 http://techreport.com/reviews/2003q3...4/index.x?pg=1 http://www.amdzone.com/articleview.cfm?ArticleID=1344 http://www.amdmb.com/article-display.php?ArticleID=259 And many many more. Quick summary, courtesy of moi: Two releases, The Athlon FX 51, and the Athlon 64 3200+. The main performing enhancing features of the two new chips are the on-die memory controllers (dual channel for the FX, single channel for the 3200+), and 1Mb of L2 cache. The FX is ruinously expensive, but overall appears to be the current best desktop processor in the world. The 3200+ is less expensive than the FX, but still too expensive for most. It is a good match for the P4 3.2 GHz, although the P4 still holds sway in it's traditional strong points, but the gap is much closer than before. The P4 is pretty much destroyed in most gaming benchmarks. With Half Life 2 and Doom 3 just around the corner, this is likely to be a critical factor for many people building top end PCs for the latest games. Both chips will be obsolete in around a year when the second generation socket 939 chips based around 90nm technology appear. Intel's answer, the "Prescott" chip, will offer serious competition to the Athlon 64, but it has recently been delayed again to early December, amidst rumours of overheating problems. edited There's no need to tell me when I'm right; I operate on that principle exclusively and with absolute certainty

24th September 2003, 20:33	#5
dylman Forum King Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Hawarden Posts: 2,115	I'm waiting until this time next year. Socket 939 90nm architecture, dual channel DDR2 memory, Windows XP 64bit, PCI Express video card, fast SATA hard drive(s). Geek heaven, and a quantum leap above my current setup (Revolution, not evolution, baby!) And since I'll be going for a complete platform change anyway, if Intel are better when the time comes I can join the dark side if necessary... There's no need to tell me when I'm right; I operate on that principle exclusively and with absolute certainty

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

24th September 2003, 03:30	#2
Atmo The Freak (Forum King) Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 9,400	Here's a few more comparisons between the A64 & P4EE http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=434 http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...on64-fx51.html I was expecting slightly better performance with 32bit apps, but the fact that the FX-51 variant was able to edge out the P4EE in just about everything should keep most AMD fans happy for now at least.

24th September 2003, 18:33	#3
Wish Major Dude Join Date: Oct 2000 Posts: 702	P4 EE=Knee Jerk Reaction since Prescott got nice heat problems The improvements from AthlonXP to Athlon64 is really nice. Kudos AMD.

24th September 2003, 20:26	#4
laz Major Dude Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: the internet Posts: 1,089	Now if they could move on to the 90nm process, and if they can get the speeds up, a lot. Then they will be saved for good. Like a 3ghz A64FX. That will be FAST! Also, do not buy into the tech just yet, unless you have the money to burn. B/ the Athlon FX requires error correcting ram to run, and they cost a lot. And the normal A64 can not run duel channel ram, and that hurts preformace. But GREAT WORK AMD! it really does good in the non-synthetic apps (they mean nothing anyways)

24th September 2003, 21:21	#6
Starbucks Forum King Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Forums Posts: 2,685	I like the new scores for the 3200+ and the FX-51, but those integrated memory controllers have to be updated rather constantly, DDR2 is just around the corner too. The P4 still wins in the rendering and workstation area. But at $441, the 3200+ is a better buy than the 3.2 P4 which is at $600. I can't imagine how much the P4 Emergency Edition will cost. I was hoping that the A64 would out perform the P4 signifigantly. Let's just hope that AMD and IBM can get that SOI process right so they get more than 60% yields.

25th September 2003, 14:04	#7
Mr_007 Banned Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 2,838	Oh great cpu!