Go Back   Computer Forums > General Computing > Hardware
Click Here to Login
Join Computer forums Today


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-24-2006, 10:08 PM   #11
In Runtime
 
Quinton McLeod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 298
Default Re: AMD Athelon 64 FX-60 Toledo 2.6 GHz Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
AMD will not go 65nm until late 2007. They are usually 1-1.5 years behind Intel on the manufacturing process.

I'm not too sure about that. I do know that AMD has borrowed a few examples from IBM concerning the 65nm process. However, I didn't hear a date on when they will release it.

AMD did say they wanted to release it by the end of this year (2006), but nothing specific.
__________________

__________________
The best quotes I've ever heard:
RaistlinZ - "I think God woke up one day (probably around Noon. dude likes to sleep in) and said to himself, "OMFG, these dinosaurs are just kicking too much ass. The world is not ready for them yet." "
Quinton McLeod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2006, 10:15 PM   #12
In Runtime
 
Quinton McLeod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 298
Default Re: AMD Athelon 64 FX-60 Toledo 2.6 GHz Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1337DuD3
I agree. If the FX-60 was indeed lowered in price, and possibly came out a little sooner, it would be the chip to get. Although, I wouldn't mind owning one!



Yes, I think that if you're going to compare overclocked processors, then both manufacturers processors need to be overclocked, not just one specific processor, which in this case was the intel 955XE processor. I think if they would have overclocked the FX-60, although there's no need to as it clearly wins in virtually every benchmark they tested it in, it would be interesting to see an overclocked Athelon 64 X2 4800+.

Yes, of course it would be interesting. I'd like to see how the two compare both in performance and heat dissipation. I'm also interested in the wattage they both aquire when overclocked.


Quote:

Indeed true. The 65nm technology just makes the chips cheaper to produce. Although I'm more then certain that there's performace gains to be made in 65nm. Also, intel has announced that they want to release 45nm chips at the end of this year, as well as the first quad core. I think it's a bit to soon to release quad-core CPUs along with 45nm technology. They should really focus their efforts on the new Dual-Core processors and new 65nm technology before openly announcing, "We're releasing 45nm chips as well as quad-core CPUs this year." It just doesn't make any sense to me, or rather it does in terms of marketing. Peopel will immediatly jump on the bandwagon if you flash new words and say, "technology." I mean look at why businesses buy pre-built computers, when they could very easily get peopel to build there own for them, and get much more performance enhancments out of them

I absolutely 100% agree with that statement.
We are just now utilizing dual core technology. We don't need quad cores yet until the programs can catch up with dual core first!
45nm technology sounds promising and I'm looking forward to it... Especially with AMD's plans to break away from Intel's x86 architexture. However, I am just now digesting the 65nm technology. When I heard about the even smaller technology, I felt that these guys are moving just a tad bit too fast. The market just isn't ready yet! Let us catch up first!


Quote:
I don't know what to do with HT technology. I myself want to turn it off, but I'm worried that it will make my CPU slower. So I'm not sure what to do with it. Although when it comes to benchmarking, if the CPU has the option, leave it on. Grade the CPU based on what it has. Certain technologies were implaced on it, and therefore it should be graded on those technologies. Wether or not you get better scores is indeed subjective, but, if the processor comes with a feature, then test it on that feature. That's only my opinion though.

HT technology is a good technology when it's utilized, but when it's not used, it hinders performance; and that is bad! That is why I don't agree with HT in benchmarks unless a certain program can actually use it to claim Intel's boost in performance.
__________________

__________________
The best quotes I've ever heard:
RaistlinZ - "I think God woke up one day (probably around Noon. dude likes to sleep in) and said to himself, "OMFG, these dinosaurs are just kicking too much ass. The world is not ready for them yet." "
Quinton McLeod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2006, 10:21 PM   #13
Fully Optimized
 
ownage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,404
Default Re: AMD Athelon 64 FX-60 Toledo 2.6 GHz Review

well, concerning how AMD was a year behind intel when switching to 90nm, i would expect late 2007.
ownage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2006, 10:37 PM   #14
Golden Master
 
alvino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 19,967
Send a message via AIM to alvino
Default Re: AMD Athelon 64 FX-60 Toledo 2.6 GHz Review

Yeah, AMD is weird that way. They're late when switching to newer processes, while they switch sockets so darn often that it's annoying.
alvino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2006, 11:23 PM   #15
BSOD
 
JustinMcG67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,519
Send a message via AIM to JustinMcG67 Send a message via MSN to JustinMcG67 Send a message via Yahoo to JustinMcG67
Default Re: AMD Athelon 64 FX-60 Toledo 2.6 GHz Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quinton McLeod

Yes, of course it would be interesting. I'd like to see how the two compare both in performance and heat dissipation. I'm also interested in the wattage they both aquire when overclocked.





I absolutely 100% agree with that statement.
We are just now utilizing dual core technology. We don't need quad cores yet until the programs can catch up with dual core first!
45nm technology sounds promising and I'm looking forward to it... Especially with AMD's plans to break away from Intel's x86 architexture. However, I am just now digesting the 65nm technology. When I heard about the even smaller technology, I felt that these guys are moving just a tad bit too fast. The market just isn't ready yet! Let us catch up first!
Agreed! I don't understand why intel wants to switch to quad-cores so quickly when they just got a good dual core out, and even then, it's not a dual core! It's a double core! So hwo can they suggest quad-cores when they can't even make a true dual core! Just doesn't make any sense to me. Although I'm usually open to new technologies, I don't agree with this just yet, because they should really perfect they're dual core processors before they move on to a new technology. They need a dual core that can effectivly compete with the Athelon 64 X2 series. Sure the Pentium D series CPUs are good, but in terms of all around performance, as we saw in the benchmarks in the Multitasking benchmarks to be more specific, the Pentium D series CPUs lost miserably!

It just doesn't seem logical to announce a new technology when your own CPUs can't compete with other CPUs in terms of sheer processing! However, with AMDs success in the dual-core area, I'm more open to them announcing a quad-core CPU rather then intel. Because intel just hasn't perfected their dual core processors yet. However, once they get ahold of it, then I'm all open for it.

Quote:

HT technology is a good technology when it's utilized, but when it's not used, it hinders performance; and that is bad! That is why I don't agree with HT in benchmarks unless a certain program can actually use it to claim Intel's boost in performance.
So would you suggest me to disable my HT technology? I'm not sure how much it would actually increase performance so I don't really know what to do with it. I do notice that programs install relativly fast, but could it be faster if I disabled the HT support?
JustinMcG67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2006, 11:37 PM   #16
In Runtime
 
Quinton McLeod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 298
Default Re: AMD Athelon 64 FX-60 Toledo 2.6 GHz Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1337DuD3

So would you suggest me to disable my HT technology? I'm not sure how much it would actually increase performance so I don't really know what to do with it. I do notice that programs install relativly fast, but could it be faster if I disabled the HT support?

I would recommend you disable it unless you plan on using a program that utilizes it... And I mean a program that you really really need.

Anyway, I haven't heard much about Intel's announcement about Quad Core, but if they do decide to do that, I agree with you. They should at least listen to AMD when they tell Intel to have the cores communicate directly to each other (as well as several other things).

As far as the AM2... I hear people are saying to stay away from it for at least 6 months to a year. Reason why is because when the first generation of motherboards are released, they will be buggy and cause problems. Also, DDR 2 doesn't overclock well. Even though DDR 2 is cheaper and I'm interested in migrating to DDR 2 in the future, it just isn't the correct solution right now. AM2 will have many many benefits, and I know this, but the market has yet to catch up and a lot of people just don't know what they should do right now. I mean, they just released the FX-60 and just because the AM2 was announced, people are recommending against it (including I) due to the simple fact that something "better" is coming out soon that will phase it out.

AMD and Intel are really fighting for the throne right now... We the consumer are indeed winning in this war... But at the same time, we are being flooded with too much of a good thing... In return, we end up not buying and instead waiting...
__________________
The best quotes I've ever heard:
RaistlinZ - "I think God woke up one day (probably around Noon. dude likes to sleep in) and said to himself, "OMFG, these dinosaurs are just kicking too much ass. The world is not ready for them yet." "
Quinton McLeod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2006, 12:02 AM   #17
BSOD
 
JustinMcG67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,519
Send a message via AIM to JustinMcG67 Send a message via MSN to JustinMcG67 Send a message via Yahoo to JustinMcG67
Default Re: AMD Athelon 64 FX-60 Toledo 2.6 GHz Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quinton McLeod

I would recommend you disable it unless you plan on using a program that utilizes it... And I mean a program that you really really need.

Anyway, I haven't heard much about Intel's announcement about Quad Core, but if they do decide to do that, I agree with you. They should at least listen to AMD when they tell Intel to have the cores communicate directly to each other (as well as several other things).

As far as the AM2... I hear people are saying to stay away from it for at least 6 months to a year. Reason why is because when the first generation of motherboards are released, they will be buggy and cause problems. Also, DDR 2 doesn't overclock well. Even though DDR 2 is cheaper and I'm interested in migrating to DDR 2 in the future, it just isn't the correct solution right now. AM2 will have many many benefits, and I know this, but the market has yet to catch up and a lot of people just don't know what they should do right now. I mean, they just released the FX-60 and just because the AM2 was announced, people are recommending against it (including I) due to the simple fact that something "better" is coming out soon that will phase it out.

AMD and Intel are really fighting for the throne right now... We the consumer are indeed winning in this war... But at the same time, we are being flooded with too much of a good thing... In return, we end up not buying and instead waiting...

Very true!

The consumers are being flooded with to many good things. We have new dual and double cores, as well as the first dual-core gaming processor, the FX-60, and a very awesome and extremly powerful CPU, as well as a really nice and mega CPU, the 955XE. Both companies are making very nice processors, it's just there's to much of a selection, not to mention with a new Socket coming out, as well as both are making DDR2 the standard memory choice, it's just to much. Most peopel are still using 32-bit chips, so when you introduce 64 bit along with dual cores and even make the mention of Quad-Cores, it's just overwhelming.

I bet businesses right now are having a hay day over it. Of course most businesses choose intel over AMD, but ultimately when it comes to running a business, servers are what you need, and the new Dual-Core 170 Denmark Opteron is the thing to beat! Infact, I'd liek to see a triathlon of the Opteron VS the X2 VS the 955XE. That would be intersting to see who comes out on top, in terms of multitasking, gaming, and most importantly, overclocking. Because it seems as though more and more people who purchase a PC are starting to discover how benefiting overclocking can be! Not just in terms of performance, but in terms of how cost effective the desicion is. Because you can buy a lower priced product and overclock it to the higher priced one and still achieve the same relative performance, and at a significantly lower cost!

We also need to find ways to utilize these new technologies, specificaly in gaming, as those are the programs that more often then not, truly use the PCs hardware. The RAM, processor, and video card are really targeted towards one specific thing, and that is gaming. If the people who design games could possibly be funded by these companies who make the hardware, then maybe we can see better games, and by better I mean in terms of utilizing the hardware. Because games at the moment can't fully utilize the dual-core CPUs yet, along with the new powerhouse GPUs, such as the brand new 48 pixel pipelines X1900XTX and the 512MB of memory 7800GTX. No game can fully access those specifications. So maybe companies need to start thinking out side the box. They could try to help the programs use the hardware, instead of throwing out new hardware and leaving the programmers wondering how they can use all of it.
JustinMcG67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2006, 12:44 AM   #18
Fully Optimized
 
ownage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,404
Default Re: AMD Athelon 64 FX-60 Toledo 2.6 GHz Review

when did DDR2 not overclock well? I remember seeing Micron D9's going up to DDR2-1000 when they are rated at DDR2-5400. Check out the Corsair 5400UL it is 1GB sticks too. MMM I love Micron D9.
ownage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2006, 12:46 AM   #19
Fully Optimized
 
Š88's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,775
Send a message via MSN to Š88
Default Re: AMD Athelon 64 FX-60 Toledo 2.6 GHz Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1337DuD3
Sad? The new AM2 socket processors will be 65nm, faster, consume less power, as far as I can tell, the end of Socket 939 and the beginning of Socket AM2, is nothing short of amazing! The new Am2 processors will be awesome. Soon to follow the AM2 processors, Quad-Core processors will be launched. Plus, the new FX-62 CPU will be launched.
Well I mean sad that my 939 technology is at the beginning of it's end and Im gonna have to open my wallet to pay for new computer parts one day. I am happy to see new and better technology being released but it's unfortunate I won't be able to afford them for a while.
__________________
Killing under the cloak of war is no different than murder

Kein Alkohol ist auch keine Lösung!
Š88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2006, 10:06 AM   #20
Fully Optimized
 
ownage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,404
Default Re: AMD Athelon 64 FX-60 Toledo 2.6 GHz Review

Remember that AMD doesnt plan on switching to 65nm anytime soon. The AM2 is probably be very buggy in the begging as they will take the 939 cpus and tweak the memory controller to support DDR2 and thats about it.
__________________

ownage is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0