If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Athlon FX-51 at 2.8Ghz Reviewed, P4 Hammered
Curious to see how the Hammer core scales?
Head over to http://www.aces hardware.com/ to see the review and benchmark results for a Prometia phase-change (refrigeration) cooled Athlon FX-51 system overclocked to 2.8Ghz. The only thing holding the processor back from going faster was the maximum multiplier supported by the motherboard used. The Aces Hardware article shows that the Hammer architecture, thanks to SOI and a slightly longer 12-stage pipeline, can scale to higher clock speeds than the K7. More importantly, it shows that performance scales better with clock speed than the P4 thanks to the on-die dual channel memory controller. So not only does the benchmarks indicate the FX-51 beating the stock P4EE, but it shows the Hammer has the potential of accelerating away from the P4 as the clock speed is dialed up. It is clear that the days of the P4 are numbered just like this was the case with the PIII when the K7 showed up. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
On 28 Sep 2003 01:21:38 GMT, (Supertimer) wrote:
I am sorry, the link below should be: http://www.aceshardware.com/ There was an extra space in the web address. (Supertimer) wrote: Curious to see how the Hammer core scales? Head over to http://www.aces hardware.com/ to see the review and benchmark results for a Prometia phase-change (refrigeration) cooled Athlon FX-51 system overclocked to 2.8Ghz. The only thing holding the processor back from going faster was the maximum multiplier supported by the motherboard used. The Aces Hardware article shows that the Hammer architecture, thanks to SOI and a slightly longer 12-stage pipeline, can scale to higher clock speeds than the K7. More importantly, it shows that performance scales better with clock speed than the P4 thanks to the on-die dual channel memory controller. So not only does the benchmarks indicate the FX-51 beating the stock P4EE, but it shows the Hammer has the potential of accelerating away from the P4 as the clock speed is dialed up. It is clear that the days of the P4 are numbered just like this was the case with the PIII when the K7 showed up. All this is very nice. The real question though isn't whether or not the P4s days are numbered, we knew that before the FX-51 was released. Superior product is not enough to insure market success - the betamax, DR-DOS 6.0, and the Amiga are all solid evidence of that. The real question should be whether or not the FX-51 and it's stablemates can insure AMDs solvency. Since the release of the first Athlon AMD has had a superior product in many ways yet they've teetered on the brink of bankruptcy. This product needs to be not just a market success but a cash cow or it may not matter. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
mike wrote:
On 28 Sep 2003 01:21:38 GMT, (Supertimer) wrote: I am sorry, the link below should be: http://www.aceshardware.com/ There was an extra space in the web address. (Supertimer) wrote: Curious to see how the Hammer core scales? Head over to http://www.aces hardware.com/ to see the review and benchmark results for a Prometia phase-change (refrigeration) cooled Athlon FX-51 system overclocked to 2.8Ghz. The only thing holding the processor back from going faster was the maximum multiplier supported by the motherboard used. The Aces Hardware article shows that the Hammer architecture, thanks to SOI and a slightly longer 12-stage pipeline, can scale to higher clock speeds than the K7. More importantly, it shows that performance scales better with clock speed than the P4 thanks to the on-die dual channel memory controller. So not only does the benchmarks indicate the FX-51 beating the stock P4EE, but it shows the Hammer has the potential of accelerating away from the P4 as the clock speed is dialed up. It is clear that the days of the P4 are numbered just like this was the case with the PIII when the K7 showed up. All this is very nice. The real question though isn't whether or not the P4s days are numbered, we knew that before the FX-51 was released. Superior product is not enough to insure market success - the betamax, DR-DOS 6.0, and the Amiga are all solid evidence of that. The real question should be whether or not the FX-51 and it's stablemates can insure AMDs solvency. Since the release of the first Athlon AMD has had a superior product in many ways yet they've teetered on the brink of bankruptcy. This product needs to be not just a market success but a cash cow or it may not matter. Perhaps all AMD needs is a fully naked lap dancing pixie! However seriously, AMD capturing the heart of Microsoft for the XBox II and Opterons success into the realm of academic super computing, is a great acheivement on there behalf. Many have teetered on the brink of bankruptcy recently (surprisingly there is a world recession on), the point should be if they can survive now, what is going to happen to them when the economy gets moving again? I would think there future looks very promising, from looking at what they have acheived on the whole lately. As for the Amiga if only Commodore went they way the PC did. Was an old dream of mine but died but that's another story |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Minotaur" wrote in message ... mike wrote: On 28 Sep 2003 01:21:38 GMT, (Supertimer) wrote: I am sorry, the link below should be: http://www.aceshardware.com/ There was an extra space in the web address. (Supertimer) wrote: Curious to see how the Hammer core scales? Head over to http://www.aces hardware.com/ to see the review and benchmark results for a Prometia phase-change (refrigeration) cooled Athlon FX-51 system overclocked to 2.8Ghz. The only thing holding the processor back from going faster was the maximum multiplier supported by the motherboard used. The Aces Hardware article shows that the Hammer architecture, thanks to SOI and a slightly longer 12-stage pipeline, can scale to higher clock speeds than the K7. More importantly, it shows that performance scales better with clock speed than the P4 thanks to the on-die dual channel memory controller. So not only does the benchmarks indicate the FX-51 beating the stock P4EE, but it shows the Hammer has the potential of accelerating away from the P4 as the clock speed is dialed up. It is clear that the days of the P4 are numbered just like this was the case with the PIII when the K7 showed up. All this is very nice. The real question though isn't whether or not the P4s days are numbered, we knew that before the FX-51 was released. Superior product is not enough to insure market success - the betamax, DR-DOS 6.0, and the Amiga are all solid evidence of that. The real question should be whether or not the FX-51 and it's stablemates can insure AMDs solvency. Since the release of the first Athlon AMD has had a superior product in many ways yet they've teetered on the brink of bankruptcy. This product needs to be not just a market success but a cash cow or it may not matter. Perhaps all AMD needs is a fully naked lap dancing pixie! However seriously, AMD capturing the heart of Microsoft for the XBox II and Opterons success into the realm of academic super computing, is a great acheivement on there behalf. Many have teetered on the brink of bankruptcy recently (surprisingly there is a world recession on), the point should be if they can survive now, what is going to happen to them when the economy gets moving again? I would think there future looks very promising, from looking at what they have acheived on the whole lately. As for the Amiga if only Commodore went they way the PC did. Was an old dream of mine but died but that's another story With all the talk about AMD's profitability or lack thereof, I don't understand why many believe AMD has to be the #1 best selling CPU to be successful. Pepsi is the #2 selling cola in the world and they make billions of $s. Lee jeans isn't the best selling jean and they too have been around long before I was. Point being is that if AMD is losing $ it's not because of the lack of total # of CPUs sold. The total amount of VIA C3 CPUs sold are way lower (and cheaper) than intel and AMD yet VIA continues to spend $ in research and development, manufacturing, and marketing of them and no one is reporting about VIA losing tons of $. If AMD is really losing the millions of $ I keep reading about AMD should have been out of business long ago. Maybe they have creative CPAs that know how to show $ losses when a profit is made like Hollywood does with motion pictures. AMD needs to market themselves better like VHS vs. Beta. An example of a superior product out marketed by an inferior product which became the product of choice. My thoughts on the subject. Nystagmus |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Nystagmus" wrote in message
... "Minotaur" wrote in message ... mike wrote: On 28 Sep 2003 01:21:38 GMT, (Supertimer) wrote: I am sorry, the link below should be: http://www.aceshardware.com/ There was an extra space in the web address. (Supertimer) wrote: Curious to see how the Hammer core scales? Head over to http://www.aces hardware.com/ to see the review and benchmark results for a Prometia phase-change (refrigeration) cooled Athlon FX-51 system overclocked to 2.8Ghz. The only thing holding the processor back from going faster was the maximum multiplier supported by the motherboard used. The Aces Hardware article shows that the Hammer architecture, thanks to SOI and a slightly longer 12-stage pipeline, can scale to higher clock speeds than the K7. More importantly, it shows that performance scales better with clock speed than the P4 thanks to the on-die dual channel memory controller. So not only does the benchmarks indicate the FX-51 beating the stock P4EE, but it shows the Hammer has the potential of accelerating away from the P4 as the clock speed is dialed up. It is clear that the days of the P4 are numbered just like this was the case with the PIII when the K7 showed up. All this is very nice. The real question though isn't whether or not the P4s days are numbered, we knew that before the FX-51 was released. Superior product is not enough to insure market success - the betamax, DR-DOS 6.0, and the Amiga are all solid evidence of that. The real question should be whether or not the FX-51 and it's stablemates can insure AMDs solvency. Since the release of the first Athlon AMD has had a superior product in many ways yet they've teetered on the brink of bankruptcy. This product needs to be not just a market success but a cash cow or it may not matter. Perhaps all AMD needs is a fully naked lap dancing pixie! However seriously, AMD capturing the heart of Microsoft for the XBox II and Opterons success into the realm of academic super computing, is a great acheivement on there behalf. Many have teetered on the brink of bankruptcy recently (surprisingly there is a world recession on), the point should be if they can survive now, what is going to happen to them when the economy gets moving again? I would think there future looks very promising, from looking at what they have acheived on the whole lately. As for the Amiga if only Commodore went they way the PC did. Was an old dream of mine but died but that's another story With all the talk about AMD's profitability or lack thereof, I don't understand why many believe AMD has to be the #1 best selling CPU to be successful. Pepsi is the #2 selling cola in the world and they make billions of $s. Lee jeans isn't the best selling jean and they too have been around long before I was. Point being is that if AMD is losing $ it's not because of the lack of total # of CPUs sold. The total amount of VIA C3 CPUs sold are way lower (and cheaper) than intel and AMD yet VIA continues to spend $ in research and development, manufacturing, and marketing of them and no one is reporting about VIA losing tons of $. If AMD is really losing the millions of $ I keep reading about AMD should have been out of business long ago. Maybe they have creative CPAs that know how to show $ losses when a profit is made like Hollywood does with motion pictures. AMD needs to market themselves better like VHS vs. Beta. An example of a superior product out marketed by an inferior product which became the product of choice. My thoughts on the subject. Nystagmus First of all, you can't compare CPUs to cola. Unless of course you constantly need to redesign the product and it costs countless millions to do it. How AMD is surviving is beyond me. They sell CPUs for next to nothing in hopes of somehow gaining market share over Intel. As for marketing their product? You need to have money to do that....and have a competitor who does not intimidate your hardware suppliers. As for the Amiga... multitasking without hyperthreading.... those were the days. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"The TweakOholic" wrote in message le.rogers.com... "Nystagmus" wrote in message ... "Minotaur" wrote in message ... mike wrote: On 28 Sep 2003 01:21:38 GMT, (Supertimer) wrote: I am sorry, the link below should be: http://www.aceshardware.com/ There was an extra space in the web address. (Supertimer) wrote: Curious to see how the Hammer core scales? Head over to http://www.aces hardware.com/ to see the review and benchmark results for a Prometia phase-change (refrigeration) cooled Athlon FX-51 system overclocked to 2.8Ghz. The only thing holding the processor back from going faster was the maximum multiplier supported by the motherboard used. The Aces Hardware article shows that the Hammer architecture, thanks to SOI and a slightly longer 12-stage pipeline, can scale to higher clock speeds than the K7. More importantly, it shows that performance scales better with clock speed than the P4 thanks to the on-die dual channel memory controller. So not only does the benchmarks indicate the FX-51 beating the stock P4EE, but it shows the Hammer has the potential of accelerating away from the P4 as the clock speed is dialed up. It is clear that the days of the P4 are numbered just like this was the case with the PIII when the K7 showed up. All this is very nice. The real question though isn't whether or not the P4s days are numbered, we knew that before the FX-51 was released. Superior product is not enough to insure market success - the betamax, DR-DOS 6.0, and the Amiga are all solid evidence of that. The real question should be whether or not the FX-51 and it's stablemates can insure AMDs solvency. Since the release of the first Athlon AMD has had a superior product in many ways yet they've teetered on the brink of bankruptcy. This product needs to be not just a market success but a cash cow or it may not matter. Perhaps all AMD needs is a fully naked lap dancing pixie! However seriously, AMD capturing the heart of Microsoft for the XBox II and Opterons success into the realm of academic super computing, is a great acheivement on there behalf. Many have teetered on the brink of bankruptcy recently (surprisingly there is a world recession on), the point should be if they can survive now, what is going to happen to them when the economy gets moving again? I would think there future looks very promising, from looking at what they have acheived on the whole lately. As for the Amiga if only Commodore went they way the PC did. Was an old dream of mine but died but that's another story With all the talk about AMD's profitability or lack thereof, I don't understand why many believe AMD has to be the #1 best selling CPU to be successful. Pepsi is the #2 selling cola in the world and they make billions of $s. Lee jeans isn't the best selling jean and they too have been around long before I was. Point being is that if AMD is losing $ it's not because of the lack of total # of CPUs sold. The total amount of VIA C3 CPUs sold are way lower (and cheaper) than intel and AMD yet VIA continues to spend $ in research and development, manufacturing, and marketing of them and no one is reporting about VIA losing tons of $. If AMD is really losing the millions of $ I keep reading about AMD should have been out of business long ago. Maybe they have creative CPAs that know how to show $ losses when a profit is made like Hollywood does with motion pictures. AMD needs to market themselves better like VHS vs. Beta. An example of a superior product out marketed by an inferior product which became the product of choice. My thoughts on the subject. Nystagmus First of all, you can't compare CPUs to cola. Unless of course you constantly need to redesign the product and it costs countless millions to do it. Ok, than compare GM against BMW. BMW in no way is even close to selling as many cars as GM, yet they are known for superior automobiles. And BMW makes a profit. And BMW has a product that is constantly redesigned. How AMD is surviving is beyond me. They sell CPUs for next to nothing in hopes of somehow gaining market share over Intel. Well, that approach hasn't worked for AMD if we are to believe that AMD is constantly lossing $. What I think AMD needs to do is flood the advertising market. This cost money for sure but AMD needs to increase their advertising budget and pay for it with a modest increase in the cost of their CPUs. Apple is a healthy company and they don't have more than what 7% market share of computer sales. Innovation is what keeps them on the silicon map. AMD needs to work closely with software engineers so that they will design software that will be tuned for AMD's CPU. AMD could even share if not pay all monies for the software engineer's R and D. Establish partnerships more aggresively with products that would showcase AMD's CPU's strenghts. Share the cost of cross-brand advertising with the likes of Microsoft, Adobe, gaming companies, high end software titles, etc. Make the world populous through awareness advertising familular with AMD so that they demand AMD CPU s enough so that the stronghold intel has is broken. Show Dell and all others that dealing only with intel will limit their profits. As for marketing their product? You need to have money to do that....and have a competitor who does not intimidate your hardware suppliers. Well that is what capitalism is all about isn't it? I'd bet ya Microsoft, Trump, etc use the same tatics as intel. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
All this is very nice. The real question though isn't whether or not
the P4s days are numbered, we knew that before the FX-51 was released. Superior product is not enough to insure market success - the betamax, DR-DOS 6.0, and the Amiga are all solid evidence of that. The real question should be whether or not the FX-51 and it's stablemates can insure AMDs solvency. Since the release of the first Athlon AMD has had a superior product in many ways yet they've teetered on the brink of bankruptcy. This product needs to be not just a market success but a cash cow or it may not matter. Intels (p5?) will be a 64bit processor using the Amd-64 instruction set.. To me, that says that AMD's move has been adopted by INTEL as the next step to take. If INTEL wouldnt have adopted it then I think we might have seen AMD possibly go under (or at least loose nearly all of their home users).. but with INTEL picking up the 64 idea then that probably shows they made a good move |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
AMD needs to work closely with software engineers so that they will design
software that will be tuned for AMD's CPU. AMD could even share if not pay all monies for the software engineer's R and D. Establish partnerships more aggresively with products that would showcase AMD's CPU's strenghts. Share the cost of cross-brand advertising with the likes of Microsoft, Adobe, gaming companies, high end software titles, etc. Make the world populous through awareness advertising familular with AMD so that they demand AMD CPU s enough so that the stronghold intel has is broken. Show Dell and all others that dealing only with intel will limit their profits. Microsoft x86-64 optimized for Amd-64.. I think they did what you suggested .. I belive that Adobe does actually push AMD chips for being the best chips to use with their "ADReader" product.. As for marketing their product? You need to have money to do that....and have a competitor who does not intimidate your hardware suppliers. Well that is what capitalism is all about isn't it? I'd bet ya Microsoft, Trump, etc use the same tatics as intel. Yea they do, that's my microsoft has been up for several antitrust cases over the past few years if the EU fines the the max penalty then I think we'll see MS rethink things As for the VIA chips, Just look at the c3.. It's newest processor is 15cm x 15cm, (sad it cant be passivly cooled), has a low power consumption, and rates up there with a duron 500.. INTEL recently had laptops removed from COMPUTEX because they didnt like the fact that they had Antaur processors in them, sitting next to laptops that had intel chips (nice).. Did you also know that Intel has flooded the market with cheap outdated chips to try and compete with VIA's low power processors.. Sure VIA doesnt complain but they dont put in the amount of money that Intel/Amd puts in, nor have they had to deal with the same type of competition (but big blue seems to want to change it) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"rstlne" .@. wrote in message
news All this is very nice. The real question though isn't whether or not the P4s days are numbered, we knew that before the FX-51 was released. Superior product is not enough to insure market success - the betamax, DR-DOS 6.0, and the Amiga are all solid evidence of that. The real question should be whether or not the FX-51 and it's stablemates can insure AMDs solvency. Since the release of the first Athlon AMD has had a superior product in many ways yet they've teetered on the brink of bankruptcy. This product needs to be not just a market success but a cash cow or it may not matter. Intels (p5?) will be a 64bit processor using the Amd-64 instruction set.. To me, that says that AMD's move has been adopted by INTEL as the next step to take. If INTEL wouldnt have adopted it then I think we might have seen AMD possibly go under (or at least loose nearly all of their home users).. but with INTEL picking up the 64 idea then that probably shows they made a good move Intel really only had two options: go with x86-64 or stay 32-bit. It would have been commercial suicide to try to push for another 64-bit extension, as it would take at least two years (judging by the time it took for x86-64) to get software support for the extension, by which time x86-64 would be very well entrenched. Even more so as (according to rumours) MS told Intel that if Intel rolled their own 64-bit extension, MS would not develop Windows for it. Staying 32-bit only wasn't really too sensible either, as it gives AMD a huge marketing advantage to say that their chip runs 32-bit code fast, and 64-bit even faster (a *lot* faster in some cases, judging by the AcesHardware report). The only question is how well Intel can add it to the P5: whether it's going to be 64-bit bolted on to a 32-bit core (ie: bolt x86-64 onto the p4 core, which would have severely low performance) or a 64-bit core that supports 32 bit (like whatever-the-heck-AMD-is-calling-their-CPU-this-week). -- Michael Brown www.emboss.co.nz : OOS/RSI software and more Add michael@ to emboss.co.nz - My inbox is always open |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pentium 4 vs. Athlon XP vs. Athlon 64's | MarkW | General | 2 | October 10th 06 12:11 PM |
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ or Dual AMD Athlon XP 2800+ | SysCold | Overclocking | 9 | July 4th 04 03:25 AM |
P4C 2.8Ghz vs P4C 2.4Ghz vs Barton 2500+ vs Barton 2800+...what's the verdict? | Vin | Overclocking | 10 | February 19th 04 08:47 PM |
Slowest Athlon 64 humbles fastest P4 in gaming | Tone-EQ | Overclocking AMD Processors | 1 | December 15th 03 04:09 PM |
AMD Athlon 64FX first impressions | Chris | General | 14 | September 29th 03 02:22 PM |