Information

Dear forum members,
We are delighted to inform you that our forums are back online. Every single topic and post are now on their places and everything works just as before, only better. Welcome back!



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
Quad-Core from AMD: Quad FX Platform Review

Started by: Chicken | Date 11/29/06 10:22:11 PM
Comments: 71 | Last Comment:  01/02/08 11:21:59 AM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-16]

1. 
"In other words, AMD Quad FX will most likely appeal only to the most dedicated AMD fans."

Sad that fanboys will buy inferior technology just because of brand loyalty.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/29/06 10:22:11 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
Well, didn’t Intel keep the 80% market share selling P4 and PD crap.
Didn’t people bought crap even knowing that it was crap. (Intel fanbolism)

So let people buy crap, however this crap is better crap than the Intel past crap.
In other words this is good crap, not bad crap like Intel.

Crap.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/30/06 03:51:47 AM]
Reply
 
This AMD setup is crap. It's too expensive and has too much heat problems. I must say I am very disappointed at AMD. Being an AMD user since the 586, I have never seen such a sad attempt at competing with Intel.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/02/06 02:16:36 PM]
Reply

2. 
Guess we have a new definition for retard people : those who buy a 4x4.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/29/06 11:07:50 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
This system tested was the 2x2. The 4x4 is dual quad.(err hence the name 4x4) That's why this system is called Quad FX. (ie. 4 in total in a 2+2 configuration.)

Facts are a good starting point.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/30/06 03:46:08 PM]
Reply

3. 
Please review with Xp 64 as any sensible person would use this os on this platform. This will allow numa to function properly as well as memory interleave.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/29/06 11:47:26 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
XP 64 is not going to make the interleave problem go away. Only Vista has a NUMA aware scheduler, which will schedule processes to run on a the core which is closest to the memory where the process is stored.

Ultimately, AMDs approach is more scalable that Intel, because memory throughput increases with each CPU you add. You can see how bad the Intel FSB must be, by the fact that in the four-application test, that the QuadFX starts to perform heavily, and this is with the rather useless interleaved memory, and non-NUMA aware OS.

All this entire review shows is:
* A single process running on a single CPU with a single memory bus, is faster than a single thread running on a CPU with memory interleaved between fast local memory, and slower memory via another CPU somewhere is. Frankly this is not new.
* Two CPUs use more power than one.
* A single shared front-side bus sucks.

There should have been a test with Linux, which has a NUMA aware scheduler, and and putting the motherboard into full "NUMA mode". Or with Vista.

Only NUMA can scale. Front-side bus technology is dead.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/02/06 12:07:43 AM]
Reply

4. 
It reminds me of when the P4 were first released but, somehow, this looks even more retarded...
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/30/06 01:36:37 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
This shit is bull. Damn AMD, you're looking like Intel did during the Netburst diaster.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/02/06 02:18:07 PM]
Reply

5. 
Bad review. If there is some problem with NUMA than you must Enable it or Disable the feature.

Vista will solve the problem if its a problem.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/30/06 03:46:20 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
Bad comment. Commentator did not understand the principle or performance characteristics of ccNUMA architectures, and also did not read the review properly.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/30/06 04:29:09 PM]
Reply
 
Please educate us stupid ones where in the review is stated whether Interleave was enabled(omptimal for non-NUMA-aware OS as XP) and where are tests on Vista o Linux???
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/03/06 05:48:17 PM]
Reply

6. 
So I wonder if they had SMP turned on for Quake 4 - bet not.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/30/06 06:45:45 AM]
Reply

7. 
There is no way that AMD would release this platform if a single core 2 duo were faster.

I smell shenanigans.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/30/06 06:49:17 AM]
Reply

8. 
Could you try to re-benchmark the multi-tasking performance with node interleave turn off?

Windows XP Pro SP2 is NUMA aware.

thanks.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/30/06 07:42:53 AM]
Reply

9. 
This is what I mean, ^^ another stupid comment. AMD was never done and the acquisition of ATi was a smart move for AMD. And yes, they are going to make a quad-core, just forgot what they will call it, haven't you seen the raodmaps?
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/30/06 09:34:33 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
That is what im saying, delay is gonna kill them. Yeah AMD is gonna make a quad core, but in the time intel is gonna do something to beat it, etc.. And i dont see how buying ati was a smart move. I am myself a amd fan, i always owned amd cpu for all my computer. But seeing intel product wich is outperform by far in any benchmark amd product and still using 90nm.. :( sad
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/30/06 11:08:32 AM]
Reply
 
One more thing also is, you should add an other test machine, ( Dual Xeon (DualCore) Dual Opteron(Dual Core) the about same price cpu and compare it to the New quad 4x4. I bet that is going to be the same performance or it can be interesting to see if it really worth to put money into the quad 4x4 or if it the same as a Server platform wich exist LONG time and they didnt invented nothing new.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/30/06 11:12:36 AM]
Reply

10. 
Got any white elephants? No? Hey, that QuadFX will do quite nicely. There will be a 0 day where all C2D motherboards made will support C2Q, just with a BIOS update. On that date, within a few months, the desktop 2-socket board will only be a curiousity.

But kudos to AMD for keeping some of their dwindling mindshare alive. Bring on the competition. It's what gives us X2 3800 for $150 and E6300 for $180.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/30/06 11:18:00 AM]
Reply

11. 
Very good review from what Ive seen I think AMD has rushed this processor idea in responce to INTEL`s
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/30/06 01:34:21 PM]
Reply

12. 
I was afraid of this. AMD just slapped something together to compete with the new Intel chips. AMD will go down fighting tho I am a hardcore AMD fan and will always be. I think AMD will suprise us soon to turn around the chip wars once more. Go AMD!!
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 11/30/06 10:56:11 PM]
Reply

13. 
"The third test is probably the most sophisticated. Our test platforms were busy working on three tasks at a time: image editing in Adobe Photoshop, final rendering in 3ds max and video encoding into MPEG4 format. Here Quad FX platform performed not so well falling behind Intel’s dual-core CPUs. Moreover, as we see, the dependence of Quad FX performance on the CPU frequency is quite small, so I would assume that there is something limiting this performance dramatically. But of course, it is high latency of the memory subsystem, which we have already complained about several times."
I though in your multimedia multi-tasking test, the Intel's Core just pose its SSE engine power (it ís definitely more powerful than AMD SSE engine since Intel NetBurst) so your conclusion about memory subsystem limit is not totally right. The multitasking test with Quake and WinRAR has showed this.
Abcslayer.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/01/06 01:43:58 AM]
Reply

14. 
This Quad FX technology sounds very interesting for a low-end server.

XP doesn't have a NUMA aware scheduler, but Linux does. And the review shows that when actually running four applications the Quad FX system is faster.

All this review shows, is that running a single task on a multi-CPU system, where RAM has been divided between CPUs, that memory access is slow. I didn't need this review to tell me that was going to suck.

But running Linux, and the RAM set non-interleaved, with a highly threaded workload, it is going to be really fast. Even in non-NUMA mode on XP, you can see Quad FX pull ahread. The Intel quad-core CPU is totally limited by the FSB.

Too bad this board didn't support buffered DDR2 and ECC, as it would be an awesome cheap server.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/01/06 11:51:20 PM]
Reply

15. 
Intel Sucks
AMD Sucks
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/04/06 04:13:27 PM]
Reply

16. 
Wow maybe u missed it but AMD is dead in the water! 4x4 is slower, hotter, uses 30% more electricity ands not even here yet! Mean while the QX6600 is out next month - lol! Misery loves company and AMD had its moment. No amount magazine and Internet bios will save the poor products made by AMD! By the way the QX6600 will run at over 3 ghz thats 2x amd 62's - with p4 cooling techniques.

My New Years prediction:

The new indicator is dell - when dell switches then you know its time to sell your AMD stock! 5 years from now when dell switches back you know to sell your intel stock? M Dell is the B Gates of Hardware - I predict he will quit and volunteer work like B.G!

Like Zepplain - time to "Ramble On"

You AMD guys never stop do ya! Pentium 4 garbage? First, AMD got lucky for 1 year or so. Let me explain, the deep pipe line of the Pentium chip was designed for 10 ghz - the reason it did not work was unforeseen leakage. That is, at a certain point a electrons pass through the insulating part of the chip. Now, Intel realized this in 2003 and designed the core system a shorter pipe line like AMD. If this unforeseen leakage had not happened AMD's new chips would still be like sempron - slow slow doggie! Sure P4's get hot but sill at 4.25ghz a 3.6ghz chip games pretty good. In fact i just shipped a 3.2 E6700 based system will kick any AMD system out there but i am typing on my 2003 p4 3ghz shuttle running 3.5ghz yes over 3 years old. guess what no lag, music is playing, spysweeper is sweeping, my avg is doing its free thing - try that on any AMD chip made in 2003!

Now that the X6800 i have here is running over 4 ghz - no amd can match that! My QX6700 is waiting for its 680i chipset board to arrive (asus striker) by the way do not use any 5 series nvidia chipsets they run so hot - total garbage. Well, my new direct x system with qx6700 will be 2 years a head of AMD's dreams!

O ya, back to my P4 3.0c its still runs most games (yes - not oblivion) but most, fine, while i listen to music!

Well - just remember how many light bulbs Edison made before he stumbled on to carbon then tungsten - the P4 is a stepping stone.

( 800 series +900 series)/ p4 = qx core series (or AMD's last rights!)
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/20/06 03:37:53 PM]
Reply

[1-16]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment