News

Advanced Micro Devices Incorporated goes Intel route these days when it obliges end-users to acquire expensive registered PC3200 DDR SDRAM memory modules for AMD Athlon FX-51 microprocessors. The company, however, does not pin any illusions on registered memory modules, as next year it plans to launch another version of its chips with integrated memory controller supporting ordinary DDR SDRAM memory modules even in dual-channel mode.

In Fall 1999 Intel Corporation, Santa Clara, California, unveiled its Pentium III “Coppermine” processors with i820 (Camino) chipsets with RDRAM memory controller. It was clear, PC600, PC800 RDRAM memory was not necessary for Intel Pentium III CPUs and very few users utilized Intel’s RDRAM supporting P6 platform. One year later, in November 2000, the Santa Clara, California-based chip-maker launched its Pentium 4 processor and i850 chipset with only RDRAM support. RIMMs have always been the most expensive memory modules and even enthusiasts did not want to adopt them. Furthermore, RDRAM and supporting platforms were not able to show tangible performance increase over the less expensive AMD Athlon as well as Intel Pentium III with PC100 or PC133 SDRAM. What is happening now? AMD tries to go the same route by forcing to use expensive PC3200 registered DIMMs with its desktop AMD Athlon FX-51 processors.

Registered memory modules are used in variety of server applications and AMD Athlon 64 FX is the first desktop platform that requires this type of memory. Basically, registered and buffered memory modules allow installing a lot of memory modules on one a single memory channel – a not really necessary capability for the vast majority of desktop computers. Buffered memory modules are equipped with a special chip called “register”. This chip clocks in and clocks out the data by system clock taking about one clock cycle to perform the registering process. In applications that require registered RAM modules such logic is incorporated into the memory controller design.

Next year AMD launches its new Socket 754 and Socket 939 AMD Athlon 64 and AMD Athlon 64 FX microprocessors. The former will provide single-channel, while the latter, dual-channel memory controllers supporting typical DDR SDRAM memory modules. What is important here is that next year it will not be necessary to use registered memory modules and Socket 939 CPUs will not be compatible with the current Socket 940 infrastructure. The approach resembles Intel with its endless shuffling of slots, sockets, memory types and so on.

Obviously, AMD is far more fair here, since everybody, including mainboard makers, OEMs, SIs and even a lot of end-users know that next year there will be no Socket 940 for desktop applications and there will be no need for expensive registered memory modules. Nevertheless, like Intel AMD rolled out its high-end platform that has no future, but brings some additional computing power now at tangibly higher price-point.

Well, this is how the PC business works nowadays…

Discussion

Comments currently: 8
Discussion started: 09/28/03 04:55:21 AM
Latest comment: 09/29/03 06:14:44 PM
Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-7]

1. 
This move makes sense from a financial standpoint. The AMD 64 bit processors were delayed in release anyway. If they don't have the time to develop a non-registered FX chip, they have to use a neutered (ie, 1 way) Opteron chip, which is 940 pin, so they can get any FX chips out of the door.
When they have had time to change the Opteron design to make it not need registered memory, they will make a new chip, further from the Opteron design.

And as it stands, if you buy a 940-pin FX, you would surely be able to upgrade in the future to an Opteron.

Basically it seems like AMD were short on tim eto do everything they wanted too, and hence will have to make the changes come next year.
[Posted by: Lonyo  | Date: 09/28/03 04:55:21 AM]

2. 
...And now the fake news brought to you by X-bit labs. Boo-hoo someone might need a new motherboard next year, maybe pointless opinion pieces could be relegated to an editorial section? Or maybe: Well, this is how the PC news website business works nowadays…
[Posted by: Travolta  | Date: 09/28/03 08:12:54 PM]

3. 
That is the stupidest thing that I have read in days.

Intel went with RDRAM for profit and nothing else.

AMD's motives are very different. Get a clue.
[Posted by: compaddict  | Date: 09/28/03 08:58:51 PM]
+ expand thread (1 answer)

4. 
Do you, guys, think there is a difference for you about the reason of someone's decision in case this decision impacts you financially?

Intel might adopt now dead RDRAM for money and we had to pay the money or use AMD Athlon. AMD might adopt the registered memory for a different reason, now we have to pay as well, or choose a different platform. From end-users stand-point there is no difference, to my mind.

Like there is no difference for customers about Intel's inability to bring a 90nm processors with power consumption equal to 0.13 micron chips! That is why those, who own i865PE/i875P-base mainboard, have to get a new mainboard for Prescott. Oh, surely they can probably get a Pentium 4 Extreme Edition for some $800...
[Posted by: Anton  | Date: 09/29/03 01:38:02 AM]

5. 
LOL. Both of these companies are in it ONLY for the $$. They really don't care about you. In fact, they'll want you to plop down as much money as possible on their flagship chips and keep on doing that for every 3-4 month. However, looking @ AMD in my perspective, they have a more valid reason and at least a upgrade solution, unlike the dead-end path for P4's.

The 64's aren't really a finished product yet. Hence that's why the FX's like a Opteron Clone, and the motherboard needs a socket change. AMD HAD to release the 64's now even if they haven't gotten a 100% finished product out with a set-standard in sockets. They still need the time to fix up their CPU and rework their design/process to make it efficient and cost-effective in production. And look at the bright side, even if your new board doesn't support the later 64's, you'll still have the option to fit a Opteron in there. I'm sure the Opteron will scale just as nicely as 64's if the architecture proves to be a good one at scaling.

Now... P4s... LOL you idiots who went for Springdale/Canter were stooped by Intel AGAIN. You should've known that Intel was going to pull off something like that. I don't see why they need another change in sockets. This would be the 3rd! socket change in P4-architecture's lifetime... 478-423-(the new one). I guess you can plop down the money for the P4 Xeon-clones (P4 EE), although I dobut Intel can scale the .13m P4 much anymore. The thing's already running past 3 ghz...
[Posted by: razor2025  | Date: 09/29/03 06:17:19 AM]

6. 
I'm don't agree with that idea. I think it's not fair to compare the Athlon FX - registered DIMM with the Intel - Rambus case.
Intel had both technological and economic reasons for going the Rambus route. Both companies had economic agreements, and Intel invested in Rambus hoping it's stock would go up.
AMD hasn't such interest, it's simply a product that's half baked: probably they hadn't planned originally an Athlon 64 with dual channel memory controller, but in the end the demand for that feature was strong and they simply stripped something from the Opteron design and rushed the product to market. So they stuck with the same requirement for registered modules from the Opteron. They won't benefit from sales of that modules, like Intel with RDRAM. And they obviously are aware of the problem, so they already planned the 939 pin version, with an memory controller that doesn't need registered modules.
[Posted by: havok  | Date: 09/29/03 01:56:34 PM]

7. 
I don't know what the fuss is about c'mon you spend $700+ on a processor only to buy pc2100 RAM?!! plz It has been known from the beginning that the Athlon 64 FX is not targeted towards the mainstream or average customer. It is like buying a RADEON 9800 PRO for a computer with a celeron 800mhz processor. Maybe after sometime when prices go down then you'll see variations allowing you to use different types of memory depending on your needs but for the time being it doesn't matter to me because I"m really not planning to buy one anytime soon and if I had the resources to buy a system like that you can be damn sure I wouldn't ask anything less than the best components
[Posted by: nitrokid  | Date: 09/29/03 06:14:44 PM]

[1-7]

You must log in to add comments.

Forgot password? Registration

remember me



Related news

Latest News

Saturday, November 21, 2009

11:44 pm | Barnes and Noble: Nook E-Book Readers Are Sold Out. E-Book Reader from B&N Sold Out Before Release

7:53 am | Cell Network Operators Set to Become Largest Mobile Internet Devices Sellers – Analysts. Mobile Network Operators to Gain Strength in Devices

Friday, November 20, 2009

10:11 pm | ATI Seeks Its Best to Ensure More Radeon HD 5-Series Supplies – Company. Additional Number of DirectX 11 Graphics Boards is Incoming

11:56 am | Fusion-io’s SSD Setup Reaches 1TB/s Aggregate Bandwidth. Fusion-io Gets Contracts from Government, Creates World’s Fastest SSD Setup

10:06 am | Notebook – the Most Desired Christmas Gift, Says CEA. Notebooks, Players and HDTVs Top Christmas Presents Wish List

9:11 am | Ebay Completes Skype Sell Off. Skype No Longer Belongs to Ebay