Originally Posted by RonindeBeatrice
I read it wowza. He made a few good points, but none that I honestly care about.
the two FX series processors are going to be bundled together apparently at just slightly over the cost of a single one (I'll believe it when I see it, but it's what I read).
the motherboard will probably be EATX, like it's server brothers, so space shouldn't be quite as tight. I think actually a dual socket motherboard would be practically impossible with ATX (look at your motherboard and imagine slamming another CPU socket on it anywhere!)
four memory modules isn't terrible, as it will be likely that users will be fast upgrading to 4 GB anyway as the system requirements of Vista begins to make games write "recommended: 4 GB of RAM" on the box. Having 4 X 1 sticks is cheaper (and probably faster) than 2X2 GB sticks. Hell even Dell recommended 2 GB of RAM for Vista machines, and these are word processors! You certainly don't want 3 GB of RAM do you?
and who said you'd have to buy two graphics cards?
If any of the counter arguments I've made have been even hinted as being untrue then please correct me. That fella (from my homestate nonetheless) knows nothing more than anyone else at this moment.
I think it will be a good setup, but at first, the motherboards companies like Tyan, Supermicro and other server boards will be comming out. It will be much more to make these boards/offer less OCing features than the current Intel platforms. Time will tell, but I don't like the thought of 90nm 125w processors running right next to eachother.
Again, the artical is Intel bias, to pick out the details like dual channel DDR (which gives 1% preformance increase over single channel), 4x1 gig sticks, and SLIed/x-fired gfx cards.
Though he does later say
As far as I can tell it's still anyone's ball game.
basically to save his but if AMD is ontop.