Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 47 Posts

·
^^That's my user name^^
Joined
·
9,920 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,430 Posts
True the total "FSB" or the Hyper-Transport actually of any Socket 939 processor is 2GHz, but it's also only 32 bits wide whereas Intel's 800MHz FSB is 128 bits.
 

·
^^That's my user name^^
Joined
·
9,920 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
heyheyhey, don't diss amd, lol
 

·
^^That's my user name^^
Joined
·
9,920 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
that is a decent fact though, but the price really blows that though, does it not?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,430 Posts
It might be good to also point though that while Intel's bus can move more data, it also carries the burdon of the memory controller and its subsequent bandwidth for which most of that toal FSB bandwidth is used, while AMD's "FSB" only has to carry the AGP/PCI data.
 

·
^^That's my user name^^
Joined
·
9,920 Posts
Discussion Starter #7

·
^^That's my user name^^
Joined
·
9,920 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
my bad, lol
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,743 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by klewiss

128-bit integrated DDR memory controller â€" up to 6.4GB/sec memory bandwidth for breakthrough performance and extraordinary cinematic computing experiences


Pentium 4 has 256bit cpu to memory data path
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,430 Posts
That doesn't seem right...
Northbridge controls the memory and the FSB, making them essientialy one and the same, Dual Channel DDR is 128 bits, thereby making the FSB 128 bits wide...
 

·
^^That's my user name^^
Joined
·
9,920 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
according to pc world:

AMD expects to have the performance lead among mainstream desktop PC processors with the Athlon 64 4000+, says Jonathan Seckler, product manager for the Athlon 64 product line.

Industry analyst Nathan Brookwood agrees, especially in the near term as Intel resets its road maps.

"For some folks who are really pushing hard on performance and for whom seeing an hourglass is an economic or emotional kind of problem, AMD will have an advantage," says Brookwood, of Insight 64 in Saratoga, California.

As of Tuesday, the most powerful mainstream Pentium 4 processor in Intel's stable is the Pentium 4 560 processor, which runs at 3.6 GHz and uses 1MB of Level 2 cache. Intel announced last week that it is canceling plans to bring a 4-GHz Pentium 4 processor to market in the first quarter of 2005, and will focus instead on releasing a 3.8-GHz Pentium 4 chip with 2MB of Level 2 cache memory during that quarter. It will also roll out slower processors with 2MB of Level 2 cache next year.

Intel is expected to make two faster versions of its Pentium 4 Extreme Edition available later this year to carry its performance banner, but those chips are not used in as many PCs as the mainstream Pentium 4 processors. The forthcoming chips are also expected to have faster front-side buses to increase the speed at which data flows between the processor and the memory.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,743 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by YiffyGriffy

That doesn't seem right...
Northbridge controls the memory and the FSB, making them essientialy one and the same, Dual Channel DDR is 128 bits, thereby making the FSB 128 bits wide...

doesnt it go through the MCH memory controller hub
its data paths are 256bit at least the 845chipsets and higher do
so all p4s dopnt have 256 just from 845 and above

references
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,430 Posts
Intels pushing chips with more cache while AMD readies dual core chips... that also have 2MB of L2 Cache.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,430 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by spookedjunglist

doesnt it go through the MCH memory controller hub
its data paths are 256bit at least the 845chipsets and higher do
so all p4s dopnt have 256 just from 845 and above

I'm pretty sure the MCH/Northbridge link to the processor and to the DIMM slots is 128 bits. Think of it this way, each module of DDR400 memory is 64 bits. The PC3200 rating attached to the same module translate into a theorretical bandwidth of 3.2GB/s, when you run dual channel you double it for 6.4GB/s. And I just checked, Intel's chipsets supporting 800MHz FSB are rated for 6.4GB/s of data transfer. I unfortunately couldn't find anything specificaly about bit width though. That's Intel for ya...


EDIT: I think what it means by internal data path is the North to Southbridge link.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,334 Posts
^^Intel has already released the 570J which is 3.8GHZ. It is pretty darn fast, but no match for the Athlon FX-55. Intel is still king of Video Editing, but AMD has really shown vast improvements and has taken the lead in just about every other benchmark. I am totally impressed with the FX-55 and am excited to see the FX-57. For now I say AMD is on top of the heap, but this is just like the Videocard war. Each manufacturer always comes up with a trump card of their own.
 

·
^^That's my user name^^
Joined
·
9,920 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
that is true, as i cannot wait fo the GeForce 7 series, is it is to come. I just hope GeForce gets to 512MB before ATI, because whoever gets it first, gets me as a forever customer,
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,085 Posts
I like Intel becuase one, you get better OC's i find, more Mhz above stock. Yuo cant say it's beuase intels stock clocks are higher becuase the 2.4A goes to 3.9Ghz on air, i forget who done that, is it shawn magrail or someone like that.

I also like intel becuase i am a professional editor at 14, sounds weird but true, i'm being payed $1000 for the job i'm working on now and i've got a $3000 job lined up, where i will also get a percentage of sales.

I'm going off topic now but AMD chips do play games better than intel at stock speeds but once intel hit 4Ghz+ they start outperforming AMD's.

AMD chips do perform better in everyday tasks but is bairly noticable, only noticable thorugh benchmarks.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,743 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by YiffyGriffy

I'm pretty sure the MCH/Northbridge link to the processor and to the DIMM slots is 128 bits. Think of it this way, each module of DDR400 memory is 64 bits. The PC3200 rating attached to the same module translate into a theorretical bandwidth of 3.2GB/s, when you run dual channel you double it for 6.4GB/s. And I just checked, Intel's chipsets supporting 800MHz FSB are rated for 6.4GB/s of data transfer. I unfortunately couldn't find anything specificaly about bit width though. That's Intel for ya...


EDIT: I think what it means by internal data path is the North to Southbridge link.

swear i read it somewhere in a mag or something.... ill try and dig it up the next time i have to goto the bathroom


i specifically remember it saying 256 cpu to memory data path though
have to check my references though
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,430 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by klewiss

that is true, as i cannot wait fo the GeForce 7 series, is it is to come. I just hope GeForce gets to 512MB before ATI, because whoever gets it first, gets me as a forever customer,


Funny thing is 512MB cards were supposed to be out last Fall...
And remember, there's a lot more to video cards than just how much memory they have, check the link in my signature.
 
1 - 20 of 47 Posts
Top