[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [K12OSN] New servers



On Sat, 2003-10-11 at 17:34, Terrell Prude', Jr. wrote:
> Athlon 64 chips are somewhat slower than either an Opteron or Athlon
> 64/FX, according to the recent Toms's Hardware review.  Also, no
> "Athlon 64" of any type supports SMP; only the Opteron series does. 
> Personally, given the relatively minimal price difference, and given
> that Socket 940 is much more likely to be supported in the future than
> Socket 754, I'd go w/ the Opteron over the Athlon 64 in any case,
> workstation or server.  In the case of a single-processor workstation,
> I might go w/ the Athlon 64/FX over an Opteron chip if the price
> savings were large enough; currently it isn't. 
> 
I've read that the Socket 940 Opterons are an intermediary solution. 
Something having to do with memory channels and ECC memory.  It will be
phased out in Q2 of 2004 in favor of the Socket 939, whose Opterons will
handle memory better for servers.  As far as workstations the Socket 754
for Athlon64 will continue.  Those chips have only one memory channel
(Opteron has 2), but it can use non-ECC DDR400 RAM, as opposed to the
Opteron's requirement for ECC DDR333 (which may also explain the better
benchmarks for some 32-bit chips that don't require the ECC RAM).

-- 
Jim Anderson

Open
Source
Opens
Minds

"Forward in all directions!"






[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]