PJB
Mon Oct 03 03:30:00 CDT 2005
Hi Mike,
Opteron chip is much faster. I use 2 and it's nearly equilivant to 4
processors. All 32 bit software I am testing works Adobe, Macromedia, DVD,
eTrust 7.1.
Runs very very fast. About to add up to 8Gb Ram and another SATA drive. The
only thing I needed to do was d/l x64 nVidia driver for the on-board audio.
I used a Tyan 940 m/board 2895.
It gets pretty damn hot and requires a server case with 4 fans min.
--
Peter Banks
Wellington, NZ
"Tim" <Tim@NoSpam.com> wrote in message news:dhpp38$d67$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> I'd look at an Asus A8N-e motherboard if graphics performance was not The
> big thing for you as it is mot an SLI system. There are several SLI
> options if graphics is really important IE A8N-SLI (Premium, Deluxe, and
> original).
>
> However most if not all Atlhon 64 / X2 / FX processor motherboards seem to
> be limited to 4GB RAM which is a tad annoying.
>
> The processor options you have are (ignoring Intel): Athlon 64 single core
> family, X2 family, and FX55 / 57. You can either go for performance (FX57
> or lesser model), low cost (Athlon 64), or Dual core (X2) = smooth system
> with medium performance. If you want a long life system then I suggest you
> build with some quality criteria EG low noise, not cost cutting on PSU
> etc, and an Upgrade Path planned EG when FX57 price drops to X, upgrade
> CPU...
>
> The other processor options are Opteron 2xx family for dual processor (and
> dual core options = total 4 CPU's) - few workstation users would be able
> to utilise quad CPU's unless they have a specific workload that benefits
> well from this. Opterons offer the advantage of being able to have
> considerably more RAM than the above CPU's since for some reason all
> mobo's released for the above have a limit of 4GB. Someone correct me if I
> am wrong, but I am sure you can build an Opteron system using a single 2xx
> processor then upgrade later (requires an XP repair install to change the
> HAL last I knew). Initially this will cost a tad more for the motherboard
> and RAM options may be more expensive, however prices only come down long
> term coupled with the ability to ADD another CPU and lots more RAM your
> system will be able to grow as budget permits and needs demand.
> Unfortunately, fast Opterons are not cheap...
>
> My personal preference is the Asus A8N-e for the Althon 64 bit families as
> the extra expense of SLI simply is not needed by me, nor do I need to go
> beyond 2 CPU's. There are several manufacturers of workstation class
> motherbaords for Opterons including Iwill.
>
> Dual core / dual processor systems IMHO have a longer life simply because
> they are so smooth to use. As a S/W dev, a lot of the tools I use are
> already mutlithreaded and make good use of duals, so having a dual means
> it is very difficult for one person to clobber a machine although it
> happens, but while you are, you still get a very smooth interaction.
>
> Windows XP and Server utilise the 2 cpu's / cores well, balancing workload
> dynamically so the user always has the 'best' experience (IO devices
> permitting - don't use IDE disc drives, SATA is much better).
>
> If you want pure [single cpu] speed, get an FX57 (or perhaps FX55 if they
> are still available). Otherwise X2 is IMHO an excellent way to go if you
> either have multithreading systems or run mutliple active tasks
> concurrently. You could get a single core Athlong 64 "budget" model and
> upgrade later to an FX or X2, but if your like me I never get round to
> reselling old parts.... I just buy new systems.
>
> New opteron chips are on their way to market. A new 939 pin opteron chip
> has been released so I am not too sure of the implications here (non
> registered ram perhaps?). It would be a good idea to review total long
> term RAM needs and look at the implications in terms of system life.
>
> see www.amd.com/pricing
> Compared to the X2 pricing, many of the Opteron chips are quite
> reasonable, however clock speed will be important.
>
> HTH
> - Tim
>
>
>
>
> "Wayne Wastier" <waynewastier@nospam.charter.net> wrote in message
> news:%23qT60NexFHA.3000@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> "Mike Smith" <mike_z@excite.com> wrote in message
>> news:ftkqj1loo1l7tqatn1320hmttoccgc1utk@4ax.com
>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 21:44:08 -0500, "Wayne Wastier"
>>> <waynewastier@nospam.charter.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ok, here is what I think you would love to have, based on what your
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813127223#DetailSpecs
>>>>
>>>>
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103529
>>>>
>>>> The motherboard can use as much as 8GB of DDRAM.
>>>
>>> Do you have any opinion on dual core versions? I realize that many
>>> apps aren't currently supporting it, but I do have a few
>>> multi-processor apps that I run which I think will be fooled into
>>> thinking that I have multiple CPUs. Maybe with the help of a patch.
>>> At some point, there will be support and I plan on using this machine
>>> for a while.
>>
>> Yes. Newegg has several dual core AMD 64 bit CPU's. While they are good,
>> I don't know if the motherboard that I posted about supports them. Also,
>> they are expensive at the moment. It is a trade off right now, dual core
>> and less DDRAM, or single core and more DDRAM. (unless you opt for a more
>> expensive motherboard, and more expensive Registered DDRAM if you use a
>> dual core Opteron.)
>>
>> The whole thing boils down to how much money you have to spend. I would
>> always recommend an AMD solution over Intel, especially when 64/32 bit
>> processing is concerned. However, if dual processing is a major concern
>> for you, Intel is the cheaper route to go at this time. (that is if you
>> don't already have a motherboard that supports AMD's dual core cpu's.)
>>
>> --
>>
>> -------------------------------------
>> Wayne Wastier
>> Z-80 - AMD 64 3200+
>>
>
>