Opteron series 100 vs athlon 64 fx

[rstlne]

I would imagine so. I have a hard time imagining any operating system
having a use for any of the 3DNow or SSE instructions,
--

Their Current chip doesnt run on Linux or Windows xp 64 ..
Redhat explains the linux problem
Microsoft nearly states that they will fix the problem in software for it to
run.

 

[Peter Dickerson]

Their Current chip doesnt run on Linux or Windows xp 64 ..
Redhat explains the linux problem
Microsoft nearly states that they will fix the problem in software for it to
run.

Apparently Nocona doesn't implement a 64-bit IOMMU, which the OSes assume
since AMD 64-bit CPUs have it. The sw fix is probably straightforward but
means that AMD will have a significant performance advantage for systems
with >4G of physical memory because it can avoid copying data.

Peter

 

[Gregory I. Hayes]

If the the locked multiplier would be something to look at also. I bought a
FX-51 which ran at 2 GHZ. I have overclocked it to 2.4 GHZ ( without any
special coolers or anything, just changed a couple of bios settings) so
effectively I now have a FX-53. I wouldn't have been able to do this on an
Opteron if the multiplier was locked.

Gregory I. Hayes

So the price difference between
Opteron146 2GHz 1MB S940 Box (£191exVAT)
and
Athlon 64 FX-53 1MB S940 (£589 ex VAT)
is just down to clock speed 2GHz vs 2.4 GHz??

Martin

 

[JK]

Opteron motherboards are expensive, and use 333 registered ECC ddr ram.
Athlon 64(939) motherboards use regular ddr 400 ram.

 

[John R Weiss]

Some use ECC, some not... But yes, it's still more expensive than
non-registered RAM.

If you're not going to use more than 1 CPU, I'd go with the cheapest system
overall (MB, CPU, RAM) for the desired clock speed. The cores are
essentially the same.