News

Comment by: aabbccdd (May 24, 2006 05:22)

wow the technology never stops its amazing the advancements in the last couple years .maybe the FX-60 939 socket will come down in price when they release the FX-62 and i can buy one!!!

Comment by: OzMick (May 24, 2006 08:46)

I've been waiting desperately for the Pacifica virtualization to come out... This is a really big thing, allows for multiple server instances for example, such as a dedicated DB and webserver, running completely independant, so can reboot one and not the other, and portable images of operating system images... Might not sound great, but this is huge.

Comment by: SOCOMII (May 24, 2006 15:28)

I feel my socket 939 is outdated already.

Comment by: wolf123 (May 24, 2006 16:06)

Can you be more specific what does

so can reboot one and not the other, and portable images of operating system images.

Comment by: wolf123 (May 24, 2006 16:06)

Does anyone know the processor speed of this new board is it over 4ghtz

Comment by: ALAND (May 24, 2006 16:14)

The socket 939 is still a great buy. The 64X2 3800 dual core is very good and this new processor will be very expensive.

Comment by: bobiroc (May 24, 2006 18:26)

"Can you be more specific what does

so can reboot one and not the other, and portable images of operating system images."

Virtualization is fantastic and now that processors are being optimized for it, it will open a new revolution of computing. I have been testing some of our servers using VMWare and it will be awesome when we implement it this summer.

Basically we have servers dedicated to apps that do not necessarily run all the time, but for some reason they need to be run independant from other applications. So we are basically wasting server power. With Virtualization I can take one server and run 2,3, 4 or more servers on one box. That way you only have one physical server, but the virutal servers all run independant of each other so no conflicts. I can have a Windows Server and a Linux server on the same box running at the same time.

This can be taken to the desktop level so you can run multiple operating systems on one computer at the same time. No need to reboot to a boot menu and choose.

Comment by: OzMick (May 24, 2006 18:29)

wolf123:

Virtualization at the moment relies on either having a modified OS running on top of another OS (Xen), or having an unmodified OS running in a fully virtual environment (Virtual PC). Both suffer from different penalties, Xen requires a modified system which is out of the league of most and doesn't have support for Windows but has low processor penalties (doesn't have to translate commands, it is already done in the kernel). Virtual PC suffers from having to intercept everything going on and make sure the virtual system isn't aware that it is virtual. That means a bigger MHz overhead, but easier for the user.

What on-chip virtualization does is allow the user to pretty much divide the CPU into as many different cores it has, and each can perform pretty much independently. Xen is apparently going to be the next huge thing here, as it means that there is no longer a need to create a custom OS, it'll run out of the box. Have a read on the net about Pacifica or Xen for more info.

Comment by: johnodd4 (May 25, 2006 02:22)

all right a new amd great

Comment by: aabbccdd (May 25, 2006 03:08)

AMD 80% of the market share Intel 20% and losing ground everyday , i would say Intel is in trouble

Antec Overature ATX Quiet Media Case w/ TruePower550-Watt/ASUS A8N32-SLI Deluxe Socket 939/ Seagate160GB Barracuda/ ATI-Radeon-X850 XT Platinum/ CORSAIR XMS 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR SDRAM Unbuffered DDR 433(PC 3500)/AMD Athlon 64 4000+ San Diego 1GHz HT/6 Fans/2-Plextor PX-716A Drives/Lite-On SHW-160P6S/View Sonic-VP2030b 20.1"LCD 1600x1200 res.8ms respone time

Comment by: aabbccdd (May 25, 2006 03:45)

Dells selling AMD CPUs now!!!!

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?sku=A0558336&cs=198c=us&l=en

Comment by: xyqo (May 25, 2006 15:10)

Woooo they stepping up tha game agian. nice AMD very nice.

Now all i have to do is wait till i can afford it. Oh yeah by then they'll have even newer better stuff.

Comment by: OddBall20 (May 25, 2006 17:42)

Well I always had intel until one day someone started talking to me about AMD. They are as good or better then intel and a little cheaper, so I got a ADM put in my puter and I'm glad to say that it works very very good and now I'm a ADM freak lmao. I don't think all ever go back to intel.

:O)

Comment by: Sniping_G (May 26, 2006 00:10)

Wow back when i bought my old computer all the pc's were usng intel and very few amd now when i go to the store i start seeing amd and my cpu i am using right now is using a amd prossesor go AMD

Comment by: vegeta66 (May 26, 2006 00:16)

yes go AMD kick intels ass,... =)

keep up the good work AMD

Comment by: vegeta66 (May 26, 2006 00:18)

dell bought alienware so they can now branch into the AMD market

we shall call it,....

delleinware

--from maximum pc--

Comment by: sammorris (May 26, 2006 19:06)

w00t!

Lol, it had to be said. The AM2 is no contender for Intel's next move, but it's a nice boost to AMD's rep at any rate.

Comment by: l34merik (May 27, 2006 14:37)

@wolf123

the fx-62 runs at 2.8GHz while the 5000+ runs at 2.6GHz. The 5000+ is almost the same as the fx-60 but has a smaller cache size.

If anyone wants more details about it read it at

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1966027,00.asp

Comment by: cgl88 (May 28, 2006 08:00)

How will Intel's Conroe stack up against the FX-62 and X2 and the AM2 socket/platform?

Comment by: sammorris (May 28, 2006 18:07)

Much though it pains me to say it, Conroe will slaughter AM2 because it's very little different to AM1 or 939. AM3 will be intel's real challenge, but by then they may have improved upon Conroe. I'm wondering how long it'll be before Woodcrest or a variant of it makes desktops. 4 cores, and some server boards support two of them. Eight cores. Given a 2.66Ghz Conroe is a match for a 2.6Ghz FX-60, CPU tech is starting to move again.

Comment by: wolf123 (May 30, 2006 13:45)

no comment its actually slowwer then i was thinking it would be

Comment by: ALAND (Jun 04, 2006 10:49)

I just bought an AMD socket 939 64X2 3800 Dual Core running at 2.1Ghz and it kicks the crap out of my Intel 3.6Ghz. So you cannot compare AMD and Intel using a Mhz comparison.

Comment by: sammorris (Jun 04, 2006 11:05)

No indeed you can't. The focus has drifted from actual mhz to structure efficiency. The AMD low frequency, high effiency route is what has given them the performance edge for the past 2 years or so.