AMD hit 3 gig SKT F / L1 cpu on sale

This is also the Quad FX platform that when you can find the mobos will support 2 of these cpus on the same board

http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/Produ...oductID=532106


Here is a little look at a board http://usa.asus.com/products4.aspx?l...30&modelmenu=1

Take note of the 12 sata connectors on the mobo

Also take note of the stupid price...

[The Jackal]

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

Take note of the 12 sata connectors on the mobo

So I can do without my rows of PCI ATA expansion cards

Besides 12 disks won't fit into my next project ....

http://mountainmods.com/gallery/albu...lbumListPage=1

http://mountainmods.com/gallery/album38

I'm looking at the bob slay and will probably have it shipped from the states : The usual UK cr*p $150 in the states £150 here

Originally Posted by TraxData

Also take note of the stupid price...

Its a brand spanking new FX cpu running at 3 gig under 400 quid is bloody cheap if these will run on there own. I am only guessing they will but you may need 2 running together for this to work but that puts it inline with the quadro cost wise just about with a faster bus speed.
One thing I did notice is its a 90nm process which to be should have been 60 nm

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

Its a brand spanking new FX cpu running at 3 gig under 400 quid is bloody cheap if these will run on there own. I am only guessing they will but you may need 2 running together for this to work but that puts it inline with the quadro cost wise just about with a faster bus speed.
One thing I did notice is its a 90nm process which to be should have been 60 nm

While its £250 cheaper than the intel quadcore series, there is no way i would spend just under £400 on a cpu.

I guess rich people would though.

[MovedGoalPosts]

So are AMD going to get back the value for money performance crown once this chip and board get a bit more mainstream?

Originally Posted by Rob

So are AMD going to get back the value for money performance crown once this chip and board get a bit more mainstream?

Hope so.

[The Jackal]

Been discussed on a lot of harware forums :

Best response I saw :

" This barely qualifies as even a stop-gap response to Conroe "

Originally Posted by TraxData

While its £250 cheaper than the intel quadcore series, there is no way i would spend just under £400 on a cpu.

I guess rich people would though.

or computer enthusiasts. Motor enthusiasts would spend as much on a spoiler on the back or 3 times as much on sports cams for example.

Edit : Forget i posted, lol.

Originally Posted by Rob

So are AMD going to get back the value for money performance crown once this chip and board get a bit more mainstream?

On reading the manual it does say when fitting the cpus it refers to if you install a second meaning it may well run with 1 cpu making it a very cheap FX cpu on its own as a dual core.I could be wrong and you may need to run 2.

Have you noticed how they have taken on an LGA format ripping off Intels design with no pic on the cpu?

---------- Post added at 00:52 ---------- Previous post was at 00:51 ----------

Originally Posted by CrC-3rr0r

Been discussed on a lot of harware forums :

Best response I saw :

" This barely qualifies as even a stop-gap response to Conroe "

if you read all that why aint you bloody posted it before dagnamit

[The Jackal]

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

if you read all that why aint you bloody posted it before dagnamit

Heh soz : I like TraxData don't believe being sold more cores is the solution.
To me more frequency on a dual core is more beneficial. Maxing out 4 cores doing a variety of things will highlight and pronounce the bottlenecks of your system.

If 2/3 of your cores are whacking your defragmented hard disk to bits with independent processes what do you think the overall performance of your system will feel like ?

Originally Posted by CrC-3rr0r

Heh soz : I like TraxData don't believe being sold more cores is the solution.
To me more frequency on a dual core is more beneficial. Maxing out 4 cores doing a variety of things will highlight and pronounce the bottlenecks of your system.

If 2/3 of your cores are whacking your defragmented hard disk to bits with independent processes what do you think the overall performance of your system will feel like ?

a lot better than if my disks were fragmented which I think is what you ment? I wouldnt be in that situation as ive said before I set up my machines properly and remove said read write hard drive bottleneck by installing enough to cope with multitasking

Each cpu has its own ram channel also this will remove another of the bottlenecks

[The Jackal]

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

a lot better than if my disks were fragmented which I think is what you ment? I wouldnt be in that situation as ive said before I set up my machines properly and remove said read write hard drive bottleneck by installing enough to cope with multitasking

Each cpu has its own ram channel also this will remove another of the bottlenecks

Yeh fragmented.

Heres an old article - cant vouch for its validity though.
http://www.neoseeker.com/news/story/6327/

I'm still not convinced mate : whack open a couple of winrar processes along with a few quick par repairs and your said ' perfect ' machine will start to feel the pain.

well my machine chugs away quite happy. Its all about spreading the work onto different drives as the read write problem with single disks is very valid