AMD Delivers Increased Performance To Enterprise Customers with the AMD Opteron™ Proc

TheLostSwede

SUNNYVALE, CA -- August 5, 2003 --AMD (NYSE: AMD) today announced immediate availability of the AMD Opteron™ processor Model 246, designed to provide outstanding performance for servers and workstations. The AMD Opteron processor Model 246, which will power the IBM eServer 325, provides a unified platform for servers and workstations, enabling simultaneous 32- and 64-bit computing. The IBM eServer 325 is planned to power one of the world’s largest Linux supercomputers at Japan’s National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST).

Pricing The AMD Opteron processor Model 246 is priced at $794 in 1,000-unit quantities.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,51_104_543~73132,00.html

Shorty

Oh my dear god

:wow:

Mack. It's time plan NOW my friend. NOW.

Thrax

Holy **** :wow2:

//EDIT:

I know the 240 is 1.4GHz, the 242 is 1.6GHz, the 244 is 1.8GHz, so the 246 must be 2.0Ghz?

I found a pattern!

The 1, 2, 4, and 8 in the model codes (Opteron 1xx, 2xx, 4xx, 8xx) stands for how many processors in tandem the processor is to go with. We've established that.

However if you add the LAST 2 digits together, you get the value of its speed AFTER the decimal point. Such as x.(added value).

Then you can intelligently attach that value to the remaing gigaherz the processor uses.

x40 = 4+0 = 4 = 1.4 GHz
x42 = 4+2 = 6 = 1.6 GHz
x44 = 4+4 = 8 = 1.8 GHz
x46 = 4+6 = 10 = 2.0 GHz
x48 = 4+8 = 12 = 2.2 GHz (???)

I win.

Straight_Man

Yes. And the 12X is a single series meaning single CPU on die, 1.2 GHz base, last digit. That might carry to the Athlon64 codes somewhere from what I have seen so far, as the Athlon64 will eventually probably replace the Opteron singles and possibly some of the 2 on die series down the line.

This is common, take state-of-the art and blend the true core circuit designs into the economy processor later. The 2.0 GHz Celeron also has as part of it the older P4 cores, cache is smaller but that can be a seperate circuit area and the computerized circuit design dev lets them go with a proven processor-circuits-only core and less cache added onto the die design. So it is a one-design-gen-back (as oppossed to complete processor family gen) P4 core (CPU only wise, as seperate from cache on the die which is how they are breaking things now for designing and sometimes a lesser cache capacity but the old processign core). AMD is starting to do similar things compared to Intel's designing costing in this respect to keep design and proving in costs down and save on needing to start software dev totally from scratch for economy and volume sales processors. Number details different, but pattern of new is reused at least partly in older later is following this trend more and more.

I will be interested to see exactly what they do with caching for the Athlon64. But I expect the ALUand PFU areas of the dies to migrate down into the value chips more and more obviously.

a2jfreak

If the 844 in a 4P setup is that fast, how fast would an 846 in an 8P setup be?

Wipe your chins up off the floors, boys!

danball1976

Well, then what will it be when it reaches 2.4Ghz or higher?

Based on this:
x40 = 4+0 = 4 = 1.4 GHz
x42 = 4+2 = 6 = 1.6 GHz
x44 = 4+4 = 8 = 1.8 GHz
x46 = 4+6 = 10 = 2.0 GHz
x48 = 4+8 = 12 = 2.2 GHz (???)

Would it be?:
x410 = 4+10 = 14 = 2.4GHz?
x412 = 4+12 = 16 = 2.6Ghz?
x414 = 4+14 = 18 = 2.8GHz?
x416 = 4+16 = 20 = 3.0GHz?
x418 = 4+18 = 22 = 3.2GHz?

Or (I doubt this would work - it would be too confusing)
x50 = 5+0 = 5 = 2.4GHz
x52 = 5+2 = 7 = 2.7Ghz

Straight_Man

I do not think they have thought that far ahead for numbering yet. But, it would not surprise me to see them start numbering starting with a 2 GIG base for a very fast line.

Thrax

danball1976 said
Or (I doubt this would work - it would be too confusing)
x50 = 5+0 = 5 = 2.4GHz
x52 = 5+2 = 7 = 2.7Ghz

If their desire was consistency (Assuming my pattern is even right), 2.4 and 2.7GHz would in fact be their next steps.

a2jfreak

Hopefully it will be in my home when it reaches 2.4GHz and higher.

But also what will they do when the speed of the RAM used goes up? Opertons use PC2700, right? So what happens when PC3200 is used? Does the naming scheme change?

danball1976 said
Well, then what will it be when it reaches 2.4Ghz or higher?

Thrax

The Athlon64s are now expected to ship with DCDDR400 support. And from this user's point of view, AMD would be retarded to not do so. Being unable to place <font size=4><font color=red>Dual Channel PC3200 (DDR400) support!</font></font> on their packages would kill them in retail.

a2jfreak

I was pretty certain the A64 was going to utilize PC3200. I was asking about the Opteron. As far as I know there are no PC3200 ECC modules available.

Thrax said
The Athlon64s are now expected to ship with DCDDR400 support. And from this user's point of view, AMD would be retarded to not do so. Being unable to place <font size=4><font color=red>Dual Channel PC3200 (DDR400) support!</font></font> on their packages would kill them in retail.

danball1976

Thrax said


If their desire was consistency (Assuming my pattern is even right), 2.4 and 2.7GHz would in fact be their next steps.

I mainly meant 2.4 and 2.6, but I guess that
x50= 5+0 = 5= 2.5GHz
x52= 5+2 = 7= 2.7GHz
x54= 5+4 = 9= 2.9GHz
x56= 5+6 = 11= 3.1GHz
x58= 5+8 = 13= 3.3GHz
x60= 6+0 = 6= 3.6GHz
x62= 6+2 = 8= 3.8GHz
x64= 6+4 = 10= 4.0GHz
x66= 6+6 = 12= 4.2GHz
x68= 6+8 = 14= 4.4GHz
x70= 7+0 = 7= 4.7GHz and so on.

Thrax said
The Athlon64s are now expected to ship with DCDDR400 support. And from this user's point of view, AMD would be retarded to not do so. Being unable to place <font size=4 color=red>Dual Channel PC3200 (DDR400) support!</font> on their packages would kill them in retail.

Unfortunately, only buffered and ECC memory will work with it, and there arn't any out right now.

Thrax

Kingston Technology - System Memory
Info...

KTH-XW4100A/512 512MB PC3200 ECC MODULE New & Factory sealed.
(Part - KTH-XW4100A/512)
Price: $ 156
MinOrder: 1

Ship 1 : $8.45
Updated:7/21, 11:16 AM
$164.45 PCNation/Computer Warehouse Club
Info...

800-235-0909
847-400-3400 -- P.O.'s accepted

TheLostSwede

Thrax, i am afraid that Athlon 64 will only utilize one channel of DDR unfortunatly. Also only one Hypertransport channel.

"The upcoming AMD Opteron and AMD Athlon 64 processors are designed for different markets. For the server/workstation market, the AMD Opteron processor will undergo more stringent validation and reliability testing. Another difference will be in the number of HyperTransport links embedded on the chip. The AMD Athlon 64 processor will contain one HyperTransport link offering 6.4 GB/s data transfer while the AMD Opteron processor will offer three links. The processors will also contain different amounts of cache."

I also believe the first one`s also only will have 512kb cache.

September 23:rd is the release date for Athlon 64 for desktops and Athlon 64-M for lappys.

Thrax

Subsequent data has already pointed to dual channel DDR400 support using 940 pins and a 1mb l2 cache.

The 512 l2 cache is for the 754 pin A64s.

TheLostSwede

Isn´t it the 754 Athlon 64 that this is about?

Well, the thread is about the Opteron, but it has changed slightly to the 64 instead.

Thrax

I thread jacked it!
--

The 754 Athlon is going to be, essentially, the Duron of the Athlon64 line whilst the 939/940 Athlon64s will be the ones that all us l337 h4xx0rz want.

mmonnin

939 is the Athlon and the 940 is the Opteron correct?

Thrax

940 will supposedly be first run Athlon64s (The expensive ones), 939 will be intermediate, and 754 the cheapos.