AOA Forums AOA Forums AOA Forums Folding For Team 45 AOA Files Home Front Page Become an AOA Subscriber! UserCP Calendar Memberlist FAQ Search Forum Home


Go Back   AOA Forums > Hardware > AMD Motherboards & CPUs

AMD Motherboards & CPUs Questions or comments on AMD products?


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 23rd February, 2006, 06:39 PM
Member/Contributor/Resident Crystal Ball
 
Join Date: March 2004
Posts: 7,451

AMD CPU's in trouble? RMA's times tell the truth

Sonn to come upon us is a new platform form AMD. Although this may be news to some, to others this has been a long-time coming.

As far back as early March last year, I can clearly recall complaints from OEMs and programmer's alike on the lack of bandwidth on current computing platforms, and I heard concerns expressed on what possibilities future tech may bring, or not bring, to the next generation of computing.

Although the average user would have little knowledge of such taking place, the outbreak of higher-than-supported speeds of ram for both the Intel and AMD platforms tells a large tale as to what consumers and manufacturers themselves are demanding.

To further bolster this line of thought, the current deciphering of AMD K8 cpu steppings, compared with results obtained from top overclockers world-wide with these same cpu's, It seems AMD has been releasing new memory controllers, almost to the tune of one every 2 months. I can only ask myself...why?

Recently in the news we have heard of the SKT AM2 cores, soon to be released, being delayed just because of such an issue...an issue with memory control. Is there a link?

According to current sources, the turn around time for an AMD FX-60 CPU is 1 month. the same sources cite that this is due to either low yeilds, or a early revision of the core. In follow-up to this, it has been found that according to the cpu steppings and week codes on current FX60's has gone back to early memory controllers from the Sandiego line...so what happened to the newer cores?

When you factor in the delayed release of AM2 from march/april to June 6th, 2006, we can get a clearer picture or at least i think so.

But the question remains...with the expected launch @ 90nm, are these cores getting pulled for an upcoming release, or plain and simple, did AMD screw up?
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 23rd February, 2006, 07:47 PM
Chief Systems Administrator
 
Join Date: September 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 13,075

How do you determine the memory controller from the stepping and week code?
__________________
Any views, thoughts and opinions are entirely my own. They don't necessarily represent those of my employer (BlackBerry).
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 23rd February, 2006, 08:02 PM
Member/Contributor/Resident Crystal Ball
 
Join Date: March 2004
Posts: 7,451

I posted this in a thread earlier.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cadaveca
Example: CABNE

1st letter: "production/release code"
Pre-production or early samples have an "A" here where final production batches will be a "C" (for current chips). Some may recall that Venice samples where seen in the wild as "ABBLE" and current production runs are "LBBLE". While complete understanding of this is unknown at this time, it is clear that this has something to do with early samples.

2nd letter: "core cache code"
A = single core, 1MB
B = single core, 512KB
C = dual core, 1MB (each)
D = dual core, 512MB (each)

Note: 'Toledo' cores (1MB) with half the cache disabled will still be coded as "C". Therefore, you can see earlie 4600+ samples as ACXXX with only 512KB per core enabled.

3rd and 4th letters/numbers: "memory controller revision"
Works like a counter using all letter of the alphabet and digits 1-9. 3rd letter increments when running though all available 'steppings' as noted by the 4th letter.

FX-55: XXA2X
FX-57: XXBNX
FX-57 (new stepping)/FX-60: XXB2X
3700+ (new stepping): XXB3X
...
and so on...

5th letter: "revision code"
C = rev C (as in CG Clawhammers)
D = rev D (as in D0 for CBBID chips....)
E = rev E (as in the rev E 'San Diego' core)
Newest FX-60's are CCBHE, which was on the Sandiego core first.
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 1st March, 2006, 12:14 AM
madcatmk3's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: August 2005
Location: New York, United States of America
Posts: 2,213

thats odd, but as fx-60's seem to have the same preformance I think they might just of figured out a way to make a cheaper memeory contoller. The san diego thing is probly due to them over complexing the FX mem contoller.
__________________
Alienware
3.2 Ghz
1 GB ram
4-4-4-12
160GB
256 MB 6800GT 413/1102
Main Rig
AMD 4000+ 2772 MHz w/ DFI SLI DR
2GB Corsair XMS (with LED's of course)@ 2.5-3-2-11 @ 240MHz
250GB HDD SATA2
Xfi-64MB X-Ram
WMCE
7800GTX OC-516(+40Mhz Delta clock)/1300
AOA Team fah
"The motherboard installation section essentially said "refer to motherboard manual for installation instructions". My motherboard manual of course said "refer to case manual for further installation instructions"."
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 1st March, 2006, 01:34 AM
Member/Contributor/Resident Crystal Ball
 
Join Date: March 2004
Posts: 7,451

The part you have missed in this is that the current FX60 memory controller does not like cold(lower than -10), wereas the replacement one does.


Now, the way to overcome this, in the past, was a higher multi, and lower HTT speed, but at the same time, this affects memory speed. However, it seems the original FX-60 controller is capable of running the "unsupported" speeds of DDR433, 466, and 500 as well as a lower HTT, to deal with the "coldbug".(higher multi, lower FSB, high memspeed) But the old Sandiego controller is not(need hihgh HTT at the same time as high memspeed).

So to me, it seems that they have taken a step back, in order to gain stability.
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 1st March, 2006, 02:19 AM
SteveI's Avatar
AOA Staff
Tetris Champion
 
Join Date: September 2001
Location: NJ
Posts: 6,971

I don't believe the hype... The preview I read about is silly. Running DDR2 at high speed is not going to give any better performance than DDR. The benchmarks were worse, not because of issues with the memory controller on board the CPU... The controller was still limited to 200mhz dual channel. The memory could be running 200Ghz and it still won't be any faster... but wait, DDR2 was worse than current DDR systems? DUH!!! of course, when it is running CAS4!

DDR2 running high speeds is highly deceptive. The higher speed only means something if the memory controller is running synchronously.... secondly, ridiculously high latency memory can't be good for performance.
__________________
AOA Team fah
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 1st March, 2006, 02:43 AM
madcatmk3's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: August 2005
Location: New York, United States of America
Posts: 2,213

ya I'm on my alienware and I see a lot more exiting lag then ym reg system, and the rams defective on that.
__________________
Alienware
3.2 Ghz
1 GB ram
4-4-4-12
160GB
256 MB 6800GT 413/1102
Main Rig
AMD 4000+ 2772 MHz w/ DFI SLI DR
2GB Corsair XMS (with LED's of course)@ 2.5-3-2-11 @ 240MHz
250GB HDD SATA2
Xfi-64MB X-Ram
WMCE
7800GTX OC-516(+40Mhz Delta clock)/1300
AOA Team fah
"The motherboard installation section essentially said "refer to motherboard manual for installation instructions". My motherboard manual of course said "refer to case manual for further installation instructions"."
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 1st March, 2006, 04:57 AM
Member/Contributor/Resident Crystal Ball
 
Join Date: March 2004
Posts: 7,451

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveI
DDR2 running high speeds is highly deceptive. The higher speed only means something if the memory controller is running synchronously.... secondly, ridiculously high latency memory can't be good for performance.

You are right, however, also be aware that as you increase memory speed, you can easily increase HTT...which interacts with all other systems parts.


Anyway, all the talk about effectiveness of the DDR2 platform over DDR is moot...Current incarnations of DDR2 memory don't have an on-die controller, nor do they have an onboard PCI-e interface(1207 pins, anyone?), so any comparison you can draw are not realistic given the inplementation.

The major difference is that DDR2 can be quad-pumped, rather than the dual we have now. but to keep up with DDR, DDR2 must run @ 1000mhz, @ CAS 3 or 4.


But i can run DDR on any DDR2 platform, should i so desire. there are socket-adapters.





the truth.


the value of DDR2 will greatly increase when the new socket begins. As fab's aren't even really producing alot of DDR2 currently, demand may cause that price to go higher. But i have been saying that for quite some time.

think about my earlier post today...companies need ways to create new sources of income. playing the memory market sounded like a good idea in the past, and samsung paid for it, as I had said they would. I wonder who it will be this time, as it seems it's about to fall the same way again...except this time they got it barely this side of legal, as the key player that may make or break this deal is the end consumer...

And guess what folks...you and I ain't the end consumer. We make up for abt 11% of the total pc revenue currently. that aint alot. whatever the IT companies decide to go with, we get stuck with, plain and simple. With choices as limited as they are, when it comes to computing platforms, there can be no other way. The move to DDR2 is not one for computing's sake, but for someone's(and alot of families for the employyes that work @ these companies) wallet.
__________________

Last edited by cadaveca; 1st March, 2006 at 05:03 AM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
will we ever know the truth? surlyjoe Random Nonsense! 8 8th September, 2005 01:11 PM
AMD RMA's dod AMD Motherboards & CPUs 0 7th January, 2003 12:47 PM
The truth about VGA ramsinks ZigZagZeppelin Graphics and Sound cards; Speakers and other Peripherals 3 14th October, 2002 09:54 PM
The Truth Shall Set You Free! mookydooky Mookydooky's Just for laughs! 0 14th August, 2002 02:44 AM
The truth about F.R.I.E.N.D.S Aphex Random Nonsense! 8 15th January, 2002 01:35 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:30 PM.


Copyright ©2001 - 2010, AOA Forums
Don't Click Here Don't Click Here Either

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0