AMD's Quad FX: Technically Quad Core
by Anand Lal Shimpi on November 30, 2006 1:16 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
The Processors
To complete the brand new Quad FX platform AMD is introducing three new processors today: the Athlon 64 FX-74, FX-72 and FX-70, running at 3.0GHz, 2.8GHz and 2.6GHz respectively. Each physical processor features two cores and a 1MB L2 cache per core, much like previous dual core FX processors, but what sets these CPUs apart from previous FX chips is that they are sold in bundles of two. So when you buy an Athlon 64 FX-74, you are actually buying two dual-core CPUs in a single box. It's not the most elegant way of getting four cores, but it gets the job done and AMD manages to do so at a competitive price. Note that these CPUs are effectively Opterons but with the memory controller configured to support un-buffered DDR2.
The Chip
Core 2 Duo (left) vs. Athlon 64 FX-74 (right), AMD's first LGA desktop CPU
AMD's pricing structure, including the new Quad FX processors, is as follows, with Intel's upper echelon CPUs thrown in for comparison:
| CPU | Clock Speed | L2 Cache | Price |
| AMD Athlon 64 FX-74* | 3.0GHz | 1MB per core | $999 |
| AMD Athlon 64 FX-72* | 2.8GHz | 1MB per core | $799 |
| AMD Athlon 64 FX-70* | 2.6GHz | 1MB per core | $599 |
| AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 | 2.8GHz | 1MB per core | $713 |
| AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+ | 2.6GHz | 1MB per core | $403 |
| Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 | 2.66GHz | 4MB per 2 cores | $999 |
| Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600** | 2.40GHz | 4MB per 2 cores | $851 |
| Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 | 2.93GHz | 4MB | $999 |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 | 2.66GHz | 4MB | $530 |
* Note: These processors come in pairs of two, pricing is for both CPUs
** Note: The Core 2 Quad Q6600 is an unreleased CPU and will be introduced in January 2007.
So for $999 you can either get two dual core 3.0GHz AMD processors, or a single quad core 2.66GHz Core 2 Extreme QX6700. Later we'll figure out which is indeed faster but it seems that AMD's pricing is at least competitive.
The Roadmap
When we first heard that Quad FX wasn't going to be Socket-AM2, we couldn't help but feel that AMD was introducing yet another Socket-940 into the mix. Is there really a future for Quad FX or is it nothing more than a stop-gap solution until native quad-core CPUs arrive?
The Socket
AMD has already committed to supporting two quad-core CPUs in current Quad FX platforms, so there's at least an upgrade path well into 2007, but what happens afterwards?
AMD's most recent roadmaps show continued support for Quad FX throughout 2007; in fact, the highest clock speed AMD CPUs will always be Socket-1207 parts (3.0GHz today and then 3.2GHz by Q2 '07). It looks like AMD is transitioning the Athlon 64 FX line to be exclusively for the Quad FX platform, leaving all other chips for AM2.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
88 Comments
View All Comments
BikeDude - Tuesday, December 5, 2006 - link
Could the reason be that 1GB per memory node is simply too little?On a configuration like this, you'll easily see one of the nodes with only 256MB or so left...
So, put in some more memory! At this point 32-bit XP will be limiting, even for 32-bit apps. (XP won't address more than 2^32 Bytes, some of this will be masked by PCI and PCIe devices, and additionally each process only has a 2GB address space for code&data unless you upgrade to 64-bit Windows) Also be aware that nVidia ForceWare 80.00 and newer lost PAE support. You'll experience crashes and non-working games if combined with a PAE aware 32-bit OS (such as Win2003). ForceWare 79.11 works fine though.
(BTW: MSFT added NUMA support in XP SP2)
Kiijibari - Saturday, December 2, 2006 - link
Hi Ananand,sounds credible, because there is some extra cache snooping traffic going on, anyways, please keep us posted if there is a new BIOS version available, and if it would "do" something :)
Windows schweduler differences between XP and VISTA would be interesting, too.
So far there were only Win32 XP vs. Win Vista64 comparisions, not possible to draw a fair conclusion with that data.
Thanks a lot
Kiijibari
mino - Friday, December 1, 2006 - link
One important question:Are those new FX-7x CPU identical or is there some differentiation employed ???
Kiijibari - Saturday, December 2, 2006 - link
identical to what ?If you meant Socket-F Opterons, then yes, they are identical, if the BIOS allows it, then normal Opterons should be able to run in 4x4 boards, too.
cheers
Kiijibari
mino - Sunday, December 3, 2006 - link
Thanks that info(if correct) pretty much clears the FUD.Griswold - Saturday, December 2, 2006 - link
How so? The 2P+ Opteron IMC wants buffered RAM, while these FX types do not. I dont think a simple BIOS hack can circumvent that.Kiijibari - Saturday, December 2, 2006 - link
*gasp*Du you really think AMD engineers, tests, validate, etc. a CPU for a niche market ??
There are maybe only a few thousand 4x4 CPUs, that are sold worldwide per month ... it would be economical ridiculous.
But if you dont know anything about business, maybe that will convince you:
http://www.aceshardware.com/forums/read_post.jsp?i...">http://www.aceshardware.com/forums/read_post.jsp?i...
cheers
Kiijibari
lollichop - Sunday, February 26, 2017 - link
All idiots talking about old CPUs here :D Fast forward 11 years, Ryzen will be out in a week's time.