holy smokes! that dual athlon is FAST

[SoopaStar]

Don't know if any of you have seen this article yet, but the dual athlon is smoking!
http://www.2cpu.com/tyan_dual_2ghz.html

Paul

[SiteCharts.com]

Haha. Nice try.
Too bad that there aren't any 1.99 GHz Athlons around!

[NDC]

http://www.sysopt.com/forum/biggrin.gif

[SoopaStar]

I don't think its a joke. I got the link fromt eh registier. AMD displayed their dual tyan mobo at cebit this year and I have seen pics from a japanese market with some.

Paul

[AuraEdge]

Thier supposta be some preproduction Palaminos on a preproduction Dually Tyan board. The register usually isnt that legit, since its a running rumor mill, but 2CPU, and other sites that link it are right on the dot 99% of the time.

Bring out the 760MP already! Quit taunting us!

[djurom]

Could that be maybe overclocked system so it posts that speed?

[jaida]

that is a tough one it very well could be legit and it could not.

The japanese have their hands on such new technologies before we even hear about them. This person most likely has a dual athlon board but whether he can hit that speed with two I dont know.

The reason I have doubts instead of calling this a fib is because of the device i've heard of that allows you to adjust cpu fsb without effecting your periphials etc. because you can alter the speed of them also.

I forget the name of it but it does exist.

[Kuasimodem]

I read the article, and they are preproduction Palominos! I wonder how well they will overclock?

(that will get some minds churning!!)

[Long Haired Hippie Phreek]

WOW! I can't wait...if thunderbirds are running at 2gh now, what are the hammers gonna be running at in a few months? Just think...twin hammers, geforce3, 1gb..[chokes on druel]

[shady]

i think it is true...look
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=463

[shady]

why do u think it took so long for manufacturers to come up with dual athlon boards???

[Mntsnow]

Could be sweet but OUCH
the Thunder K7 is estimated to enter the retail market for around 118,000 Yen, or about $950 USD.

At that kind of price Intel will still rule the Dually market

[Joel Kleppinger]

Keep in mind this is Tyan. Don't expect an overclocking friendly board out of them.
(in case you're curious)

[welsh wizard]

I think you will find AMD has only just decided they want to get serious about the higher market and Biz systems, before the Athlon AMD were a poor mans alternative, but now the way they are Intel could end up the Poor mans CPU http://www.sysopt.com/forum/wink.gif
WW

[NDC]

Yep. Tyan has a reputation for stability when it comes to Dual Mainboards, not overclockability.....

[Futants]

Here we go again. Everyone talking about dual processors. I am by no means some computer guy that knows everything. In fact I know very little. However I do know how to do the math on products. Everyone always says how fast the dual PC's are. Well maybe you people could explain as to why the dual processor machines are never the fastest in the Mhz's. IE: The powerMac G4, dual 533Mhz instead of a dual 733? And why is a dual 533 $300.00 less than a single 633 machine which also has a bigger hard drive? It dosen't make sence. Everyone needs to get off the dual wave and realise that somewhere aroud 600-800 Mhz Pc's are almost as fast as the new P4 1.5Ghz. I run a P3 450 and my friend just got a P4 from Dell. Hate to tell ya but you can't notice much difference. One thing I am sure of is that it certanly is not 3 times as fast! Everyone needs to stop buying the latest thing out there so that the companies like Intel, AMD and maybe others will come up with a whole new processor. If everyone keeps upgrading to the overpriced hardware as soon as it comes out they will not put efforts into revamping the industry. There are some good theories out there such as a PC that uses lasers and 3D holograms to store info. As it is now the processors have reached their limit in technology! But if these companies keep their hands in your pockets they wont look elsewhere for speed. I have a buddy that works with intel from time to time and the people he knows say that the P4 was thrown out there just to keep AMD behind in the overestimated clock speed arena. Their next processor will be something nobody has ever seen before. I have no way to prove what I just said but that is what I was told. I hope I have not offended anyone, just stating what I believe and what I was told.

[NDC]

I use several PC dual systems....

1) Dual P3 @ 900Mhz, 1GB PC-133 RAM, SCSI Ultra 160 10,000rpm....


2) Dual P3 @ 550Mhz, 768MB PC-100 RAM, SCSI Ultra 160 10,00rpm....


3) Dual G4 @ 533Mhz, 768MB RAM, IDE UMDA-66, 7,200rpm.


I also have several uni-processor systems and I couldn't be happier using a uni-processor system over my dual processor systems. When it comes to multi-tasking & SMP enabled applications and you're used to using a SMP system, you could never go back to a uni-processor system again. I guess you would actually have to sit down and use one to notice the difference. Until then, it's very hard to judge the performance between the two by opinions of others. Just stated what I believe and is a fact... http://www.sysopt.com/forum/wink.gif

As for the math you did on the pricing of MACs, I think there is quite a difference between the Dual 533 and the Single 733, spec wise and processor wise as you can see below...



$2,499.00
Dual 533MHz (Additional ???? for the 733Mhz dual... Who knows how much?)
PowerPC G4
1MB L2 cache (This processor doesn't have L3 cache)
128MB SDRAM memory (Add $200 for additional for 256MB)
40GB Ultra ATA hard drive (Add $100 additional for 60GB)
CD-RW Drive
NVIDIA GeForce2 MX
Gigabit Ethernet
56K internal modem


$2,999.00
733MHz
PowerPC G4
256K L2 & 1MB L3
256MB SDRAM memory
60GB Ultra ATA hard drive
CD-RW drive
NVIDIA GeForce2 MX
Gigabit Ethernet
56K internal modem




I have a good feeling the price comparison between the 533 and the 733 is quite big. Although it's only 200Mhz in difference, it's very hard to determine the reason for the pricing.

Look at the price difference between P4 1.3Ghz & P4 1.5Ghz! Only 200Mhz difference in clock speed, but the price difference is $149!!!! 1.3Ghz is $243 while the 1.5Ghz is $435 for the extra 200Mhz. How could some one explain the price difference in this case? I think only Intel can explain this one. hehehe



[This message has been edited by NDC (edited 04-21-2001).]

[Hellmund]

Your friend probably got one of those Dell P4's with the M64 vid card.In that case you wouldn't notice too much of a difference in 3d acceleration area,run seti,RC5 or other processor intensive tasks and then you will see a difference.

As for forcing intel/amd to create new processors,they actually already have,the P4 for instance is not a Re-vamped PIII.I take it though your actually trying to refer to something like DNA computer or Quantum computers.Which are still a while off.Sure it seems like a good idea to wait for something like that and not buy anything until they put all their support into it, but I bet you will find that they will adapt and use technology the got by refining and perfecting current processor technology. Ever heard the expression "make the best of what you got".Well that's what Amd/Intel are doing each time they release higher clocked versions of their processor.Anyway those are my thoughts and I hope I don't offend anyone.

[SiteCharts.com]

To get back to the topic:
Yes I believe there are the first Dual-Athlon-Test-Boards out there.
NO, I don't think that benchmark gives the real performance of those systems.
I think this benchmark was 1. painted (PS does wonders) 2. got mixed up because it wasn't build to test Dual-AMD-CPU's 3. something else.

[SoopaStar]

Futants,
Maybe you should do some research before posting garbage like that. No offense (although it probably will offend), but a dual system is NOT the same as a processor that is twice as fast. Its not even used for the same purpose.
If your theory was right, then those companies spending money on 4-way and 8-way systems are wasting money..right? no. It has to do with threads and CPU load balancing.

Paul

[Joel Kleppinger]

We've been through this before.

1 MHz CPU x 2 CPUs is NEVER NEVER NEVER as good (in true performance) as 2 MHz CPU x 1 CPU. Come on people.

The reason for this is the extra overhead it takes to keep 2 CPUs synchronized. It doesn't matter whether you've multithreaded your app up the wazoo... it still will be faster (at least slightly) on a system with a single CPU which is as fast as the combined MHz of a dual CPU system. I will produce benchmarks if necessary. (Pick your benchmark... I don't care.. even RC5, the ultimate in threading will be slightly faster on the single CPU system). Read the Dual CPU article here on SysOpt. http://www.sysopt.com/articles/multiproc/index.html

The reason why multi-CPU systems exist is really quite simple. There's no such thing as a 10 GHz CPU. Since there isn't, if you can band together 2 or more CPUs, you can acheive speeds you couldn't with only one CPU... because there aren't CPUs that fast.

Also keep in mind I'm talking about comparing only within a single CPU architecture. Obviously comparing a Dual P3 700 system with a P4 1.4 GHz system the same way is totally bogus. Don't waste my time.... Let's get this right folks.

Yeah, I know you love dual, NDC, but the facts are the facts. I didn't make them -- I only report them. If you like dualies so much, I would wonder whether it wasn't just because the quality of the motherboards is generally better... having nothing to do with the actual CPU performance... because THAT is not the case (although, obviously, there isn't a P3 1.8 GHz, so your dual 900 system is certainly going to kick the tail of any single CPU system, assuming multi-threaded applications).

[This message has been edited by Joel Kleppinger (edited 04-22-2001).]