AMD Pushes Back Athlon 64, Pushes Up New Athlon XP

[Logan2002]

Now that is a surpise.

[tony_j15]

Yeah, really. I'm guessing it will be within 300mhz of the 3ghz P4 and still be able to keep up with it. Like the 2000+ compared to a 2ghz.

[AllGamer]

is Obvious why

AMD 64 is waiting for Intel 64 to also be readily be avaible for normal people like us

so that gives a better fight, and proves AMD has a better CPU than intels crapo 64

[Karifan]

Wooooha!!!
Imagine a system built on a
Asus A7v8x with a Barton 3000++, 1 gig of DDR 400 and
the Nvidia FX ultra.
I have the board, I have the ram, waiting for the FX and the Barton to go on sale.
$600.00++ is a little steep for the Barton tho.

Anyone ready to project 3DMark se on this monster???

20000++???

[Beeblequix]

Now that is a surpise.

Yeah, I know. @ AMD

Seems like AMD changes their roadmaps at least 4 times/year. But if it makes them more money by delaying the Hammers and providing the consumer with Barton earlier then I'm happy.

I think my new AMD flavored rules-of-thumb are:
1) they make great processors
2) cool that baby
3) take their roadmaps with a grain of salt

ß

[Beeblequix]

...Anyone ready to project 3DMark se on this monster???

20000++???

On a stock system, not even. 3dMarks come primarily from GPU(orVPU), then CPU and memory.

On a stock system with your specs (Asus A7v8x with a Barton 3000++, 1 gig of DDR 400 and the Nvidia FX ultra) I'd estimate a score of ~15,800-16,200. That places it above a P4&R300 based rig by a marginal percentage.

Overclocking, well, ask NOHTO. He's already getting that.

ß

[BiG MiKeY]

Originally posted by Beeblequix



On a stock system, not even. 3dMarks come primarily from GPU(orVPU), then CPU and memory.

On a stock system with your specs (Asus A7v8x with a Barton 3000++, 1 gig of DDR 400 and the Nvidia FX ultra) I'd estimate a score of ~15,800-16,200. That places it above a P4&R300 based rig by a marginal percentage.

Overclocking, well, ask NOHTO. He's already getting that.

ß

im shure hell have oveer that.... especially when nvida optimizes the dtivers for the GFFX..... anyway i hope he has ear plugs

[BiG MiKeY]

Originally posted by AllGamer
is Obvious why

AMD 64 is waiting for Intel 64 to also be readily be avaible for normal people like us

so that gives a better fight, and proves AMD has a better CPU than intels crapo 64

yea but they lost on the chance to be the first 64 bit processor and the tons of money they woulda made..... im shure there is a technical reason for this...... maybe big blue has something to do wit this

[killer_teddy]

Does this mean prices for XP2100 or 2400 wont be dropping until later?

[AllGamer]

AMD was the first one that released the 64 bit CPU, at least a month before Intel 64

and AMD is still producing them

but at the moment only Large Companies with load of cash has access to them

so they are indeed way ahead of Intel 64

the delay is for the Consumers

i bet they are just making enough for X-mas big time release, instead of realease a bunch ever month, so this way they can get enough stock, and no suffer liike in the past that never had enough supplies of the first bunch of Athlons



so yup, definitely a good move

[BipolarBill]

Originally posted by Karifan
Imagine a system built on a
Asus A7v8x with a Barton 3000++, 1 gig of DDR 400 and
the Nvidia FX ultra.

Can you imagine going deaf from the fan noise? Huh? What did you say?

[Tor]

Just out of curiosity, where do "normal" people that buy the Athlon64 plan on getting apps that actually run in a 64bit environment? I know that there is a 64bit version of XP, but as far as I can tell it only ships with Itanium based workstations. I haven't been able to find a re-seller that offers XP64, and I imagine that if I did the price would be outrageous! If you just use a normal XP or below version of windows then what? You can't run 64bit apps, (which really don't exist for home consumors) in a 32bit OS. If there really was a desktop market for 64bit processors don't you think that Intel would be all over it? In the end, its going to be a "regular" processor with 1Meg L2. If it ever gets released. Just kind of curious, because with HT Intel already has compilers out to the software development community to optimize their programs with HT. Maybe XP64 will be available by then for home users and some developers will make 64bit apps that are of use to home users? Or maybe it'll just be an over-hyped processor?

Tor

[Tor]

Originally posted by AllGamer
AMD was the first one that released the 64 bit CPU, at least a month before Intel 64

What processor would this be? I searched AMDs website and couldn't find any reference to a 64bit processor. Of course it would help if they had a search engine on their site.

Tor

[BipolarBill]

That's our All Gamer for you - all games and no brains. There is still no AMD 64-bit CPU. Itanium, though flawed, has been available for about two years.

[causticVapor]

Well, all this anticipation a few months ago and now the processors are scheduled to be a year late.

I really hope hammer shows its performance well in comparison to a 3.4-4.0GHz Pentium 4 which it will be rivaling then.