Slashdot Log In
Ars Evaluates Core 2 Duo in Latest System Guide
Posted by
Zonk
on Fri Aug 25, 2006 04:08 PM
from the can-i-have-a-god-box-please dept.
from the can-i-have-a-god-box-please dept.
RevDobbs writes "I always take a peek at the Ars Technica System Guides before white-boxing my next PC. Well, today I hit the site and see that they recently published their first post-Core 2 Duo System Guide." From the article: "The new Intel Core 2 Duo processors bring a swift change to the Hot Rod, making the lifespan of Socket AM2 very brief in the Hot Rod. Performance from the Core 2 Duo (aka, Conroe) appears to be excellent in all regards, from pure performance to heat output. Overclocking prospects also look excellent, with an overclocked Core 2 Duo being an amazingly fast chip for the money."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Thoughts from a singulatarian (Score:3, Interesting)
And I'm still waiting for an architecture change. How about finally retiring the byte as a base logical unit? In return, just use the bit, or whatever word length the machine is.
Re:Thoughts from a singulatarian (Score:4, Funny)
Yeay! do away with the byte!
Also, i can't wait until we've got clockless quantum holographic computers booting off of non-volatile ramdisks and cooled by eskimo flatulence ...
By the way, your hover car is getting towed.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Dude, you're getting a Smell!
Re:PDP8 (Score:4, Interesting)
And for your information: Processors like the x86 series are not byte addressable. They usually load a cacheline and the processor fetches the byte you want.
So instead of doing
movb (%rax),%bl
You'd have to do
movq (%rax),%rbx
andq $255,%rbx
Worse yet, if you want the [say] 5th byte of a 64-bit word...
movq (%rax),%rbx
shrq $40,%rbx
andq $255,%rbx
That's clearly a winning idea!
Tom
Parent
a winning idea (Score:2)
movb (%rax),%bl
You'd have to do
movq (%rax),%rbx
andq $255,%rbx
Worse yet, if you want the [say] 5th byte of a 64-bit word...
movq (%rax),%rbx
shrq $40,%rbx
andq $255,%rbx
That's clearly a winning idea!
Uhm
Re: (Score:2)
Tom
Re:Thoughts from a singulatarian (Score:4, Interesting)
And the move from K7 -> K8 brought about 90nm SOI which greatly reduced power and heat issues. A similarly clocked K8 would easily run 10-15C cooler than a K7 at idle.
AMD has plans to move to 65nm and 45nm. I won't say when [cuz that's secret and frankly I don't remember anyways]. They're just not rolling out a completely new core every other month to avoid wasting time supporting really short lived products.
Conroe seems like a decent design. Until I build a box with one I can't really say. If all the hype is true though it's a good competitor to AMD K8, not a replacement, certainly in a lot of server oriented computing tasks.
Tom
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Intel is already on 65nm. The last I read about AMD's move to 65nm on the tech sites was that it was next year, by the time Intel will already be moving to 45nm. AMD is officially a generation behind in that department.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Frankly, even given where I work I'm happy that Intel is turning out good [or at least better] hardware. We all win when technology is getting neatoer.
Tom
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm reading rumor and news leaks that say more along the lines of Q4/2006 for the 65nm production. The new Opteron socket F CPUs are due out soon and I'm not sure whether they're going to be 90nm or 65nm. And that could slip until 1Q/2007 or later of course. (I confess that I mostly sca
Re: (Score:2)
This has already happened. The base logical unit on conroe is the 64bit longword. You can access bits and bytes (and 32bits) within that of course, since that's a necessity for various kinds of programs.
Energy Issues (Score:2, Insightful)
Wait a minute! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
... or he knows the article's format :-)
I'm gettin' me one of those 'God' boxes (Score:1, Funny)
Jesus Christ, under what circumstance would you build a desktop machine that powerful and use linux?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Seems like, if you are building a god box... you simply want the very best.
The real question is: which Linux.
;-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
God Box (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Any other Motherboard Suggestions (Score:1)
This is what's bothering me. (Score:5, Informative)
Either they don't support DDR2800 (anything less is a waste), or they don't have SLI, or they're missing amenities like firewire or decent onboard sound.
A "budget" Conroe system is difficult to spec since unless you go DDR2800 you aren't going to have much over a DDR400/DDR500-based AMD K8 system (and I'm not talking AM2, but the same logic applies). Memory bandwidth is a bottleneck for performance and usability. Despite Conroe's advances in CPU power, most situations where you wait for the computer are not CPU bound (unless you are heavy into movie/music decoding/compression). An bus-overclocked low power K8 (like the Opteron Denmark) can still beat a Conroe system in memory throughput.
DDR2800 brings this to parity but then you are not talking about a cheap system anymore; it's everything EXCEPT for the CPU that costs too much.
Hopefully in the next few months we'll see price drops in DDR2 memory and more competetion in the Core-2 Duo compatible motherboards. This should make them more affordable and help to shake out the gold implementations.
Parent
you're out of touch (Score:2)
Your idea of "decent" in motherboards is crazy. You are talking a very high spec board here. These kind of boards will cost a lot, for any platform. I looked on Newegg, there are only two Conroe boards that cost over $250, and each includes a WiFi interface with built in access point! Similar boards to these for AM2 cost $200, so the difference isn't all that much anyway.
go ahead and say it... (Score:2)
If you want to compare across brands, go ahead. We'll never settle that argument because you'll say that the comparisons I make aren't proper because the cheaper boards I suggest aren't stable but the cheaper ones you suggest are. I've been there before, done that argument.
I wouldn't buy an ASRock eit
Re: (Score:2)
*** Make sure if you are ordering the Intel D975XBX that it has a BIOS revision of at least 204. *** I've read th
Re: (Score:2)
$265 USD -> $295 CDN
Four SATA's w/ raid, ability to add four more SATA's easily.
Also, you bought a 3800+ X2, you obviously weren't paying attention. It gets beat by the 3800+ 64 in some cases.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Fanless design, 2 x16 PCI Xpress slots for SLI, 8 phase power, 2 SATA RAID controllers, dual gig-Ethernet, firewire etc.
Although I've heard some issues, I believe with outdated BIOS and the Conroe chips. I guess I'll see when it comes in.
I thought that was a misprint. (Score:2)
But apparently the NForce MCPs were quite readily converted into an SPP and are giving the stock Intel chipsets a run for their money (while being essentially compatible with your AMD64 Nforce drivers).
Your idea sounds pretty good. I'd probably aim for a 6300 or 6400 though, I hear they can hit 2.8, 3GHz without a voltage increase or water cooling. And while I'm too young to have experienced the Celeron
Did the prices go up? (Score:2)
I seem to remember the Budget Box at $600, the Hot rod $1300, and the God box costing unholy amounts of money.
Otherwise, we all knew that the core2 duo would get the nod: Low Power, fast, x86x64. (does the last one sound like an old memory chip?)
$.02
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, prices went up when building your own.
Me, the local store is selling a AMD 64 X2 w. 2GB RAM AMD, dual layer DVD, 300GB HD, video card with digital and analog outputs with a 19" wide screen flat panel. As far as I can tell, the one I am looking at has workable Linux drivers for all the devices and costs $1000 CDN.
Yes, I used to build, in fact built about 12 systems over the years. You can build them better than you can buy, but not cheaper. It does not seem like you can build them cheaper than you
Re: (Score:2)
Semi-OT Something I've always wondered about... (Score:4, Insightful)
And btw, I can't believe they put only 8gigs on the highest-end box, I would think 16 would be the bare minimum, heck, I'm thinking of going to 4 gigs on my pedestrian x2-4800, you'd think that something of that calibre would be a bit better equipped.
Re:Semi-OT Something I've always wondered about... (Score:4, Informative)
I sorta remember that too, so I went and looked. Socket 939 came out in June 2004 (or thereabouts). This could be part of the downside of having a built-in memory controller. Since DDR reached the end of it's reach (PC3200 seeming to be the fastest commonly available) and DDR2 commonly available, they decided to go with a new pin-out so that you couldn't mistakenly mix/match the wrong CPU with the wrong memory. Less confusion for the customer.
At least, I think that's why the pin-out was changed... (according to the AMD FAQ it was).
What AMD has said at this time is that the new AM3 chips (which support DDR3) will be compatible with AM2 and AM3 motherboards. So you can put an AM3 chip into an older AM2 motherboard, but not the other way 'round. We'll see if that holds true...
Parent
Losing respect for Ars... (Score:2, Interesting)
No, actually, to use the full power of the God Box requires something with fewer root exploits and journaling file systems...
NTFS (Score:2)
No, actually, to use the full power of the God Box requires something with fewer root exploits and journaling file systems...
Last time I checked, it was called NTFS, and it predates ext3 by almost a decade (1993 versus 2001.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:NTFS (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=101670 [microsoft.com]
The idea is it can rollback partially completed transactions and recover from bad shutdowns. Also it can do it quickly without searching the whole filesystem for inconsistencies. That's the whole point to NTFS.
Re: (Score:2)
I will never browse their site again from my GNU server, no sir! It's dead to me.
Two things (Score:5, Insightful)
2. The push to the socket AM2 architecture was to enable DDR2 support for AMD chips. Socket 939 could not support the faster memory that is hitting the market now, such as the DDR2 800Mhz (cheaper) or the brutal DDR2 1066Mhz (save your pennies).
AMD has stated that the AM2 platform motherboards will be able to support their next generation of chips. So if you are like me and made the plunge, your mobo won't be obsolete for a good long time.
snake
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Soundcard (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Irrational AMD fanboys foaming at the mouth (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Irrational AMD fanboys foaming at the mouth (Score:5, Insightful)
There is no dal Intel has that AMD wouldn't take in a second.
Evil...sheesh, how easy is someones life when there evil is a company trying to get exlusive contract.
And don't forget two rules:
The consumer rules
The 99% of user do NOT care what cpu they use, so it makes no sense to create a line of machine for more then one processor company.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If Intel doesn't deliver, then they could go with AMD and pay a smaller cost for change over then two lines.
Intel knows if they piss off a customer, they will loose it. So there is incentive for intel to play well with its customer.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a pretty fucking stupid way of deciding whether or not *intel* is evil...
You've obviously already made your conclusion and have no interest in changing your mind. Why bother pretending otherwise w