THG Looks at ClawHammer Mobo 204
An anonymous reader writes "Tom's Hardware Guide managed to get a first look at the new Socket 754 ClawHammer motherboard. While they don't provide the benchmarks that you might be looking for, they do an excellent job and providing pictures and an overview of the ClawHammer Platform."
isnt there a saying... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:isnt there a saying... (Score:1)
tubes (Score:4, Interesting)
I love the old-timey tubes used for the sound. I wonder how reliable these will be. I'm old enough to remeber having to replace tubes in our old tv back in the day.
Which tubes are these?? (Score:3, Informative)
Since six channels are being amplified (5.1) and three tubes are present, I'm assuming they're using three double-triodes in Class A configuration. Maybe 12AX7s? [mclink.it] Note to AOpen: people care about this kind of thing.
Re:Which tubes are these?? (Score:3, Interesting)
I suppose they are playing to the home theater market, but I couldn't give a damn personally whether they are using double triodes or anything else. The Altec Lansing speakers I have hooked to my computer are sufficient for basic sound, but they aren't going to come close to filling a room like a real stereo system would. Besides, since when do you need a full amp instead of just a preamp in your computer.
Re:Which tubes are these?? (Score:2, Informative)
Almost certainly 12ax7s... (Score:2, Informative)
12ax7s would certainly make sense, as they're still in production in several places (Russia, China, Yugoslavia) and thus relatively cheap. They're also widely used in preamps of guitar amplifiers, so you can find them at your local Guitar Center...
The EF86 [duncanamps.co.uk] was popular for hi-fi preamp applications like this in the '50s and '60s because they had lots of clean headroom, but they're not used as much any more because the ones still in production have a nasty habit of being microphonic. You'd also need twice as many of them, since they're a single pentode in roughly the same bottle as a 12ax7.
Re:Which tubes are these?? (Score:2)
At least they're smart enough (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:At least they're smart enough (Score:2)
Re:At least they're smart enough (Score:1)
Re:At least they're smart enough (Score:4, Informative)
Re:At least they're smart enough (Score:2)
Actually, there isn't all that much of a "northbridge" in most of today's chipsets either. Ironically enough, these days the "southbridge" is really more of a northbridge than the northbridge is.
The reason for all of this is that the "bridge" terminology is all defined with regards to the PCI bus. The northbridge is sort of where the PCI bus starts and where it has a bridge to the host controller. The southbridge is hanging off the other end of the PCI bus and provides a bridge to a different bus (ie the ISA bus).
Now though, the layout of the chipsets is quite different, and we have the PCI bus starting off of the I/O chip (ie the ICH in Intel chipsets, or the MCP in nVidia chipsets). These chips than connect using another interconnect (Intel's Accerlated Hub Architecture, Hypertransport, V-Link, etc.) to a memory controller, AGP and processor bus chip (Intel's MCH, nVidia's IGP).
With the Hammer, they stretch the separation a little bit more by moving the memory controller onto the processor itself.
Ohh, and as for the original poster, active cooling is a BAD thing IMO. Those little fans are quite possibly the least reliable part of an entire PC. If at all possible, they should be avoided from a reliability standpoint. Mind you, if you're overclocking, reliability is probably not your #1 concern. As for me though, give me a nice big passive heatsink anyday.
Too bad that's really a dumb move. (Score:5, Interesting)
How many active-cooling north bridge motherboards have you owned? I owned one. Its north bridge fan failed after only 3 months of constant use. Compared to every other motherboard I own, none of which require a fan (most don't even require a heatsink, and they power 1Ghz systems!), it was a terrible mistake purchase. I've since replaced it with a motherboard bought specifically because its north brigde used passive cooling. It's given no problems in the year+ of service it's given.
Re:At least they're smart enough (Score:5, Insightful)
Most people don't want to OC. I've done it before and I won't do it again - the added speed isn't worth the instability. Especially if you're planning to keep using the computer for several years.
As others have said, adding yet another fan is a detriment for normal use. It's another mechanical part that will fail - especially since most of the bundled fans are as cheap as they can afford to keep prices down.
One of my buying criteria on a motherboard is passive cooling for the north bridge. I don't need the active cooling and I really don't need the added noise.
Re:At least they're smart enough (Score:1)
I just want a computer that I can't hear. Is that really too much to ask?
Re:At least they're smart enough (Score:1)
I can't stand the fact that about 9 months into the life of my computer (still under warranty, but old enough to have the reciept lost) my fan is failing.
I can find every size of CPU fan imaginable, but no one carries these tiny littel buggers. I tried calling ASUS, just to ask them where I might be able to order, and that is no help. They don't answer their phone messages or email ever.
Overclocking 101 (Score:3, Informative)
I started long before any of this was trendy, with an AMD 386SX/33 which I always ran at 40. I've now got 300 and 333MHz K6-2s, each running at 350. And soon, I'll add an unlocked Athlon XP to the mix. These machines don't crash. Ever.
It's trivial, and simple: Don't go to far. Don't up the voltage beyond manufacturer specification for the speed you're trying to achieve. If anything seems at all funny about the scenario, back down a notch and try again - don't try to "fix" it with fans and peltiers and waterblocks. Once you've found a speed that seems to work, it might not be a bad idea to step it down another notch to help with future operating variables.
The next step is rather simple: Leave it the fuck alone. You've already had all of the overclocking joy that your particular hardware combination will yield. Enjoy your pennies saved and be done with it.
CPUs are rated in the factory using similar methods. They all come off of the same line, and are tested at a high-ish clock speed. If a core fails a test at a given speed, it is retested at consecutively lower speeds until it passes. The resultant number is stamped on the package and/or burned into the multiplier.
In theory, anyway. The reality lately is that toward the end of a given core's life, there's a point at which lower speed chips simply aren't produced anymore, while there is still market demand for them. So, there's a lot of lower-cost, factory-underclocked chips on the shelf, so that AMD and Intel can stay competitive with eachother in the mid-to-low end markets.
This is evident from the price structure of commodity OEM CPUs. When there are 3 or 4 mid-range speeds are within a few dollars of eachother, they're quite likely to be exactly the same part, and may even be from the same batch.
It is inarguable that running some of these chips at faster-than-marked speeds is not in any way overclocking.
And, at any rate, it's heat that destroys CPUs, not clock speeds that are within the design parameters of the core. For this conservative approach to overclocking, added heat very nearly at non-issue status.
Therefore, I strongly suspect that my machines will last forever, as far as I'm concerned, just like every solid state device should (obvious exceptions for dried-up capacitors and flaming power supplies may apply), and that they will always have an extra month or two of useful life in them before they're deemed too slow for the tasks at hand -- for free.
Just add a larger heatsink to the northbridge, duh (Score:2)
I have a heavily overclocked abit mobo running at a bus of 152mhz, rock solid. The processor is watercooled, but the chipset isn't. All I did was take off the joke heatsink it comes with and do some mods.
If you want to cure northbridge woes forever, you need:
- A athlon heat sink (I used a volcano-II)
- A saw, dremel, or other primitive machine tools
- Goop-brand adhesive
- Some alcohol and arctic silver
Take the stock heatsink off. Cut the large one so it can fit on the motherboard. Clean the northbridge off with some alcohol. Put arctic silver on the chip, and a good pile of goop around the outside of the chip. Goop can be worked off, it is a weak bond against the metal of the heat sink. Put the sink on and smoosh it down. Put something heavy on it for 24 hrs, presto. If you have any airflow through your case whatsoever your northbridge will stay at ~29-30C even heavily overclocked.
Interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
On a side note, I like the number of pins on the cpu socket. Hammer is gonna be interesting to say the least.
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Informative)
Drop outs galore.
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
no, not THAT...
Re:Interesting (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
You're right, a solid state device of sufficient clocking and fidelity could provide a 100% accurate wave recreation, with zero distortion.
As far as what _audiophiles_ want, i dont give a shit - they're all insane and have too much money.
Where people _really_ like tubes is in guitar and bass amplication. And the reason is that tubes in overdriven conditions sound "better" than solid state "distortion" (which is really just clamping, fundamentally)
The technical reason most often cited for tubes sounding warmer has to do with the order of harmonics that tube amplification creates vs solid state. I beleive tubes make 3rd and 5th order harmonics that sound more "ear pleasing".
IMO, tubes for computer audio on a motherboard is one of the dumbest ideas ever, technically, but one of the best ideas ever, marketing wise.
Re:Interesting (Score:3, Interesting)
People who prefer tube amps do it because of the different sound they lend to the music - not because of SNR or THD, both of which are higher than modern discrete amps.
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
Re:Interesting (Score:1)
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
Plus, they look cool! Makes you want to build one of those acrylic case kits [ocia.net] to show it off.
Re:Interesting (Score:2, Insightful)
Jeez. Pay $60 for a Turtle Beach card and be done with is unless you LIKE overheating, humming audio, and replacing tube.
Re:Interesting (Score:1)
Re:Interesting (Score:2, Interesting)
I find it very interesting that they would put tubes on there for the center, satellite and stereo channels. From my experience rec.audio.* groups (sampling of the "high end" users that have computers), those that prefer the tube sound would probably not buy a mobo with that (preferring instead to waste $20k on an amp that would do it for them).
Of course, since a tube just distorts the sound anyway, and you already have a computer, why not just provide a setting for a tube EQ?
This is ignoring the marketing effects of having the tube there: maybe it will work for the novelty factor.
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Interesting)
Tube power amps sound just a little bit better than their solid-state counterparts. The place where tubes really shine is in Class A (non-push-pull) amplification, which is generally used in the preamp phase. It's here where tubes' famous even-order harmonics are produced -- it's these octave harmonics which make tube sound so sweet and agreeable to human ears. Taking audio from a regular computer sound card, audio which has been produced with a solid-state preamp, and pumping it through a $20k tube power amp is just what you called -- a waste. However, when tubes are intimately involved in the sound production within the computer and are used for preamplification, you can hook it up to a $150 solid-state power amp and it will sound better than sound from a regular soundcard.
Re:Interesting (Score:1)
Right, but you're still paying extra for distortion. Now you may consider it sweet sounding, but it's still distortion. I don't have a problem with that, since you should enjoy listening to it.
I just find the juxtaposition of old and new very odd. That is, finding tubes that most people (OK, maybe just me :) associate with people who still cling to turntables and avoid CD players bundled onto a mobo for the next generation high performance (at least from the specs) AMD chip.
But I think that it may be more of a nod to the casemod crowd (and I guess I must belong having done the etching and neon for a computer for someone): it's aesthetically unique.
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
This is a preamp. No clipping should be going on at all.
You're right about the difference between clipping styles, but this is only an issue in guitar amps, or other amps where overdrive distortion is intentional. A preamp between the DAC and the sound-out port on a computer should not overdrive at all. If it does, it will sound like ass.
The style of amplification in use here, called Class A, is defined by the fact that the input signal is biased such that no clipping occurs.
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
Personally, I use amp'ed headphones for my PC, 5.1 is for my living room.
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
Most people that are really anal about sound(not me, BTW), would tell you to get as far away from things like your computer as possible. True that, there is a lot of RF emissions going on inside that little box.
Of course, these are the same people that argue that speaker wire void of oxygen sounds better. I think many of them are full of shit in some respects, as the placebo effect convinces them that it sounds better. I could be wrong though. I just know some of them claim to hear things that humans can't hear (i.e., outside of our hearing spectrum).
For a good laugh, wade through a few of the audiophile newsgroups on google. You will see what I am talking about. They are so completely anal I think it is funny.
Re:Interesting (Score:1)
The original quote was from a British minister of education in the early 1960's who said "You can divide people into two groups: those who can be further divided into other groups, and those who can't!" Of course computers were all decimal then.
This chance remark led to the introduciton of binary arithmetic. Since there were eight computers in the country, this rapidly led to the invention of Octal. (Can I say 073?)
Um... HEAT! (Score:3, Interesting)
Looking at the sockets, I'm also a bit concerned about the heat cooking the board itself, since I've seen any number of PCB electronics over the years with tubes, where the board is blackish sometimes separating foil from board. Think about that with a 7 layer PCB.
Lastly, high voltage. Scary around all these low voltage things. I wonder why they didn't consider making a daughterboard and keeping things well isolated.
Re:Interesting (Score:3, Insightful)
It seems dumb to put those tubes on the motherboard. I would much rather see that space used for three more PCI slots--the sorts of things that audiophiles and amateur musicians always find some use for. No matter how you do it, doing the D/A sound conversion inside the case will always suck. I don't know why the market for PCI cards that connect to D/A-A/D break-out boxes is so small.
Vacuum? (Score:5, Funny)
They have vacuum tubes on the motherboard for 5.1 surround sound.
Are they crazy?!? Everyone knows that sound doesn't travel through a vacuum.
Re:Vacuum? (Score:5, Funny)
Neither do private parts, but that doesn't stop 1 in 10 of geeks who work from home.
:P
Re:Vacuum? (Score:1)
32 Bit PCI (Score:4, Interesting)
-Chris
Re:32 Bit PCI (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:32 Bit PCI (Score:2)
Also notice that the board was given a model name; "AK86 Tube". All very strange and atypical for a reference board.
-Chris
Re:32 Bit PCI (Score:2)
Either way, if it has that audio it's obviously not meant for the server market (so it's a Clawhammer board? An Opteron board?) I don't think the article mentions whether it is a reference board or a final retail board either.
Re:32 Bit PCI (Score:2)
Re:32 Bit PCI (Score:2)
100BaseTX is so passee...
Re:32 Bit PCI (Score:1)
Re:32 Bit PCI (Score:2)
Re:32 Bit PCI (Score:2)
Given that (aside from video which is handled via the AGP slot) PCI provides enough bandwidth for anything the average (or most above-average) home user will want to do within the next five to ten years, I can't see this as a problem.
Re:32 Bit PCI (Score:2)
Re:32 Bit PCI (Score:2)
The board itself is nothing special, but it IS the first Hammer board.
Clawhammer Mobo? (Score:5, Funny)
No wait, wasn't he Darth Maul's second cousin?
No, I'll get it. Doesn't it attach to the Incus and transmit computer sounds to the ear drums?
Oh, I give up.
Re:Clawhammer Mobo? (Score:2)
Tube Board. (Score:3, Interesting)
I wonder if this trend is going to continue on more of aopen's boards. There must be a demand for the original tube board if they play on making a more powerful 3 tube version in the future.
Re:Tube Board. (Score:3, Insightful)
Besides, people are just going to connect indpendantly (solid state) amplified speakers to this thing and cancel out the potential benifit.
Re:Tube Board. (Score:2)
Most tubes aren't that expensive...Antique Electronic Supply [tubesandmore.com] has 12AX7s starting at $6.25 each (current-manufacture Chinese, quantity 10+). They have some more expensive varieties of that tube (NOS Amperex for $78.00 each, NOS Mullard for $67.00 each, NOS domestic-manufacture for $14.90 each), but how much you fork over for tubes depends mainly on how much audiophoole Kool-Aid you've been drinking lately. :-)
I definitely won't argue about the many similarities between the case modders and the rice boys. It's a wonder they haven't tried combining the two...how about a windowed hood on a Civic, or a nitrous bottle in an overclocked Celeron? (Then again, you couldn't see a windowed hood underneath the four-foot-wide "Type R" sticker...and it's not like there's anything worth looking at under the hood of the average rice burner anyway.)
memory (Score:2, Insightful)
Hedley
Re:memory (Score:5, Insightful)
Vacum Tubes (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Vacum Tubes (Score:2, Insightful)
Does it just fire right up after you drop it?
I think, vacuum tubes or not, dropping a computer is not a good idea.
Re:Vacum Tubes (Score:1)
Re:Vacum Tubes (Score:2)
But no, they are probably more robust than the CPU is with the pressure of the heatsink on it. The remaining available tube designs are basically military in origin.
In fact, I once had a tube catalog which had a section on tubes for computers, though these were of course for digital applications rather than analog.
Re:Vacum Tubes (Score:2)
Re:Vacum Tubes (Score:2)
Large computer manufacturers usually use an external baffle/clip system to hold the heatsinks in place so they won't fall off during shipping.
Anyway, I'm glad for AMD's move to a bolt-down CPU heatsink. I've been missing the luxury of those secure slot processors...
~GoRK
Re:Vacum Tubes (Score:2)
Re:Vacum Tubes (Score:1)
Assuming there's three tubes on the board along with all the other heat generating devices, you might want to think about better cooling.
There's some car-audio semiconductor-tube hybrids, but the word I've heard is avoid them. Go tube all the way or don't go tube at all.
Re:Vacum Tubes (Score:1)
Not really. I've got loads of amps that have tubes in them. Never had a problem with them shattering, even when things get a little rough.
Re:Vacum Tubes (Score:2)
Point 2) All musicians of any caliber with amplified string instruments use Tube amplifiers which are driven on shitty trucks in steel road cases thousands of miles every year. They dont remove the tubes before they box em up. The tubes in the amps are _quite_ difficult to get in and out of the sockets, and they hold up remarkably well.
The tubes on a motherboard are probably the least of your durability concerns, motion-shock damage wise.
Unfortunately, maybe 2h/2003. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Unfortunately, maybe 2h/2003. (Score:2)
Re:Unfortunately, maybe 2h/2003. (Score:1)
Re:Unfortunately, maybe 2h/2003. (Score:5, Interesting)
Right now AMD is working towards profitability, meaning going after markets which are stronger (which are, right now, the value microprocessor market) thus the de-emphasizing of the latest and greatest.
Re:Unfortunately, maybe 2h/2003. (Score:3, Informative)
Of course they are DE-EMPHASIZING the Clawhammer because it is running behind schedule. It has/was billed as their next savior - similar to the Athlon proc(which basically saved the company at that time). The problem is that each time the hammer is delayed things look worse and worse for AMD(and their stock price). They are trying to calm investors fears by saying the hammer is not that big of deal, but anyone with any sense knows that they need this chip out and soon.
Right now AMD is working towards profitability, meaning going after markets which are stronger (which are, right now, the value microprocessor market) thus the de-emphasizing of the latest and greatest.
There are no margins in the value market. Heck, I think AMD may sell more "value" procs than Intel does, but that doesn't make them profitable. The money is in high end business servers where people pay 1k+/proc. This is where Intel makes a ton of its money and it is where AMD wants/needs to be. AMD needs companies like Dell building poweredge servers around their proc in order to survive.
Re:Unfortunately, maybe 2h/2003. (Score:2)
Of course the margins are small in the value market. However, they are the products which actually sell a significant amount (compared to the high-end products) ... do you think that Intel sells a lot of P4 2.8 GHz machines? Not really. Are businesses lining up in droves to buy dual Xeons for their normal users workstations? It seems that what you're essentially saying here is that there is no money in the corporate desktop market (or, by proxy, the home desktop market)
Sure, there is a significant amount of money to be made in the high-end server market. Is that the only market worth considering? How did AMD even get to where they are right now? By selling high-priced processors aimed at the server market? How many servers are you aware of which use Athlon CPU's (before the MP's)? Were Athlon CPU's known for being best-of-breed CPU's at a lower price point or extremely cost-effective CPU's which were competitive with Intels latest and greatest? And this was when the economy wasn't in the shitter like it is now.
These are also different times for AMD. AMD didn't have a significant share of the market with the K6 line of CPU's. The K6 series of CPU's were not nearly as competitive with Intels offerings in price OR performance compared to the Athlons (even now)
Re:Unfortunately, maybe 2h/2003. (Score:2)
The economy is slow. IT budgets are being cut. People aren't spending. I know! Let's make the fastest chips available and charge a mint for them! I'm sure people are REALLY going to go for that.
AMD is obviously having yield problems with their current line of CPU's. Does that have anything to do with Hammer being pushed back? Not really. If they were able to keep up with Intel with their CURRENT line of CPU's, which they are doing with unreleased Athlon (not Hammer) CPU's then pushing back Hammer doesn't really hurt them at all right now, does it? You think Barton and Thoroughbred-B will be able to remain competitive until Hammer gets here (with good yields, of course) Judging by the benchmarks of samples sent to a few review sites, I think so.
Clawhammer is based on a microprocessor architecture meant for SERVERS. It's not going to be another Athlon (that is, a leader in price/performance)
Six more pictures (Score:5, Informative)
Also has a brief blurb in German
Loomis
Why vacuum tubes? (Score:5, Interesting)
What kind of sound will go through the system? A normal transistor has a 'snappier' sound to it, which is better for a lot of modern music, and I would imagine for sound effects in computer games.
I guess if you want the best for your classical LPs then maybe this is something for you, er, no, then you would be better of to get a real amplifier.
Tor
Re:Why vacuum tubes? (Score:3, Insightful)
Older Link, Computex pictures (Score:5, Informative)
Over on the Enquirer [theinquirer.net], a correction was made to an article overnight concerning shipment dates for the Clawhammer, it will not be further pushed back, to first half of '03.
Looking that stock quotes this morning I saw this: INTC INTEL CORP 14.0099 -1.5%
I assume Yahoo stock reporting is still using one of those weird old Pentiums
Gotta love the tubes (Score:3, Funny)
What are Vacuum tubes? (Score:1)
Anyone care to answer?
Re:What are Vacuum tubes? (Score:5, Informative)
Vacuum tubes were used before the invention of transistors. They serve basically the same function, but are much bigger, draw more power and are slower in their response. For these reasons, they are hardly used any more.
However, when they are used to amplify sounds, they give a somewhat different sound than do transistors. Many audiophiles argue that the vacuum tube sound is superior.
However, and now comes my personal opinion, recently something of a hype has started around tubes. People who don't really know much about sound systems take tubes as a guarantee for getting superior performance. They fail to realize that the sounds are just different and which one is superior is largely a matter of personal taste - and what type of sound is being amplified. I am not at all convinced that tubes are better for sound effects in games, for example (as they have a slower response).
Tor
Re:What are Vacuum tubes? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What are Vacuum tubes? (Score:5, Interesting)
Second, if you want some specific transfer function under overload, you can get it by design. There's a famous story about this. Some years back, Bob Carver, the well-known amplifier designer, took a tube amplifier that was well-regarded by the "high-end" audio nuts, and characterized its response with the usual test gear. He then designed a transistor amp with the same transfer function. In listening tests, listeners couldn't tell the difference.
But his transistor amp didn't sell. He then, as a joke, designed the Carver Silver 7, the most overdesigned tube amp of all time. Three chassis per channel, chrome-plated everything, insane price of about $25,000. It got great reviews. "Amp of the Decade" from The Absolute Sound.
Tubes vs. Transistors (Score:2)
I wonder what the audiophiles would think of a truly linear amplifier. (Either using devices that are backed off far from their peak power - low efficiency warning!, or by using distortion-correction techniques similar to those used by manufacturers of CDMA RF power amilifiers)
hmm... An audio predistortion amp would be a cool hack.
Re:What are Vacuum tubes? (Score:2)
Tubes and transistors produce different orders of harmonic distortion with the result that a transistor amp must opererate at a very low level of distortion to sound as good as a tube amp with a much higher distortion level. Transistor amps clip and go into distortion at very low levels of overload, tube amps enter this non linear region on a lower slope. Tube amps can be easier to listen to than transistor amps as a result of all of the above. However this mostly applies to bipolar transistors. Field effect transistors have transfer functions very much like pentode tubes and can mimic the sound of a tube amp, but most reference solid state amps have been bipolar.
I think most of the hype about tube amplifiers is greatly overrated. However the price of audio tubes and tube equipment on ebay proves how crazy some people are. We call them AudioPhools.
If you liked the vacuum tube sound system... (Score:5, Funny)
Oh man (Score:1)
Clawhammer platform? (Score:2)
754 pins?! (Score:1)
The socket of the future at AMD breaks a new record in the x86 world with 754 pins. The Intel Xeon is based on 603 pins.
Somehow, I don't think they WANTED to use 25% more pins than Intel.
Socket 7 has 321 pins, Socket A has 462...
Pins != Performance
Re:754 pins?! (Score:1, Informative)
Vacuum tubes? (Score:5, Insightful)
Besides, they just look ugly. 3 big balls of glass sitting on your motherboard. And then when one blows, you'll have to replace it.
Take the damn things off please!
Sweet Review (Score:3, Insightful)
Step backwards to the future! (Score:2)
Corrections+Link (Score:4, Informative)
"to have active cooling on the north bridge, too many new, high speed bus mobos are coming out right now with passive cooling that doesn't come close to making it easy to OC"
The chipset "Northbridge" does not get over clocked with the CPU using hyper transport. The memory controller is on the cpu. So you can increase the speed of the CPU and memory without affecting the chipset "Northbridge" at all. I used quotes around Northbridge because all the features that most people think of as being part of the Northbridge are in fact incorporated into the CPU.
"What, still only 32-bit PCI slots?
This motherboard contains a hyper transport to 32 bit PCI chip. Hyper transport runs at 6.4GB/s. PCI 32 is 133 MB/s. The manufacturer chose to use 32 bit PCI because this is a commodity board. Theoretically, a motherboard could include 6 PCI-X busses supporting 6 cards each before saturating the hyper transport bus.
Powerpoint Show [130.236.229.26] about Hammer family architecture. "save target as".
Read the show notes! AMD did not edit them out.