AMD Athlon MP 1800+ Processor Review 214
Lars Olsen writes: "Amdmb.com has posted a review of the new AMD Athlon MP 1800+ processor -- a big speed jump for the dual Athlon processor family with the new processor running at 1.53GHz. There are also 1600+ and 1500+ Athlon MPs available as well right away at stores around the World.
Dual AMD Goodness is now running just as fast as its desktop counterpart ! Here's a quote: 'Those of you who want to jump into the dual processing Athlon world will finally be able to do so with the knowledge that your processors are the top speed that the Athlon family has to offer. And for anyone who already has a Tyan Thunder or Tiger MP board and a pair of Athlon MP processors, you may just want to pop a couple of these new Athlon MP 1800+ CPUs in your system to boost performance.'" Some of the comments following yesterday's "dream system" article addressed dual-Athlon complications, so make sure you read before you buy.Update: 10/15 15:14 GMT by T : Check below for LinuxHardware.org's take on this chip, and Athlon MP systems in general as well.
Augustus writes "LinuxHardware.org takes a look at the Athlon MP platform under Linux and the newly released Athlon MP 1800+ is included. Covered in this article is not only the technology and performance of the AMD-760 MP chipset and the Tyan Thunder K7 motherboard but we also look at why anyone would consider a multi-processor system."
Re:Why bother ? its an excuse to write bad code (Score:5, Informative)
Have you ever
a) done audio editing
b) done video editing
c) applied a filter to a 50MB+ image
d) compiled X
e) done any ray-tracing
etc, etc.
Any of these things can suck up vast amounts of horsepower and beg for more.
Also, 2.4 is getting somewhat more sane in recent releases.
Chris
Man, and I just built a dual 1.2ghz.... (Score:3, Informative)
A few notes on the TigerMP though: VERY picky on RAM, very picky on how it's seated (read: install memory before board is in your case, so you can wedge it in on a flat surface!), but since getting past that, it's been ROCK solid! Beautiful system I must say!
MadCow... always 500mhz behind the curve.
Roadmap (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Truth in labeling (Score:5, Informative)
From your tone I'd expect you woudln't buy AMD anyway. However, if you did any research, you'd find the AMD's new numbering plan is actually conservative. Independant benchmark reviews have shown that the AMD 1800+ is actually more of an equivalent to the Pent 4 2GHz chip. But AMD chose a conservative threshold. Granted, the new Intel cores will boost performance a bit, but even then the AMD numbering plan is expected to be on target. Honestly - who cares what they call the chip - anyone with half a brain can find out the MHz value. But to what end? Me? I want to buy teh system which gives me the most performance for the least $$$ and right now that is an AMD chip hands down when you account for other CPU specific system costs and impacts (chipset, memory type needed, etc)
I honestly think AMD did what it HAD to do - their chips are faster at slower clock speeds and Intel managed to get folks thinking MHz was king. Now AMD has ot try and chance that thinking.
Re:Twice the burned-out CPUs? (Score:3, Informative)
Other CPUs are also very sensitive. What's rather surprising is how well Intel's P4 thermal shutdown works. I suspect AMD will get around to doing something similar. But in the meantime, I've attached a nice quiet (3800 RPM, not the 7200 RPM version) ThermoEngine to my Thunderbird, and it cruises at around 100 degrees F. Some newer/bigger heatsinks bolt to the motherboard, rather than clip on to the socket, which I suppose helps if you're really paranoid about its falling off. I use Motherboard Monitor to keep track of the temp via the Win98 system tray, and wish Linux distros would include similar capability out of the box (yeah, I know there's a way to build it in yourself...).
But then I do admit to using a 1 GHz Tbird rather than a faster one because I don't want that excess heat or power consumption.
Another preview on Tech Report (Score:2, Informative)
They only compare against the 1.2Ghz Athlon MP though... although they intend to do an expanded article soon.
shut up man
Re:to MP or not to MP? (Score:1, Informative)
The chance of a dual XP or dual Duron setup not working is infinitesimally small.
Re:to MP or not to MP? (Score:2, Informative)
SMP-enabled and mistakenly shipped. AMD supposedly will be disabling SMP in the XPs very soon.
Re:fingers... (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Why bother ? its an excuse to write bad code (Score:3, Informative)
(Note: I'm not talkig about home use here) Actually, 50,000 equations is a rather small system. Any idea what weather prediction looks like? Something like 10 equations per grid point, with a grid that's something like 200x200x50=2,000,000. So you end up with a 20 million equation system. Also, many CAD software (eg finite element simulations) also need to solve *huge* systems. The faster the computer, the more precise the simulation (because you can afford more grid points).
Things You Need To Know About Dual Athlons (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Athlon MP restricted by AMD760 mobo (Score:3, Informative)
If you're running tasks/benchmarks that aren't CPU bound, multiple CPUs won't do you any good. If you're running multithreaded apps or multiple single-thread apps, multiple CPUs are a Good Thing, and two AthlonMP 1800+ CPUs will outrun a single AthlonXP 1800+ on a KT266A motherboard. Linux kernel compiles, fr'instance.
Re:Truth in labeling (Score:2, Informative)
To me, this is an apples vs. oranges analogy. On one hand, we have the apples, who are the auto and motorcycle enthusiasts. On the other hand, we have the oranges, or the vast uninformed PC-buying public walking into CompUSA and Circuit City stores. Two completely different species.
Intel's ability to con the public into buying into the MHz game is obhorrent, at best. They manufactured an inferior processor, the P4, basically to outmatch AMD in numbers. Intel knew that AMD wouldn't be able to ramp up their Athlons to the same level within a reasonable amount of time. The P4's inferiority is backed up by the fact that P3s outperform P4s MHz-per-MHz.
I feel that AMD's new effective/relative performance ratings are justified in this case, especially since the numbers are realistic (as opposed to their 486/K5 series or Cyrix's CPUs). If Intel wants to bloat numbers, AMD has to catch up in the marketing game in order to survive in this industry. People are walking into the major retail stores and being convinced by salespeople that the P4 systems are better and just as cheap (only because they bundle inferior components such as nVidia TNT2 graphics cards and generic sound cards to reduce the price) as an Athlon-based system. The regular Joe Blow will see a bigger MHz number and an affordable price, which is the killer combination.
The Linux/hardware enthusiasts are by far a minority in the PC market. Thus, the battlegrounds look ugly to those who are more informed, but I'm sure they look even worse within the buildings of Intel and AMD. It's a dog-eat-dog world.
Re:Why bother ? its an excuse to write bad code (Score:2, Informative)
Aerodynamics
Fluid Mechanics
Oceanography
Meteorology
Stress Analysis
Well, that's the ones I know about but there must be a lot more. And not just scientists use these, there must be thousands of engineers working in these fields daily.
Chip Speed and Bus Speed (Score:3, Informative)
1. Bandwidth - face it, email and the web are king. Unless you're a gamer.
2. Video Card - if you're a gamer, you're better off spending your money on this and making sure it has tons of cache.
3. Sound Card - if you're a gamer, you're better off spending the rest of your money on this. The rest of us don't care, so skip this.
4. Memory - more, more, more. Yes, even more.
5. Bus speed - more channel so those CPUs can actually send more data.
6. Hard disk - you really should have more RAM, but once that's crammed, get better seek and access times here.
6. Chip speed - WAY DOWN HERE! - yes, if you maxed on all the above, then you MIGHT notice the difference between a 1GHz and 1.8GHz system. Otherwise, unless you're a graphics artist, YOU SHOULDN'T WASTE YOUR MONEY!
Naturally, when people review systems, they compare older systems with slower bus speed, less RAM, slower HD, and cheaper cards to new systems with faster H/W. Buy the motherboard and cards yourself and pop in a slower chip and spend the extra money on RAM - you will get way more bang for your buck that way.
Aside - I own AMD shares, so sure, go buy these speed demons! But don't do it because you have to, do it because you know you just like BIG NUMBERS.
solving systems of 50,000 equations... (Score:2, Informative)
This is very common and very useful.
Also, if I had a PC with 100 times the memory and speed, I could still bring it to its knees. As it is, I have to simplify and granulate my models to make them fit the computing power I have.
How do you think they predict the weather? Design cars and planes? Do thermal analysis? Do vibration analysis? Do electromagnetic analysis? Do displacement/stress analysis? Do computational fluid dynamics? Do transient analysis of all the above?