AMD Processors
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Question on the 64-Opteron
Topic Summary:
Created On: 11/11/2003 01:30 PM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 11/11/2003 01:30 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
NimaGraven
Senior Member

Posts: 286
Joined: 11/11/2003

You know the Opteron? Well, yea, of course you do lol.
It's a 64bit processor that handles a mix of 64 0's and 1's, right (I might be wrong , im presuming that the 64 bit refers to binary numbers.)? If that operates on the same speed as a XP 3000+ then how does the 64 bit increase performance?
Do things just get processed quicker because it can handle more bits at a time? Is the handling of the conversion between the assembly->registry->machine code any faster?

-------------------------
I live to learn.

FEED ME :D
 11/11/2003 01:33 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Ardrid
Heavy Wizardry

Posts: 12398
Joined: 10/08/2003

Yes, at Opteron 146 would operate at the same speed as an Athlon XP 3000+, but it would outperform it in 32-bit mode due to the extra optimizations the Opteron has. When 64-bit mode is enabled, the performance gap widens due to the additional registers that 64-bit code is able to take advantage of. It allows things to be done quicker in most cases.

-------------------------
Intel Core i7 860
ASUS P7P55D-E Pro
Corsair HX650W
Corsair XMS DDR3-1333 (4GB @ 8-8-8-24)
Sapphire Radeon HD 6870
Western Digital VelociRaptor 300GB
Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB
 11/11/2003 01:57 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Munny
Member

Posts: 128
Joined: 10/06/2003

All ICs operate on binary data. You have presumed correctly - 64-bit processors work with data that is 64 "bits" (1's and 0's) long, while 32-bit processors work w/ data that is 32 bits long. In 32 bit apps, the opteron effectively becomes a 32-bit processor. It still outperforms the Athlon XP at same frequencies, but that has less to do with the fact that it is a 64-bit cpu and more to do with other enhancements that were made (i.e., integrated memory controller, more cache, etc.). With 64-bit apps, the opteron can crunch numbers internally that are 64-bits long, as opposed to 32-bits. Because of its 64-bit nature, it is also able to address exponentially larger amounts of memory than 32-bit cpus.

Also, due to architectural enhancements, you will see opterons and athlon 64s ramping up to higher frequencies than the athlon xps.

-------------------------
[Insert witty saying here]

 11/11/2003 02:07 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Munny
Member

Posts: 128
Joined: 10/06/2003

QUOTE (NimaGraven @ Nov 11 2003, 11:30 AM) Do things just get processed quicker because it can handle more bits at a time? Is the handling of the conversion between the assembly->registry->machine code any faster?
Just to add, at same frequencies, 64-bit cpus do not technically process data "quicker" (since it is the same frequency). However, in 64-bit mode, programmers have the option of working with 64-bit chunks of data, instead of just 32-bit chunks. Consequently, they can write programs that, overall, will execute quicker.

-------------------------
[Insert witty saying here]

 11/11/2003 02:33 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
NimaGraven
Senior Member

Posts: 286
Joined: 11/11/2003

QUOTE (Munny @ Nov 11 2003, 11:07 AM) Just to add, at same frequencies, 64-bit cpus do not technically process data "quicker" (since it is the same frequency). However, in 64-bit mode, programmers have the option of working with 64-bit chunks of data, instead of just 32-bit chunks. Consequently, they can write programs that, overall, will execute quicker.
That would be presuming that everyone owned a Opteron 64 right? . Anyway what is the competition to the 64 Opteron, is it those 800 FSB Intel Processors? Or is the 64 bit processor really the way forward?

-------------------------
I live to learn.

FEED ME :D
 11/11/2003 04:58 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Ardrid
Heavy Wizardry

Posts: 12398
Joined: 10/08/2003

The current competition to the Opteron is the Xeon and, suffice it to say, the Xeon is being slaughtered with little trouble. I'm pretty sure that the Opteron could also take on the Itanium.

-------------------------
Intel Core i7 860
ASUS P7P55D-E Pro
Corsair HX650W
Corsair XMS DDR3-1333 (4GB @ 8-8-8-24)
Sapphire Radeon HD 6870
Western Digital VelociRaptor 300GB
Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB
 11/11/2003 05:02 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
NimaGraven
Senior Member

Posts: 286
Joined: 11/11/2003

QUOTE (Ardrid @ Nov 11 2003, 01:58 PM) The current competition to the Opteron is the Xeon and, suffice it to say, the Xeon is being slaughtered with little trouble. I'm pretty sure that the Opteron could also take on the Itanium.
*Boggle* Hasn't the Xeon been going for years? That brings me to another point, why are Xeon's always so [content edited] expensive? I haven't really bothered to read up on them or nothing .
And Itanium, is that the new range of Intel coming out? What is the spec on them?

-------------------------
I live to learn.

FEED ME :D
 11/11/2003 05:13 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
ALIEN3001
Senior Member

Posts: 315
Joined: 10/07/2003

Lol, Itaniums are out for about 2 years now.
They have IA-64 arhitecture that isn't compatible with x86, that's why all programs have to be rewritten in order to work on Itanium2 (you can use x86 emulation, but even a 400MHz Celeron would be faster than Itanium2 in x86).
That's why few programs are actually IA-64 compatible, and the price of the Itanium2 is way above that of the Opteron (the fastest Itanium2 is I think 1.5GHz).
AMD has sold more Opterons in a couple of months than Intel Itaniums in 2-3 years
Xeons've also got some problems, in SMP a 3GHz Xeon might be faster than an 2Ghz Opteron in some cases, but in 2-way or more configurations Opteron is much better -> becouse of the Hyper Transport links Opteron scales beautifuly, 2 Xeons have to share 1 533MHz FSB, but 2 Opterons have an independand 800MHz HT connection to RAM.

-------------------------
{Signature removed. Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines regarding signatures}
http://forums.amd.com/index.php?act=boardrules
 11/11/2003 05:33 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
NimaGraven
Senior Member

Posts: 286
Joined: 11/11/2003

QUOTE (ALIEN3001 @ Nov 11 2003, 02:13 PM) Lol, Itaniums are out for about 2 years now.
They have IA-64 arhitecture that isn't compatible with x86, that's why all programs have to be rewritten in order to work on Itanium2 (you can use x86 emulation, but even a 400MHz Celeron would be faster than Itanium2 in x86).
That's why few programs are actually IA-64 compatible, and the price of the Itanium2 is way above that of the Opteron (the fastest Itanium2 is I think 1.5GHz).
AMD has sold more Opterons in a couple of months than Intel Itaniums in 2-3 years
Xeons've also got some problems, in SMP a 3GHz Xeon might be faster than an 2Ghz Opteron in some cases, but in 2-way or more configurations Opteron is much better -> becouse of the Hyper Transport links Opteron scales beautifuly, 2 Xeons have to share 1 533MHz FSB, but 2 Opterons have an independand 800MHz HT connection to RAM.
Man I just realise I am well behind or Intel just didn't merchandise there Itanium's well

-------------------------
I live to learn.

FEED ME :D
 11/11/2003 05:48 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Ardrid
Heavy Wizardry

Posts: 12398
Joined: 10/08/2003

Could be a little of both The Itanium is only really known about by ppl who really concern themselves with every bit of hardware out there or people who may need the Itanium, such as those in the corporate server or big tin environment.

-------------------------
Intel Core i7 860
ASUS P7P55D-E Pro
Corsair HX650W
Corsair XMS DDR3-1333 (4GB @ 8-8-8-24)
Sapphire Radeon HD 6870
Western Digital VelociRaptor 300GB
Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB
 11/11/2003 06:28 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
NimaGraven
Senior Member

Posts: 286
Joined: 11/11/2003

Well. Is it fair to say then that you can't really compare the Itaniums to the Opterons because the companies are marketing in different directions? For example, you say Itaniums are for the corporate sector.. Which is more of a niche market whereas Opterons are pretty much known by everyone.. Which is more of a mass market.

-------------------------
I live to learn.

FEED ME :D
 11/12/2003 01:26 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
awd4dad
Member

Posts: 117
Joined: 10/06/2003

QUOTE (NimaGraven @ Nov 11 2003, 03:28 PM) For example, you say Itaniums are for the corporate sector.. Which is more of a niche market whereas Opterons are pretty much known by everyone.. Which is more of a mass market.
I would say Itanic is dedicated to a niche market. Enterprises that select Itanic solutions have a lot of software engineering to tune the system and make it efficient.
Grosso modo, for a given task, you need 5 opterons for 3 Itanics. It means that opteron has roughly 75 % raw power of Itanic but cost only 25 %. Another key point (and advantage) is the relatively low power consumption of AMD64 architecture. Electricity Bills matter for companies using a lot of servers pumping tons of wattage everyday every month every year.
Anyway, Opteron is not for mass market : Athlon64 and athlon64 FX will do the trick. Opteron is for corporate market (endorsed by IBM and soon by SUN) which is a much more lucrative market. Server market is the future of AMD.
 11/12/2003 02:42 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Ardrid
Heavy Wizardry

Posts: 12398
Joined: 10/08/2003

Well, believe it or not, AMD is actually targetting the Itanium with their 8xx series. Of course the primary focus is the Xeon, but the Itanium is still a target. And AMD wants to eventually make the Opteron a mass market processor in terms of penetrating the server market. They've revised their strategy as a result, with the server market being their primary focus and the desktop market being their last focus.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Proce...oduc...96_8799,00.html' ">http://www.amd.com/us-en/Proce..._118_8796_8799,00.html

http://www.aceshardware.com/ar...evie...teronMarket.gif' ">http://www.aceshardware.com/ar...eron/OpteronMarket.gif

http://www.overclockers.com/articles866/slide79.jpg' ">http://www.overclockers.com/articles866/slide79.jpg

-------------------------
Intel Core i7 860
ASUS P7P55D-E Pro
Corsair HX650W
Corsair XMS DDR3-1333 (4GB @ 8-8-8-24)
Sapphire Radeon HD 6870
Western Digital VelociRaptor 300GB
Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB
 11/12/2003 02:42 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
NimaGraven
Senior Member

Posts: 286
Joined: 11/11/2003

QUOTE (awd4dad @ Nov 11 2003, 10:26 PM) I would say Itanic is dedicated to a niche market. Enterprises that select Itanic solutions have a lot of software engineering to tune the system and make it efficient.
Grosso modo, for a given task, you need 5 opterons for 3 Itanics. It means that opteron has roughly 75 % raw power of Itanic but cost only 25 %. Another key point (and advantage) is the relatively low power consumption of AMD64 architecture. Electricity Bills matter for companies using a lot of servers pumping tons of wattage everyday every month every year.
Anyway, Opteron is not for mass market : Athlon64 and athlon64 FX will do the trick. Opteron is for corporate market (endorsed by IBM and soon by SUN) which is a much more lucrative market. Server market is the future of AMD.
Righty Ho. I was pretty much under the impression that the athlon64 and opteron were one and the same thing.
What is the real difference? The Opteron is more powerful than the FX?

-------------------------
I live to learn.

FEED ME :D
 11/12/2003 02:43 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Ardrid
Heavy Wizardry

Posts: 12398
Joined: 10/08/2003

Actually, the FX is more powerful than the Opteron currently due to clock speed. They are essentially the same chip, except that the Opteron can be used in multiprocessor setups.

-------------------------
Intel Core i7 860
ASUS P7P55D-E Pro
Corsair HX650W
Corsair XMS DDR3-1333 (4GB @ 8-8-8-24)
Sapphire Radeon HD 6870
Western Digital VelociRaptor 300GB
Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB
 11/12/2003 05:12 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
NimaGraven
Senior Member

Posts: 286
Joined: 11/11/2003

QUOTE (Ardrid @ Nov 11 2003, 11:43 PM) Actually, the FX is more powerful than the Opteron currently due to clock speed.  They are essentially the same chip, except that the Opteron can be used in multiprocessor setups.
I see. This makes the Opteron quite a bit more expensive to purchase, right?

EDIT: How is the heat on idle and on load for opterons/FX's? What kind of cooling solution do they use and how effective is it? Does the 64 bit handling cause the processor to get any hotter?

-------------------------
I live to learn.

FEED ME :D
 11/12/2003 09:43 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Ardrid
Heavy Wizardry

Posts: 12398
Joined: 10/08/2003

The Opteron and FX both use a standard HSF and their temps, on average, are rather low. Low to mid 30s during idle and high 30s to low 40s for idle. Running the Opteron/FX in 64-bit mode would not increase the temperature noticeably.

And yes, the reason why the Opteron has a premium on it is because it can used in multiprocessor setups. Hence the reason why the 246, which is actually 200MHz slower than the FX-51, actually costs more.

-------------------------
Intel Core i7 860
ASUS P7P55D-E Pro
Corsair HX650W
Corsair XMS DDR3-1333 (4GB @ 8-8-8-24)
Sapphire Radeon HD 6870
Western Digital VelociRaptor 300GB
Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB
 11/13/2003 12:26 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Munny
Member

Posts: 128
Joined: 10/06/2003

Also, I just wanted to clarify that, although the opteron competes in the same market segment as the xeon, the xeon is only a 32-bit processor. intel would have us believe that 64-bit systems won't be necessary for another few years.

QUOTE *Boggle* Hasn't the Xeon been going for years? That brings me to another point, why are Xeon's always so [content edited] expensive?

That's the same thing xeon owners are asking, now that the same cpu is being sold for a quarter of the price, only under a different name - "P4 EE".

-------------------------
[Insert witty saying here]

 11/13/2003 04:24 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
deuxway
Member

Posts: 193
Joined: 10/08/2003

Yes, Opteron does compete with Xeon, and it also competes with Intels Itanium.

Intel Itanium (IA64) is a (very expensive) 64bit CPU, aimed at the server market. It is not able to natively run 32bit x86 code, it runs 32x86 code with software assist, and so is much slower than AMD64/Opteron.

The Itanium is a joint development of Intel and HP, and is partly based on HP's EPIC work. I believe there is an Intel and HP Joint Venture, which has probably consumed a lot of cash, and has some messy contracts around it. This may make Intel want to stick to the Itanium route for 64bit. I'd expect HP will be upset if Intel dropped Itanium, as they put in a lot of their Research and Development into Itanium, and put their own CPU architecture, PA-RISC, on the back-burner. This may cause Intel to dis' 64bit x86, to avoid any confusion over their 64bit direction.

Part of the reason Xeon's are more expensive than P4EE's is the same reason that Opteron 246's are more expensive than 146's - multi-processor capable. Customers (reasonably, IMHO) expect to pay more for that capability.

P4EE is not multi-CPU capable. So some of the lower, than Xeon, price makes sense.

Making P4EE's from Xeon's may be straigtforward, but it's still work, it's not free. I wonder how many multi-CPU capable Xeon core's get 'neutered' to make P4EE's?

Intel are just taking advantage of their 'strong' position. I guess Intel are making enough profit on other chips that they wouldn't care if every P4EE lost money (and no one is claiming that P4EE is losing money) as long as Intel retained or increased market share against AMD.

Customers hardly affect Intel's ability to set prices, only AMD's competition does that; Intel can ignore what purchasers think. Intel aims to take market share from AMD, Intel's shareholders would fire Intel's executives for doing anything less.

CPU prices are 'invented' anyway. It makes little 'sense' to pay almost double for a CPU to get less than a 10% increase in performance. You're unlikely to notice such a small difference. But guys pay the premium. It's whatever the market will bear.
Statistics
112018 users are registered to the AMD Processors forum.
There are currently 0 users logged in.

FuseTalk Hosting Executive Plan v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.



Contact AMD Terms and Conditions ©2007 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Privacy Trademark information