AMD

A forum for discussing hardware related news, help, rumors, etc...

Moderators: boat, rickh

User avatar
[NME]T-Bone
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 2818
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2002 8:00 pm
Location: Sharpsville, PA

AMD

Post by [NME]T-Bone » Wed Nov 09, 2005 9:52 am

Socket 940??? Didn't the 939 just come out earlier this year or late last year when AMD announced their 64 bit processors?
T-Bone

"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos
will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate."

User avatar
Grummun
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Central OH
Contact:

Post by Grummun » Wed Nov 09, 2005 11:24 am

I don't think the M2 is the same as the socket 940... s940 is already available, on server-type mobos for use with the opteron cpu. Maybe it's just a different name for the same thing. I thought I had read someplace that the 940 was already obsolete and AMD was converging on the 939; either I'm mistaken or they changed their minds. It is a little irritating that any 939-based machine I might build now will have no cpu upgrade path in a year and change. :-?

User avatar
[NME]T-Bone
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 2818
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2002 8:00 pm
Location: Sharpsville, PA

Post by [NME]T-Bone » Wed Nov 09, 2005 11:47 am

Grummun wrote:It is a little irritating that any 939-based machine I might build now will have no cpu upgrade path in a year and change. :-?
That's exactly what I was thinking and is the reason I posted this here - knowing that we, and others are currently looking into new systems.

Addendum: AMD hasn't updated their roadmap since March. :evil: The toledo core is the last processor listed for the desktop. Anyone see a newer roadmap?
T-Bone

"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos
will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate."

User avatar
[NME]T-Bone
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 2818
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2002 8:00 pm
Location: Sharpsville, PA

Post by [NME]T-Bone » Wed Nov 09, 2005 12:42 pm

Welp, looks like the 939 will be phased out in Q1 2007. The M2(940) will come out in Q2'06 with the AMD64-FX-62 followed by the AMD64 X2 5200.

More info at Anandtech.
T-Bone

"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos
will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate."

User avatar
boat
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 2753
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2001 8:00 pm
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Contact:

Post by boat » Wed Nov 09, 2005 3:01 pm

so its been 754>940>939>940...? :P ;)

User avatar
[NME]T-Bone
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 2818
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2002 8:00 pm
Location: Sharpsville, PA

Post by [NME]T-Bone » Wed Nov 09, 2005 3:12 pm

yep... and from what i can find, the pinout is diiferent from the current 940's... probably in order to support ddr2 ram. :-?
T-Bone

"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos
will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate."

User avatar
Grummun
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Central OH
Contact:

Post by Grummun » Wed Nov 09, 2005 11:24 pm

[NME]T-Bone wrote:Welp, looks like the 939 will be phased out in Q1 2007. The M2(940) will come out in Q2'06 with the AMD64-FX-62 followed by the AMD64 X2 5200.

More info at Anandtech.
I was curious about 'pacifica enabled', so I looked around a bit. Apparently it's extentions to the processor instruction set to allow multiple operating systems to run concurrently in protected, secure environtments on the same hardware. How do you suppose that's useful? You can aleady multiprocess securely (more or less) on any modern *nix, without the overhead of keeping multiple copies of the kernel in memory. They're thinking of MS operating systems? :?:

User avatar
[NME]T-Bone
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 2818
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2002 8:00 pm
Location: Sharpsville, PA

Post by [NME]T-Bone » Thu Nov 10, 2005 12:41 am

Grummun wrote:
[NME]T-Bone wrote:Welp, looks like the 939 will be phased out in Q1 2007. The M2(940) will come out in Q2'06 with the AMD64-FX-62 followed by the AMD64 X2 5200.

More info at Anandtech.
I was curious about 'pacifica enabled', so I looked around a bit. Apparently it's extentions to the processor instruction set to allow multiple operating systems to run concurrently in protected, secure environtments on the same hardware. How do you suppose that's useful? You can aleady multiprocess securely (more or less) on any modern *nix, without the overhead of keeping multiple copies of the kernel in memory. They're thinking of MS operating systems? :?:
Think VMWare, except you wouldn't need to virtualize the hardware using software. This would take some of the burden off of vmware or other compartmental software and place some of the load on the cpu. wanna try new software and don't know if it will hose the OS, run 2 copies of winbloze concurrently and install the trial software in one copy without fear of hosing the other copy of the OS. that's how i read it anyhow. i don't really see any use for it unless there are specialized tasks that need run simultaneously.
T-Bone

"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos
will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate."

User avatar
[NME]T-Bone
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 2818
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2002 8:00 pm
Location: Sharpsville, PA

Post by [NME]T-Bone » Thu Nov 10, 2005 10:47 am

Other intersting reads:

AMD Pacifica

Intel's IVT

... and a pdf file

anyhow, looks like you will be able to consolodate 2 or more physical servers onto one box and have mutliple server os's running simultaneously.
T-Bone

"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos
will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate."

User avatar
Grummun
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Central OH
Contact:

Post by Grummun » Thu Nov 10, 2005 10:57 pm

[NME]T-Bone wrote:Other intersting reads:

AMD Pacifica

Intel's IVT
Virtualization widespread in the consumer PC market? I would like to hear the logic unerlying that conclusion...
[NME]T-Bone wrote:
... and a pdf file

anyhow, looks like you will be able to consolodate 2 or more physical servers onto one box and have mutliple server os's running simultaneously.
Which I can see being a real advantage in a windows environment. Seems like the more services you try to run on one windows server, the less stable it is. At the office (when we still had a data center) they had seperate servers for every little thing.

User avatar
[NME]T-Bone
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 2818
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2002 8:00 pm
Location: Sharpsville, PA

Post by [NME]T-Bone » Fri Nov 11, 2005 10:40 am

Well, unless it's a cost issue, i think it would be smarter to run a bunch of blade servers. It takes up a lot less space than the typical server, and you don't have to worry about performance issues related to virtualization.

As for the consumer pc market... i guess this will be good for the uber geeks that currrently dual boot their computers. Just think, you can run winbloze & nix at the same time.
T-Bone

"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos
will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate."

User avatar
Grummun
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Central OH
Contact:

Post by Grummun » Fri Nov 11, 2005 7:00 pm

[NME]T-Bone wrote:Well, unless it's a cost issue, i think it would be smarter to run a bunch of blade servers. It takes up a lot less space than the typical server, and you don't have to worry about performance issues related to virtualization.

As for the consumer pc market... i guess this will be good for the uber geeks that currrently dual boot their computers. Just think, you can run winbloze & nix at the same time.
One uber PC running every variation of BSD simultaneously... :o

User avatar
[NME]T-Bone
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 2818
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2002 8:00 pm
Location: Sharpsville, PA

Post by [NME]T-Bone » Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:54 am

[NME]T-Bone wrote:Other intersting reads:

AMD Pacifica

Intel's IVT

... and a pdf file

anyhow, looks like you will be able to consolodate 2 or more physical servers onto one box and have mutliple server os's running simultaneously.
looks like intel beat amd to market this time.
T-Bone

"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos
will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate."

User avatar
Dictator
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 989
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2002 8:00 pm
Location: Central Pennsylvania

Post by Dictator » Tue Nov 15, 2005 11:03 am

[NME]T-Bone wrote: looks like intel beat amd to market this time.
Besides the fact that those two processors now offer the capability to run multiple operating systems - and continue to work with the system even if one or more operating systems and applications have crashed -
I'm not sure if I get this. Does that mean it can run multiple OSs at same time?

If no, then what's the point of this? :-?

and....
a new hardware and software component that allows users to run multiple operating systems in independent partitions or "containers."
independent partitions as in harddrive partition? Or is it new feature for intel CPU?
Give me liberty, or I may well give you death.

User avatar
[NME]T-Bone
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 2818
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2002 8:00 pm
Location: Sharpsville, PA

Post by [NME]T-Bone » Tue Nov 15, 2005 11:26 am

yup, the whole point is to be able to run multiple os's simultaneously and efficiently.

independent partitions - they've always needed to be on separate partitions on your hd. now, the processor will also run multiple os's in their own partion.
T-Bone

"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos
will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate."

User avatar
Dictator
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 989
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2002 8:00 pm
Location: Central Pennsylvania

Post by Dictator » Tue Nov 15, 2005 1:33 pm

I see. So, how does that work for desktop users?

I dont think they actually mean you can run Windows and *nx for desktop for users. It'd be something like play halflife 2 game while people is accessing your web server in other OS? I wonder how hardware can deal with OS kernels access at same time? Imagine both OSs hog ethernet usage. :o
Give me liberty, or I may well give you death.

User avatar
[NME]T-Bone
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 2818
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2002 8:00 pm
Location: Sharpsville, PA

Post by [NME]T-Bone » Tue Nov 15, 2005 1:42 pm

ummmm.... read previous posts. :P

don't see much of a need in the consumer market, but consolidating servers in the workplace is a bonus and allowing you to use the best software from each os is a bonus too. i.e. apache is much more stable in a *nix environment than it is in a windows environment.
T-Bone

"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos
will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate."

User avatar
Dictator
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 989
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2002 8:00 pm
Location: Central Pennsylvania

Post by Dictator » Tue Nov 15, 2005 2:00 pm

Intel today announced its first desktop processors with virtualization technology (VT) -
Intel says Desktop. That's why I was confused. But then I don't know if true servers ever use so-called desktop processors. :-?
Give me liberty, or I may well give you death.

User avatar
[NME]T-Bone
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 2818
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2002 8:00 pm
Location: Sharpsville, PA

Post by [NME]T-Bone » Tue Nov 15, 2005 4:14 pm

more ivt info.

Home users could create virtual “partitionsâ€
T-Bone

"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos
will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate."

User avatar
boat
[NME] tried and true
[NME] tried and true
Posts: 2753
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2001 8:00 pm
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Contact:

Post by boat » Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:59 pm

i remember someone like ibm or sun doing or working on somehting like this...but that was like higher end/server type stuff... :?

Post Reply