AMD64 and PCI-Express

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 22:35:52 +0000, Synapse Syndrome wrote:

 >
 > Are there any motherboards that combine AMD64 and PCI-Express yet?
 >
 > Or Intel the only way to go? Don't really want to lose Hyper-Threading, but
 > the heat and price of Prescott chips is putting me off.
 >
 > ss.

The AMD64 runs rings around the P4. I've been running benchmarks on my
Athlon 64 3400+ laptop. In CPU bound applications it's twice as fast as my
2.66GHz Xeon. If there is a lot of IO then it falls to 40% faster but
that's due to the laptop's slow disk (4400RPM vs 7200RPM on the Xeon). To
put that in MHz terms the 2.2GHz Athlon 64 is equivalent to a 4-5GHz
Xeon depending on the application.

For desktop applications the 939pin A64s have twice the memory bandwidth
of the 754 pin A64 in my laptop which means that they should be even
faster. If you get a motherboard that uses the Nvidia NForce 3-250GB or
Ultra bridge chips you'll get an extremely high performance gigabit
ethernet MAC that's connected directly to the hypertransport bus so it's
not stealing any bandwidth from the PCI slots. The SATA controllers are
also built in so they are stealing any PCI bandwidth either. To top it off
the hypertransport bus that connects the CPU to the bridge chip runs
4GBytes/second and it's solely used for IO. Intel chips access their
memory systems over the same frontside bus as their IO systems, the AMDs
have dedicated on chip memory controllers which are not only higher
performance than Intel's (because the latency is much lower) but also
because they aren't competing for bandwidth with the IO systems.

To sum up,

1) Athlon 64 is much faster than the P4
2) Athlon 64 has more bandwidth to the bridge chip
3) All of that bandwidth is available for IO
4) Nvidia NForce 3-250GB integrates most of the peripherals that you'll
need (Gigabit ethernet, SATA, AGP8X).

There is no PCI Express yet (there will be) but you don't actually need it
because everything that you'll need is already connected to the
hypertransport bus via the highly integrated bridge chips.

So if anything is future proof it's the AMD64.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: AMD64 and PCI-Express 

General Schvantzkoph wrote:

 > On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 22:35:52 +0000, Synapse Syndrome wrote:
 >
  > >
  > > Are there any motherboards that combine AMD64 and PCI-Express yet?
  > >
  > > Or Intel the only way to go? Don't really want to lose Hyper-Threading, but
  > > the heat and price of Prescott chips is putting me off.
  > >
  > > ss.
 >
 > The AMD64 runs rings around the P4. I've been running benchmarks on my
 > Athlon 64 3400+ laptop. In CPU bound applications it's twice as fast as my
 > 2.66GHz Xeon. If there is a lot of IO then it falls to 40% faster but
 > that's due to the laptop's slow disk (4400RPM vs 7200RPM on the Xeon).

You could get a 7200 rpm hard drive for your notebook. They aren't that
expensive( perhaps around $170 for a 60 gig one).

 > To
 > put that in MHz terms the 2.2GHz Athlon 64 is equivalent to a 4-5GHz
 > Xeon depending on the application.
 >
 > For desktop applications the 939pin A64s have twice the memory bandwidth
 > of the 754 pin A64 in my laptop which means that they should be even
 > faster. If you get a motherboard that uses the Nvidia NForce 3-250GB or
 > Ultra bridge chips you'll get an extremely high performance gigabit
 > ethernet MAC that's connected directly to the hypertransport bus so it's
 > not stealing any bandwidth from the PCI slots. The SATA controllers are
 > also built in so they are stealing any PCI bandwidth either. To top it off
 > the hypertransport bus that connects the CPU to the bridge chip runs
 > 4GBytes/second and it's solely used for IO. Intel chips access their
 > memory systems over the same frontside bus as their IO systems, the AMDs
 > have dedicated on chip memory controllers which are not only higher
 > performance than Intel's (because the latency is much lower) but also
 > because they aren't competing for bandwidth with the IO systems.
 >
 > To sum up,
 >
 > 1) Athlon 64 is much faster than the P4
 > 2) Athlon 64 has more bandwidth to the bridge chip
 > 3) All of that bandwidth is available for IO
 > 4) Nvidia NForce 3-250GB integrates most of the peripherals that you'll
 > need (Gigabit ethernet, SATA, AGP8X).
 >
 > There is no PCI Express yet (there will be) but you don't actually need it
 > because everything that you'll need is already connected to the
 > hypertransport bus via the highly integrated bridge chips.
 >
 > So if anything is future proof it's the AMD64.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: AMD64 and PCI-Express 

"JK" <JK9821 DeleteThis @netscape.net> wrote in message
news:41291605.21BE14F8@netscape.net...
 > Why do you need PCI Express?
 >


Because I want to buy a new expensive OpenGL graphics card for CAD within a
year's time. It would seem a waste to buy an expensive card that has an AGP
interface when that standard will start to die.

I also like what I have read about how audio streams are all handled
seperately. I know Longhorn is far away, but at least I could make use of
these abilities when it arrives.

Oh, and there's the bandwidth.. Surely I can make use of it when doing some
rendering on twin monitors with music playing and RAID-0 drives churning,
while recording TV, as I do.

If getting a PCI-express motherboard will not cost a lot more I should at
least look into it. I plan to get one with onboard graphics for the time
being. Maybe I'll decide to buy a convention PC, who knows?

ss.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: AMD64 and PCI-Express 

Synapse Syndrome wrote:

 > "JK" <JK9821.DeleteThis@netscape.net> wrote in message
 > news:41291605.21BE14F8@netscape.net...
  > > Why do you need PCI Express?
  > >
 >
 > Because I want to buy a new expensive OpenGL graphics card for CAD within a
 > year's time. It would seem a waste to buy an expensive card that has an AGP
 > interface when that standard will start to die.

Why? When the standard dies(perhaps 3+ years?) it will be time for
a new video card, motherboard, and processor.. It is a better idea to
avoid very new technology until the major kinks are ironed out(aside
from the higher expense for the novelty factor). Think about PCI express
for the next motherboard and video card 3 years from now.

 >
 >
 > I also like what I have read about how audio streams are all handled
 > seperately. I know Longhorn is far away, but at least I could make use of
 > these abilities when it arrives.
 >
 > Oh, and there's the bandwidth.. Surely I can make use of it when doing some
 > rendering on twin monitors with music playing and RAID-0 drives churning,
 > while recording TV, as I do.
 >
 > If getting a PCI-express motherboard will not cost a lot more I should at
 > least look into it. I plan to get one with onboard graphics for the time
 > being. Maybe I'll decide to buy a convention PC, who knows?
 >
 > ss.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: AMD64 and PCI-Express 

"JK" <JK9821.TakeThisOut@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:41291605.21BE14F8@netscape.net...
 > Why do you need PCI Express?
 >


I also think that starting to buy futureproof PCIx peripheral cards and
making use of the bandwidth immediately is a lot more sensible than buying a
AMD64 just because oyu might start using a 64-bit OS one day.

ss.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: AMD64 and PCI-Express 

The Athlon 64 is about great 32 bit performance. The ability to run
64 bit code is an option that is basically thrown in for free due to
the low prices and great 32 bit performance the chips have.

Synapse Syndrome wrote:

 > "JK" <JK9821.TakeThisOut@netscape.net> wrote in message
 > news:41291605.21BE14F8@netscape.net...
  > > Why do you need PCI Express?
  > >
 >
 > I also think that starting to buy futureproof PCIx peripheral cards and
 > making use of the bandwidth immediately is a lot more sensible than buying a
 > AMD64 just because oyu might start using a 64-bit OS one day.
 >
 > ss.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: AMD64 and PCI-Express 

"JK" <JK9821.RemoveThis@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:412928C4.3ED1B31C@netscape.net...
 >
 >
 > Synapse Syndrome wrote:
 >
  > > "JK" <JK9821.RemoveThis@netscape.net> wrote in message
  > > news:41291605.21BE14F8@netscape.net...
   > > > Why do you need PCI Express?
   > > >
  > >
  > > Because I want to buy a new expensive OpenGL graphics card for CAD
within a
  > > year's time. It would seem a waste to buy an expensive card that has an
AGP
  > > interface when that standard will start to die.
 >
 > Why? When the standard dies(perhaps 3+ years?) it will be time for
 > a new video card, motherboard, and processor.. It is a better idea to
 > avoid very new technology until the major kinks are ironed out(aside
 > from the higher expense for the novelty factor). Think about PCI express
 > for the next motherboard and video card 3 years from now.
 >

Yeah, I've been reading some reviews of PCIx boards, and the onboard
graphics seems to weak for me to make do with, so I'm thinking on getting
the graphics card sooner rather than later.

So the only advantage of PCIx that I can make use of right now would be the
higher general bandwidth, and if I find out what that motherboard that has
the AGP slot I might still go that way. If the board works well I see no
reason not to get it, as it'll have that High Definition Audio onboard and
still have regular PCI slots for RAID, TV-card etc...

That's right isn't it? Even without any actual PCIx peripherals I could
still benefit from the increased bandwidth?

ss.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: AMD64 and PCI-Express 

"JK" <JK9821 DeleteThis @netscape.net> wrote in message
news:4129293E.B7C71A80@netscape.net...
 > The Athlon 64 is about great 32 bit performance. The ability to run
 > 64 bit code is an option that is basically thrown in for free due to
 > the low prices and great 32 bit performance the chips have.
 >

Yeah I know. The only thing making me hesitant about an AMD64 is the lack
of Hyper-Threading. I tend to do a lot of rendering which ties up the
computer.

ss.



 > Synapse Syndrome wrote:
 >
  > > "JK" <JK9821 DeleteThis @netscape.net> wrote in message
  > > news:41291605.21BE14F8@netscape.net...
   > > > Why do you need PCI Express?
   > > >
  > >
  > > I also think that starting to buy futureproof PCIx peripheral cards and
  > > making use of the bandwidth immediately is a lot more sensible than
buying a
  > > AMD64 just because oyu might start using a 64-bit OS one day.
  > >
  > > ss.
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: AMD64 and PCI-Express 

"General Schvantzkoph" <schvantzkoph.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.08.23.01.54.18.404334@yahoo.com...
 > On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 22:35:52 +0000, Synapse Syndrome wrote:
 >
  > >
  > > Are there any motherboards that combine AMD64 and PCI-Express yet?
  > >
  > > Or Intel the only way to go? Don't really want to lose Hyper-Threading,
but
  > > the heat and price of Prescott chips is putting me off.
  > >
  > > ss.
 >
 > The AMD64 runs rings around the P4. I've been running benchmarks on my
 > Athlon 64 3400+ laptop. In CPU bound applications it's twice as fast as my
 > 2.66GHz Xeon. If there is a lot of IO then it falls to 40% faster but
 > that's due to the laptop's slow disk (4400RPM vs 7200RPM on the Xeon). To
 > put that in MHz terms the 2.2GHz Athlon 64 is equivalent to a 4-5GHz
 > Xeon depending on the application.
 >
 > For desktop applications the 939pin A64s have twice the memory bandwidth
 > of the 754 pin A64 in my laptop which means that they should be even
 > faster. If you get a motherboard that uses the Nvidia NForce 3-250GB or
 > Ultra bridge chips you'll get an extremely high performance gigabit
 > ethernet MAC that's connected directly to the hypertransport bus so it's
 > not stealing any bandwidth from the PCI slots. The SATA controllers are
 > also built in so they are stealing any PCI bandwidth either. To top it off
 > the hypertransport bus that connects the CPU to the bridge chip runs
 > 4GBytes/second and it's solely used for IO. Intel chips access their
 > memory systems over the same frontside bus as their IO systems, the AMDs
 > have dedicated on chip memory controllers which are not only higher
 > performance than Intel's (because the latency is much lower) but also
 > because they aren't competing for bandwidth with the IO systems.
 >
 > To sum up,
 >
 > 1) Athlon 64 is much faster than the P4
 > 2) Athlon 64 has more bandwidth to the bridge chip
 > 3) All of that bandwidth is available for IO
 > 4) Nvidia NForce 3-250GB integrates most of the peripherals that you'll
 > need (Gigabit ethernet, SATA, AGP8X).
 >
 > There is no PCI Express yet (there will be) but you don't actually need it
 > because everything that you'll need is already connected to the
 > hypertransport bus via the highly integrated bridge chips.
 >
 > So if anything is future proof it's the AMD64.


Thanks. I've decided against PCIx, and know it's just whether I can live
without Hyper-Threading or not. But then, I can always keep my current PC
as well.

ss.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: AMD64 and PCI-Express 

 > Thanks. I've decided against PCIx, and know it's just whether I can live
 > without Hyper-Threading or not. But then, I can always keep my current PC
 > as well.

You do know that PCIx is *NOT* PCI Extreme (PCIe)

PCIx is a 64bit PCI slot that uses backwards compatible PCI cards.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: AMD64 and PCI-Express 

"Noozer" <dontspam RemoveThis @me.here> wrote in message
news:NwcWc.189426$J06.153601@pd7tw2no...
 >
  > > Thanks. I've decided against PCIx, and know it's just whether I can
live
  > > without Hyper-Threading or not. But then, I can always keep my current
PC
  > > as well.
 >
 > You do know that PCIx is *NOT* PCI Extreme (PCIe)
 >
 > PCIx is a 64bit PCI slot that uses backwards compatible PCI cards.
 >
 >


I wasn't talking about PCI-X.

I have seen PCI-Express refered to as PCIe and PCx.

ss.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: AMD64 and PCI-Express 

"Noozer" <dontspam RemoveThis @me.here> wrote in message
news:NwcWc.189426$J06.153601@pd7tw2no...
 >
  > > Thanks. I've decided against PCIx, and know it's just whether I can
live
  > > without Hyper-Threading or not. But then, I can always keep my current
PC
  > > as well.
 >
 > You do know that PCIx is *NOT* PCI Extreme (PCIe)
 >
 > PCIx is a 64bit PCI slot that uses backwards compatible PCI cards.
 >
 >


BTW, what's PCI Extreme?

ss.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: AMD64 and PCI-Express 

It's quite confusing as all the standards start with "Ex..."


   > > > Thanks. I've decided against PCIx, and know it's just whether I can
 > live
   > > > without Hyper-Threading or not. But then, I can always keep my
current
 > PC
   > > > as well.
  > >
  > > You do know that PCIx is *NOT* PCI Extreme (PCIe)
  > >
  > > PCIx is a 64bit PCI slot that uses backwards compatible PCI cards.

 > BTW, what's PCI Extreme?

PCIe = PCI Extreme = PCI Express = New 1 bit/4 bit/16 bit slots that will be
the new expansion interface card standard.

PCIx = PCI eXtended = Recent update of the PCI bus to allow higher bandwidth
and maintain backwards compatibility. A PCIx card can run up to 133Mhz
(actually current spec is 533mhz) and can use a 64bit bus. Standard PCI
slots are 33Mhz and use a 32bit bus. PCIx cards can usually be used in a
standard PCI slot, at a slower speed.

PCI Specs:
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.pcisig.com/specifications/" target="_blank">http://www.pcisig.com/specifications/</a>

PCIe:
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www20.graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040310/pcie-01.html" target="_blank">http://www20.graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040310/pcie-01.html</a>
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/display/PCIe_graphics.mspx#XSLTsection122121120120" target="_blank">http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/display/PCIe_graphics.mspx#XSLTse...on12212</a>
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://zone.ni.com/devzone/conceptd.nsf/webmain/70B1D3E338E6F52386256E37006DFDB3" target="_blank">http://zone.ni.com/devzone/conceptd.nsf/webmain/70B1D3E338E6F52386256E37006DFDB3</a>
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.pcquest.com/content/technology/2004/104040504.asp" target="_blank">http://www.pcquest.com/content/technology/2004/104040504.asp</a>

PCIx:
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/P/PCI_X.html" target="_blank">http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/P/PCI_X.html</a>
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.atmarkit.co.jp/fsys/special/001iasvr_basic/pcix_slots.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.atmarkit.co.jp/fsys/special/001iasvr_basic/pcix_slots.jpg</a>
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.pmasia.com/image/pcix64.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.pmasia.com/image/pcix64.jpg</a>

Google is your friend!<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: AMD64 and PCI-Express