Making the switch to AM2

[fguerro]

Originally Posted by Zenphic

Oh well, AM2 was released today, so I was wondering is anyone going to make the switch in the near future? I don't think I will since I am perfectly happy with my current S939 setup.

Give us your opinion!
Oh and if you want some AM2 reviews, head on over to http://www.ocia.net/, I've made a post gathering tons of reviews

I'm still very happy with my S939 solution. I think I may migrate to the AM2 or AM2+ socket when quad-AMD cpus are coming off the foundries at 65nm on a regular basis. I'll wait until the price-point of their mid-range native quad solution is $200-$300 US Dollars.

[ZuePhok]

amd 65nm seems pretty bad shape..hahaha it's gonna be a long wait i guess

[Chai]

C2D prices have been very stable since the launch. I wonder when the prices are going to drop.

[CALLOFDUTY05]

Originally Posted by Chai

C2D prices have been very stable since the launch. I wonder when the prices are going to drop.

I think C2D prices gonna fall when X2's selling increases.

[MeRaH]

Originally Posted by CALLOFDUTY05

I think C2D prices gonna fall when X2's selling increases.

Are you some AMD fanboy?

And why would it fall? As far as I know, AMD is the one dropping prices (makes sense due to inferior processor.) Intel has nothing compelling them to drop prices further than the market's pace.

[fguerro]

Originally Posted by ZuePhok

amd 65nm seems pretty bad shape..hahaha it's gonna be a long wait i guess

The current roadmap shows AMD shipping 65nm Quad cores in the first half of 2007 (summer?) I don't know if 6 mons is really an eternity but I can wait

[The_YongGrand]

Wah... the AMD nowadays making processors and newer sockets? The AM2, AM2+, and all the other ones? So difficult to follow.

If they maintain a socket and improvise on the processor instead it'll be much better isn't it?

[Chai]

Originally Posted by fguerro

The current roadmap shows AMD shipping 65nm Quad cores in the first half of 2007 (summer?) I don't know if 6 mons is really an eternity but I can wait

Well, it's highly possible that AMD can't keep up with their roadmap.

[CALLOFDUTY05]

Originally Posted by MeRaH

Are you some AMD fanboy?

And why would it fall? As far as I know, AMD is the one dropping prices (makes sense due to inferior processor.) Intel has nothing compelling them to drop prices further than the market's pace.

Yes. I'm a diehard AMD fan & feel proud to be that.How could u tell AMD makes inferior processors ? I think u've forgot that the past three years AMD was dominating the PC market with their Athlon 64 lineup.Intel was trying to keep up the sales of their bad CPUs like Pentium D which heats up a lot & a way pricy than the Athlon 64.Athlon 64 does have an Integrated Memory controller which drastically boosts the overall memory performance.I know with the introduction of C2D,things have gone towards Intel now,but not 4 many days Intel is gonna enjoy this.AMD will come up with such thing soon,that Intel will have to redo their strategy.No one can beat the best Price/Performance ratio than AMD.Don't 4get AMD has shown us first (Using their PR Rating)that, a CPU can't get faster by only pushing their clock speeds & the CPU performance shouldn't only be judged by the clock speed,which Intel used to do repeatedly.Now they r going the AMD way by not using the clock speeds as the CPU model number like Pentium 4 2.4 Ghz.

Why do u think the world's best Graphics chip manufacturers like Nvidia & ATI use to integrate their graphics chips only for the AMD mobos.Why didn't they make integrated Graphics chips for Intel ? Even now, not even a single Intel board does have comparable Integrated Graphics against an AMD board with integrated graphics.Can u tell me one Intel board with Integrated Nvidia graphics ? So, u will use graphics cards by Nvidia or ATI but u'll not use the CPU platform they have recommended to use with their Graphics cards.Well then,stick to Intel as u like it but the best one is AMD.It always was & it'll continue to be so.

It is now reported that the future quad-core Intel processor won’t have its cache shared among the four cores. So, the same problems as we see now in a dual-core processor without a shared cache (an insufficiently high speed of data transfers necessary to maintain cache coherency) may appear in it.

[Chai]

Originally Posted by CALLOFDUTY05

Yes. I'm a diehard AMD fan & feel proud to be that.How could u tell AMD makes inferior processors ? I think u've forgot that the past three years AMD was dominating the PC market with their Athlon 64 lineup.Intel was trying to keep up the sales of their bad CPUs like Pentium D which heats up a lot & a way pricy than the Athlon 64.Athlon 64 does have an Integrated Memory controller which drastically boosts the overall memory performance.I know with the introduction of C2D,things have gone towards Intel now,but not 4 many days Intel is gonna enjoy this.AMD will come up with such thing soon,that Intel will have to redo their strategy.No one can beat the best Price/Performance ratio than AMD.

For your information, we are not fanboys, we buy whatever is the best value for money currently.

I've been using AMD since Athlon 1.4GHz, and I bought 1600+, 1700+, 1800+, Athlon 64 3200+ Winchester, 3200+ Venice.

I've prepared to jump ship to Core 2 Duo soon hopefully. Enjoy your AMD products.