PDA

View Full Version : Quad Dual Core AMD Processors




Cadkiller
Mar 22, 2006, 08:19 AM
Group;

I just found this power house motherboard for a PC.
It requires a 1000 watt power supply.
Add the new Vista OS and an ATI 1GB video card and skies the limit.

I wonder if Mac will be able to compete with this monster setup for high end applications?

http://www.supermicro.com/Aplus/motherboard/Opteron/nForce/H8QC8+.cfm

http://ir.ati.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=105421&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=833362&highlight



Benjamin
Mar 22, 2006, 08:26 AM
Except that the new firegl wont be used in that motherboard, thats a server class mobo for 1U enclosures. your comparing three markets here. server, high end workstation and consumers so you can't really clam or state anything. btw thats a 1.2 grand mobo fyi.

Cadkiller
Mar 22, 2006, 08:43 AM
It's still a major break through for PC mother boards and video cards.
They will soon have this system for everyone to use.
As far as the cost, everything that is new is always over priced.
I'm not stating or claiming anything, just informing people of the new PC technology that is out there.

MacTruck
Mar 22, 2006, 09:21 AM
I WANT ONE!

Thats just awesome. I give it 3 months before you can get this for non server use. Can't wait.

dwd3885
Mar 22, 2006, 09:29 AM
Up to 64GB DDR266 SDRAM

mmmmm...

iCeQuBe
Mar 22, 2006, 09:49 AM
I WANT ONE!

Thats just awesome. I give it 3 months before you can get this for non server use. Can't wait.

You will never see a quad cpu mobo for consumers. They just don't need that type of power. It will only be for server. High-End workstations will have dual cpu support but not quad. Not for a long time.

Cadkiller
Mar 22, 2006, 09:57 AM
They just don't need that type of power.

Excuss me but I need that power now!
I run 3D CAD/BIM modelers for building structures and these programs are very processor hungry.
Maybe a Mac user doesn't need that power; but a PC user surely does.

KingSleaze
Mar 22, 2006, 10:13 AM
Did I miss something?
That motherboard fits in a 1U enclosure. That tells me SERVER, not PC. On the scale of an Xserve, not a PowerMac (which in itself is pretty heavy duty {Wasn't there once a supercomputer built out of PowerMacs?}) and definitely not a consumer oriented computer.
So quit drooling. Sure, get that puppy for your business. But Vista won't be out (except in beta) for nearly another year.

Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 2006, 10:25 AM
You will never see a quad cpu mobo for consumers. They just don't need that type of power.

Actually, it's more a cost thing plus the fact that most consumer software doesn't know what to do with two CPUs, let alone four. Someday (as the limits of silicon are reached) everything will be multi-CPU aware, but we have years to wait for that to happen.

MacTruck
Mar 22, 2006, 11:15 AM
You will never see a quad cpu mobo for consumers. They just don't need that type of power.


I need that power for web surfing. I mean it. I want the page to load before I type the URL.


You can NEVER have enough power. PERIOD!

Shadow
Mar 22, 2006, 11:20 AM
You can NEVER have enough power.

That is soooooooooooo true!

Cadkiller
Mar 22, 2006, 11:25 AM
You can NEVER have enough power. PERIOD!

Spoken like a true Mac Trucker.

iCeQuBe
Mar 22, 2006, 01:37 PM
Maybe a Mac user doesn't need that power; but a PC user surely does.

You only think you do because your OS is a legacy OS! :p

p0intblank
Mar 22, 2006, 02:05 PM
OP... it's Apple... not Mac!!!!!!! :mad:

Sorry, major pet peeve of mine. :p

whooleytoo
Mar 22, 2006, 02:08 PM
Worse - I'm ashamed to say I'm actually craving a Dell (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/03/22/dell_sells_xps600_renegade/)! :eek:

p0intblank
Mar 22, 2006, 02:30 PM
Worse - I'm ashamed to say I'm actually craving a Dell (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/03/22/dell_sells_xps600_renegade/)! :eek:

That case is seriously hideous. ICK!

whooleytoo
Mar 22, 2006, 02:35 PM
That case is seriously hideous. ICK!

It's so ugly, I actually like it! (I know - doesn't make any sense!)

Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 2006, 02:46 PM
The Quad SLI in the XPS 600 is impressive on paper but in the real world not worth the cost - in some situations it is slower than a single video card of similar type.

BTW, speaking of video cards, did any of you notice the video hardware on the OP's quad AMD motherboard? NO video card slot and an embedded ATI Rage XL w/8MB VRAM....The last time I saw a Rage it was in my vintage 1998 G3 iMac! :eek: :eek: Fine for a sever but hardly acceptable for a consumer system!!!

Cadkiller
Mar 22, 2006, 02:51 PM
But it has a PCI Express slot that can handle a second high end video card.

jeremy.king
Mar 22, 2006, 03:00 PM
Add the new Vista OS...

Got plenty of time to wait, do you? :eek:

Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 2006, 03:02 PM
True - I missed that. But it's only an 8x, which is puzzling (as is the choice of the onboard Rage) given the cost of the hardware.

A dual-core or dual CPU high-end desktop would probably match this beast's performance much of the time (due to the inability of software to take advantage of the hardware) at a much lower cost.

Dreadnought
Mar 22, 2006, 03:03 PM
Hmmm, I guess this is a preview what we will get in the new xserve. I would say that it would have similair specs.

Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 2006, 03:06 PM
The Xserve has had such a low profile for months now that I wonder if Apple is selling any, and if they intend to keep making them in the future...:confused:

Dreadnought
Mar 22, 2006, 03:17 PM
They will update it, but it has to be really good so it really doesn't crashes. So I think Apple is putting much more R&D and testing in it. Also the wait is for the Intel 64 bit procesors. They aren't out yet and I don't think Apple will bring an intermediate model out. Same for the new PowerMac.

Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 2006, 03:26 PM
Well, I certianly don't expect to see a new Xserve until they can sell it with a Conroe or even newer chip...but I wonder how long they'll sell the G5 model. Will their be a gap, or will it be available right up to when a new model is released? The Xserve needs to be supported longer than a consumer machine so Apple will be dealing with Xserve G5s long after PPC support is EOL'd for other Macs. So their might be an OS X server for PPC after the consumer side is 100% Intel.

bugfaceuk
Mar 22, 2006, 08:02 PM
You will never see a quad cpu mobo for consumers. They just don't need that type of power. It will only be for server. High-End workstations will have dual cpu support but not quad. Not for a long time.

Ho. Ho. Ho.

Define long time? Hopefully a long time for you is much less than a year. I would be suprised if there were not already dual-dual core consumer boards for AMD's chips, if not it will not be long.

Ahhhhh nobody will ever want more than 64k....

matticus008
Mar 22, 2006, 08:36 PM
Ho. Ho. Ho.

Define long time? Hopefully a long time for you is much less than a year. I would be suprised if there were not already dual-dual core consumer boards for AMD's chips, if not it will not be long.

Ahhhhh nobody will ever want more than 64k....

There are already motherboards for dual Opterons and dual dual-core Athlon workstations. That's not what s/he meant, though. Four sockets on anything less than a server is not going to happen for some time.

Consumers just don't need that kind of power. Cadkiller's processor-hungry rendering does NOT fall into the consumer category. If those are the job requirements, a high-end workstation is in order. But that is not a consumer PC.

bugfaceuk
Mar 29, 2006, 08:17 AM
There are already motherboards for dual Opterons and dual dual-core Athlon workstations. That's not what s/he meant, though. Four sockets on anything less than a server is not going to happen for some time.

Consumers just don't need that kind of power. Cadkiller's processor-hungry rendering does NOT fall into the consumer category. If those are the job requirements, a high-end workstation is in order. But that is not a consumer PC.

Heard it all before, too long in the tooth in this industry to believe we have even the faintest idea what will be normal in even a couple of years time. Normally, we under-estimate.