AMD releases Quad FX platform

AMD today announced its dual-socket Quad FX platform featuring AMD Athlon 64 FX-70 series dual-core processors, the newest additions to the Athlon 64 FX processor family. The platform currently supports up to four CPU cores utilizing matched pairs of AMD Athlon 64 FX-70, Athlon 64 FX-72 and Athlon 64 FX-74 dual-core CPUs, and in the future, it will provide upgradeability to eight cores with planned AMD native quad-core processors in 2007, the company said.

The Quad FX platform also features DDR2 memory, being designed non-uniform memory access (NUMA) support with compatible operating systems, according to AMD. Other features include driving four or even eight monitors at the same time when using up to four PCIe graphics cards and 12 SATA controllers enabling up to nine terabytes of storage using currently available drive technologies, the company added.

News source: DigiTimes

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Dell, CompUSA Gear Up For Vista Launch

Next Story

Asustek to launch Skype motherboards


Commenting is disabled on this article.

Will be interesting to see AMD's next profit report... I am predicting a sharp decline in sales due to C2D.
I mean, it was always going to be bad for them, but I reckon it will be much worse... Who here has been on the forums and been advised to build an AMD system since C2D release?
If AMD were going to answer back to conroe, now would have been the time, but seems they are comming up short.

Yeah for a while now I've been a supporter of AMD but seriously this is just a rush to compete with Intel. Wait till next year when AMD comes out with there actual quad core solution.

Does nobody realize that the system tested uses over 500W of power!!!! It's absolutely rediculous that a system like that requires that much power. That's also with a single video card mind you. Make that a dual CPU, dual video card system, and with everything said and done, you're going to need 750W (which means you'll want a 1KW PSU).

Bloody rediculous.... *shakes head*

Quote from Xbit Labs

AMD Quad FX platform turned out far from what we have expected. Although this way AMD intended to respond to Intel’s quad-core processors launch, this response turned out quite strange I should say.

First of all, the performance of a dual-processor platform built with two dual-core Athlon FX processors turned out lower than that of the competitor’s solutions built on quad-core Kentsfield CPUs. We have seen this in all test applications throughout the entire session.

Secondly, Quad FX platform is often slower than the regular Socket AM2 system with a single CPU because of the higher memory subsystem latency. NUMA technology that proved highly efficient in servers turned out to do more harm than good in the desktop space.

Thirdly, from the performance-per-watt prospective Quad FX platform loses not only to Intel Kentsfield based solutions but to all other platforms as well. The sky-high heat-dissipation and power consumption of this platform also set specific requirements to power supply units, system cases and system cooling.

In other words, AMD Quad FX will most likely appeal only to the most dedicated AMD fans. For everyone else this platform will most likely be none other but a unique desktop system prototype showing the possibility (or maybe even uselessness) of introducing AMD’s server technologies into the desktop sector. Although we cannot deny that the upcoming AMD processors based on promising K8L micro-architecture will give new meaning to the exciting Quad FX concept.

I would like to see the first computer with this kind of system. How much it could cost?.. 1000+$ already?.. + HDD, Video Card, and other parts... That would little too much for PC.

And still first of all we should wait for this new system versus INTEL's X4 CPU tests.

Quote - david13lt said @ #7
I would like to see the first computer with this kind of system. How much it could cost?.. 1000+$ already?.. + HDD, Video Card, and other parts... That would little too much for PC.

And still first of all we should wait for this new system versus INTEL's X4 CPU tests.

All the benches on the hardware sites show that the Quad FX is faster than the Dual Core C2E X6800 but still gets stomped silly by the Quad Core C2E Qx6700 (cept for ScienceMark which AMD has always dominated) and consumes 150W more than a Quad core intel system with like hardware. Even at 3.2Ghz it only edges past the QX6700 in some benchmarks and at 3.73Ghz the Intel quad core is completely untouchable. I think the biggest hit to performance is how the NUMA architecture works and the memory latency it causes. This might improve as Vista has a more effiecent scheduler than XP. As for now Intel still holds the performance crown yet with K8L and this platform we shall see if amd will offer the capability for Octo FX and what Intel will counter with in response.

2007 Q1-Q2 INTEL will be releasing X4 with new core and plus 45nm... And AMD won't be able to win.

INTEL already has X4 systems, 65 and 45 nm (soon) CPUs.

Yeah, okay so you cant get a dual socket woodcrest system that would perform on par with a QuadFX system and also be multiplier unlocked, but then again you can get a quad core Core 2 Extreme, motherboard 4Gb of ram for less than the price that this dual cpu and mobo is gonna wind up costing. Don't get me wrong, its a neat idea but I'm concerned how long AMD will suport this once they launch their own quad cores. I doubt they will want to lock the high end enthusiasts into buying a $500 mobo just to have the FX-7x series CPUs.

It's gone back and forth for a while now. A few years ago, it was Intel playing catchup. It's gonna be like this for a LONG time. No matter what CPU is your favorite, everyone wins with more powerful chips because of the Intel vs. AMD war.