Any 64-bit CPUs that support DDR2 RAM?

[wutang01]

I really want to build a 64 machine, ready for Vista ... but I heard the current AMD x64 CPUs only support DDR RAM. Is this true?

Are there any 64-bit CPUs that support DDR2? AMD? Intel? What sockets are they?

Do AMD and Intel have any plans by the end of 2006?

Also ... are Dual Cores any good?

[gwai lo]

AMD is releasing socket AM2/M2 which will support DDR2. As of now, none of it's platforms support DDR2.

Intel's LGA775/Socket T supports DDR2.

Dual cores are fine...

Of course AMD and Intel have plans...

[youm0nt Veteran]

  wutang01 said:

but I heard the current AMD x64 CPUs only support DDR RAM. Is this true?

yes.there are socket T intel 64 bit processors that should work with socket T mobos with DDR2 memory slots.

processors

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList....rice=&maxPrice=

motherboards

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList....rice=&maxPrice=

[thagame]

i dont see how ddr2 is the only way to run vista. i have a amd64 system and vista runs flawless with no lag at all.

[mikeboy]

ATM, only intel's new line of processors supports DDR2, AMD prefers the lower timings rather than the high FSB, but socket M2 will have full DDR2 support

[deck]

Pentium D's and the new ViiV propaganda are both 64bit and support DDR2.

[gwai lo]

  thagame said:

i dont see how ddr2 is the only way to run vista. i have a amd64 system and vista runs flawless with no lag at all.

I'm pretty sure the vista you're running isn't the final one we'll be seeing. It's also supposed to require DX10..but no one has that now..do they?

..but no, DDR2 isn't required. Just DX10

[wutang01]

Hmm, interesting! I'm keeping an eye out for the AMD Athlon 64 FX 5000+ (Socket AM2, 'Windsor')

How long will it take for ASUS to release motherboards once the AM2 comes out? (like, average time)

[Brandon Live Veteran]

  wutang01 said:

I really want to build a 64 machine, ready for Vista ... but I heard the current AMD x64 CPUs only support DDR RAM. Is this true?

Are there any 64-bit CPUs that support DDR2? AMD? Intel? What sockets are they?

Do AMD and Intel have any plans by the end of 2006?

Also ... are Dual Cores any good?

Dual Cores should be a no-brainer for any new system, unless you're on a very tight budget.

And DDR2 really isn't going to make any significant difference.

[mikeboy]

^^ I agree, Vista only requires DX10 and a 64bit machine, Vista will hopefully take advantage of dual core CPUs much more than anything else these days... but you know Bill, he usually finds a way to screw up the small details and replace them with pretty buttons and stuff ;)

question about DX10, will the GForce 7 series support it? even though its not native?

[JustGeorge]

Vista will not require a 64-bit cpu.

[McSmiggins]

Aero Glass only requires DX9.0c

And a GeForce 7 GPU will support DX10 in the same way that a GeForce4 supports DX9, it'll work, but you won't get all the features

[mikeboy]

oh ok then, thanks denzilla and McSmiggins.

[jimbo12141]

  wutang01 said:

I really want to build a 64 machine, ready for Vista ... but I heard the current AMD x64 CPUs only support DDR RAM. Is this true?

Are there any 64-bit CPUs that support DDR2? AMD? Intel? What sockets are they?

Do AMD and Intel have any plans by the end of 2006?

Also ... are Dual Cores any good?

what i dont understand is why your building a vista machine now...... vista probably wont be on sale till like November 2006 and by the time you build a computer now it will be out of date, why not save up and wait!

[ccuk]

AM2 will support DDR2... and later with a hypertransport 3.0 revision will go on to support DDR3 as well :)

As mentioned before... you do no require DDR2 to run Vista... really all you need to make the most of Vista is a good socket 939 board with PCI express, 64 bit processor and a DX10 graphics card.

[Deciever]

as a rule of thumb you should never go by the spec sheet of new or any technology always look at real world results to make your decision or you'll just be like the other 99% of consumers, buy by what the sellers tell you not by proof or proven results. And for that reason alone that is way the past 2 computers I have built for myself have been AMD processors despite the fact that I have built over 200 intel computers for the place I work at. I am no AMD fan boy by any means but like I said I go by real world results and real benchmarks not synthetic ones or by what their marketing team throws out into the press.

If intel one day comes out with a better CPU for the price then I will promptly buy it if it happens to be around the time I need to upgrade. And I used to love ATI, because at the time I purchased their 9600 Pro it was one of their top 3 or 5 gfx card on the market and it put geforeFX to shame and the previous card I owned was a crappy geforce 4 mx440 before I knew much bout gfx. But like I said I look for the best value/performance for the money so if I was going to purchase a gfx card for today I would easily choose nvidia despite having a crappy gf4 gfx card in the past, because the real world benchmarks prove their latest line up to be the better deal vs ATI.(despite ATI being first to come out with a real native pci express gfx card)

However I don't think nVidia will be ahead for too much longer.

[ccuk]

I wouldn't count on that seeing as they are producing the G80 chip which is far superior to the G75 as used in the playstation 3.

800mHz TRUE dual core chip, utilising GDDR4!

ATi have a fair old game of catch up to play.

Their fumblings with the cross fire left room for nvidia to continue the full ahead onslaught against ATI. The fight isn't over, but ATI need to get their tumb out of their ass if they do want to cacth up in time for Vista and DX 10.

Anyway, as for the move to AM2... there are going to be several new CPU's at launch of AM2.

An athlon FX-62 @ 2.8GHz.

An athlon X2 5000+ (windsor) with 1mb cache (Same as the current FX-60 :) ) more to be announced.

Athlon 64 4000+, 3800+ and entry level 3500+ with 512kb cache each.

And last but not least Sempron 3500+, 3400+,3200+ and 3000+ (mnila core) with 256Kb cache each.

Not to mention Socket F for opterons which will bring even more pace to heavy workstation users. The socket F opteron will be the first AMD processor to fully utilise L3 cache. Opterons will not only gain up to 2mb L2 cache but also upto and beyond 8mb L3 cache. This coupled alont with its rediculous 1207 pins and DDR2/DDR3 support makes it one mean processor!!

[thagame]

why is everyone saying you need a x64 system lol. vista will release 32 and 64bit versions just like xp has so no worries.

[ccuk]

  thagame said:

why is everyone saying you need a x64 system lol. vista will release 32 and 64bit versions just like xp has so no worries.

Did i say we NEED one? no.

What i was mentioning was the TOPIC at hand. Regarding CPU's that support DDR2. Vista will indeed come out in 32bit and 64bit. But if you get 32bit you are wasting your time seeing as R&D is going into 64bit and everything will move over to 64bit leaving 32bit users behind.

[Deciever]

64 bit is not much more than 32bit cpu's so why not? It is a just incase sorta thing and maybe it will give it some added life after you move on to a new machine and think why don't I install this 64bit OS on my old machine too? I bought a laptop with 64bits, not for the 64bits though I would have got it anyways but it is nice to know that hey I can upgrade to 64bit OS's if the need ever arises. I am very exiting about trying to run OSX on here........but yea that has nothing to do with 64bits.

out of all the processors out there I'd keep a real close eye on the Semprons, the 3100 non 64bit cpu was spectacular in performance and it supported every instruction set that athlon 64 did but the 3200 was BS, didn't even support SSE3, but they redeemed theirselves with 3400 palimino core is it? Sempron is like Intels Celeron except, AMD's Sempron can give the P4 and PM a run for their money, not to mention even its own Athlonb64 brother.

And intel shot itself in the foot thinking oh we can create a pure 64bit processor and leave 32bit out of the equation all together, that is why 64bits never really caught on til AMD came up with their 64/32bit hybrids and due to licensing agreements AMD must share a great portion of their new technology with Intel and so does intel with AMD but Intel is not under as big of an obligation to divulge as much information as AMD has to under their agreements.

It seems to make no sense but actually it does, their can't be a monopoly legally and if AMD comes up with a major advancement without intel able to make their own variation then Intel could be crushed or vice versa if Intel comes up with the great advancement they could crush AMD. By having licensing agreements(maybe licensing is the wrong word?) it ensures both sides that they will not put either one out of business but they will control the market together, much like the gas and oil companies do.

Edited February 5, 2006 by Deciever