Please register or login. There are 0 registered and 1428 anonymous users currently online. Current bandwidth usage: 326.30 kbit/s December 13 - 05:53pm EST 
Hardware Analysis
      
Forums Product Prices
  Contents 
 
 

  Latest Topics 
 

More >>
 

    
 
 

  AMD's Athlon 64 FX, update from the trenches 
  Sep 09, 2003, 09:30am EDT 
 
By: Sander Sassen

Welcome back, here’s an update from the trenches, and a follow up to yesterday's column. We’re still hard at work getting the Athlon 64 FX up and running, but unfortunately we have some difficulties getting it all working properly on the latest build of Microsoft’s 64bit version of Windows XP. The problems aren’t so much the AMD processor but the ATI and Nvidia video cards that we’re using. We’d love to have the latest build of both ATI’s and Nvidia’s 64bit drivers for Windows XP 64bit, but neither of them were willing to send us a copy. Why bother? Because we’d like to see how the Athlon 64 FX performs with a 64bit OS, as that is where AMD puts the emphasis on, better performance with a 64bit OS. The installation of the 32bit version of Windows XP went over pretty smoothly although a fresh install from an original Windows XP cd would result in a crash. A slipstreamed copy of Windows XP, which contained SP1a, would however install without a hitch. This just goes to show that the original Windows XP does not have support for the Athlon 64 FX, whereas SP1a does have this support.

System properties

Fig 1. The general tab of system properties correctly identifies the Athlon 64 FX processor.

AMD Athlon 64 FX system

Fig 2. The Athlon 64 FX with the heatsink attached running in the SK8N motherboard.

Another issue we came across was the fact that the Athlon 64 FX requires registered DDR memory in order to work. Whether this is due to the Asus SK8N motherboard we were unable to determine. We’ve tried a variety of different not-registered DDR modules, amongst which Crucial, Corsair, TwinMOS and a few others but couldn’t get it to boot. However dual DDR400 registered memory is supported and this requirement is similar to what is needed to get the Opteron up and running. To be honest this processor reminds us a lot of the Opteron 100 series, which also uses dual channel memory, although not DDR400 but DDR333 and is not able to run in SMP configurations.

[UPDATE, Sep 11, 2003: AMD's Athlon 64 FX, more details emerge]

Sander Sassen.

 

  Comments 
 
 Subject 
 Author 
 Replies 
 Last Post 
Re: AMD's Athlon 64 FX, update from the trenches ant decto 1 replies Sep 10, 2003, 11:24am EDT
Re: AMD's Athlon 64 FX, update from the trenches Brendan Harnett 14 replies Aug 12, 2006, 06:32am EDT

 

  Voice Your Opinion 
 
Start New Discussion Topic
 

    
 
 

  Related Articles 
 
 

  Newsletter 
 
A weekly newsletter featuring an editorial and a roundup of the latest articles, news and other interesting topics.

Please enter your email address below and click Subscribe.