AMD Opteron, Athlon 64, Athlon 64 FX and Athlon 64 FX 51

review posted September 2003

<< The current range of AMD processors

Benchmarks of AMD vs Intel processors >>

Opteron: 

This was the first of the new "64 bit" processors but targeted mainly at the server market. Based on a different technology and having different physical parameters (940 pins) it  didn't fit into standard consumer or prosumer single or dual processor motherboards. So AMD brought out their own board, albeit one targeted at the server market and unable to handle any decent graphics. nVidia (I hate starting a sentence in lower case) then came up with the nForce3 150 chipset technology to allow manufacturers to build motherboards with AGP slots that could take the new 64 bit processors.

The Opterons were released with a new numbering system. Not satisfied that they had made a disaster of GHz numbering with CPUs like their Athlon XP 2600+ (Throughbred) rated at 2.08 GHz, and the Athlon XP 2800+ (Barton) also rated 2.08 GHz! AMD decided to dump quoting speed in GHz. This could also be because Intel were thrashing them on the pure GHz speeds. So Opterons were given a three digit numbering 1xx being for processors designed for single processor PCs, 2xx to 8xx designed for machines using 2, 4 and 8 processors, like servers. The x's are to denote the speed and involved using numbers that bore no relation to GHz eg the Opteron 140 and 240 are both 1400 MHz.

Ah, but cracking the server market is difficult, and if you want volume you do need to sell to the enthusiast and home market. Enter the Athlon 64.

AMD Athlon 64:

According to AMD the "AMD Athlon 64" is a brand name for a range of 64 bit products for desktop and mobile markets. Initially they claimed that the new processor would give you "vivid realism and richer sound on digital entertainment such as games, streaming video and audio, DVDs and music". Then the PR people got into gear and by the time the processors were actually released for general consumption it changed to a breath taking promise of "cinema-quality PC performance that transforms imagination into reality", not to mention the fact that you can now "fully realise your dreams" :-)

In reality there is little advantage for the average user in moving over to the Athlon 64 or Athlon FX range of processors at this time. Bear in mind that both Windows XP Home and Windows XP Pro are 32 bit operating systems. Other software applications that you are most likely to use are also 32 bit applications. The advantage is moving over to  Athlon 64 is not to realise any immediate speed benefits but to save you having to upgrade to different hardware when 64 bit versions of Windows and 64 bit versions of other software applications become available. Till then the beauty of the Athlon 64 will be that it can run current 32 bit applications at roughly the same speed as Intel's top processors.

The Athlon 64 processors have 754 pins so won't work in any existing AMD motherboard. As the Opteron is a 940 pin processor they won't work in an Opteron motherboard either. You will have to buy a 754 pin motherboard with Via's K8T800 chipset or the nForce Pro3 150 chipset.

Athlon FX / Athlon 64 FX 51

There is always a market in selling a slightly souped up version of an existing processor to enthusiasts, gamers, first-movers and vanity buyers who must have only the very latest. The Athlon 64 FX fills that space. It's closer to the Opteron processors than it is to the standard Athlon 64 processors. It has 940 pins and can be used on Opteron motherboards. The FX part of it capitalises on a term that their partners nVidia made popular with the GeForce FX range of graphics cards. The number may be how they intend to differentiate between this and future offerings of faster FX processors. So look out for the Athlon 64 FX 52 and the Athlon 64 FX 53. Or knowing AMD the new processors may well be "Athlon 64 FX 51 GT XP Pro 555 Max" :-(

Which motherboard, how many pins?

After AMD's dismal showing with the initial motherboards for the Opterons having only low performance integrated graphics there are now two main chipsets for Athlon 64 processors, nVidia's "nForce3 150" and Via's "K8T800". There are now several nforce and Via chipset based motherboards available in 754 pin design that take the standard Athlon 64 processors. There are a few nforce3 150 chipset boards with the 940 pin socket that take the Opterons/Athlon 64 FXs. There are also of course the server boards designed to run 1/2/4/8 Opteron processors.

Marketing Tricks

At the time of writing this article it is widely believed that AMD intend to change the number of pins in the Athlon 64 FX-51 processors from 940 pins to 939 pins. More importantly it is believed that these 939 pin processors won't work in 940 pin motherboards. As one forum puts it, "AMD have become so ... Intel". Bear in mind that the downside is that you can buy the best of 940 pins motherboards for your new CPU but you may  find that newer, faster versions of that CPU just won't work in it thus cutting off all CPU upgrading potential. Possibly.

Do you need any of it?

There is some evidence that content creation and rendering is slightly faster on an Athlon 64 FX 51 than it is on Intel's top processors. The main advantages in using either the Athlon 64 or the Athlon 64 FX 51 seems to be in gaming. There are some games that are showing a tremendous gain in performance using these new chips. Once the new 64 bit version of Windows comes out - and various other video editing applications are optimised for 64 bit performance - a big gain on everyday tasks will hopefully be a lot more noticeable. But that could be early to mid 2004... or later. Note that even new versions of exiting programs - like Adobe's new Premiere Pro - are not optimised for 64-bit operation.

In the interim do note that a lot of video editing equipment, including high end video editing cards, haven't been tested extensively with the 64 bit processors so exert some caution in choosing your hardware if it's used mainly for video editing.

Next: AMD Athlon 64 vs Pentium 4