s939 mobos: Where are they?

So are all s940 mobos compatible with s939 chips? I haven't seen any
s939 mobos and only a handful of s940s. Where are the new boards?
--
=__ __ __ _ __ _= Andrew Krieg - Software Engineering Consultant =
=_ __ _ __ _ _ __= =
=_ _ _ ___= E-mail: =
=_ __ _ __ _ __ _= WWW: http://my.execpc.com/~krieg =

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 17:42:36 +0000, Andrew Krieg wrote:

So are all s940 mobos compatible with s939 chips?

I don't think so..

I haven't seen any s939 mobos and only a handful of s940s. Where are
the new boards?

Well, 940 is hardly new, they've been here for more than a year. I know
Asus, MSI, Gigabyte, and Tyan have had them for a while. And there's
several 939 boards to chose from now. I know of Asus, Abit and Gigabyte
boards that are available now and I'm sure there's others. And the 939
boards start at about $50 less than the 940 boards.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm

"Andrew Krieg" wrote in message
...
| So are all s940 mobos compatible with s939 chips?

No

| I haven't seen any
| s939 mobos and only a handful of s940s. Where are the new boards?

940's can be found about anywhere. They have been out for quite a while.
939's may still be a bit scarce (I don't shop around much), but I do know
newegg.com carries them. That's not a plug for them, it is just where I buy
stuff from sometimes if my wholesaler is running back order.

Andrew Krieg wrote:
So are all s940 mobos compatible with s939 chips? I haven't seen any
s939 mobos and only a handful of s940s. Where are the new boards?


Not sure where people get the idea that socket 940 and 939 are compatible.
Do you think you could get a socket 754 CPU in a 939 or 940 board?

Different chip, different socket, different board, different market.

Ben
--
A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 02:55:32 +0100, "Ben Pope"
wrote:

...
Different chip, different socket, different board, different market.

Ben


Personally, I'm kind of sick and tired of all this marketing bull****.

On the other hand I think it's funny people don't recognize socket 754
for the good deal it is. I can see Opteron being a step above, but
939 is pure bull****. Dual channel ? Give me a break. Didn't anyone
learn anything from all the nforce2 bull**** ?

Its all in your mind and marketing put it there.

Personally, I'm kind of sick and tired of all this marketing bull****.

On the other hand I think it's funny people don't recognize socket 754
for the good deal it is. I can see Opteron being a step above, but
939 is pure bull****. Dual channel ? Give me a break. Didn't anyone
learn anything from all the nforce2 bull**** ?

Its all in your mind and marketing put it there.



Yea, I think they learn'd that it was worth it in many cases for many
people..

On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 06:18:08 -0700, john wrote:

On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 02:55:32 +0100, "Ben Pope"
wrote:

...
Different chip, different socket, different board, different market.

Ben


Personally, I'm kind of sick and tired of all this marketing bull****.

On the other hand I think it's funny people don't recognize socket 754
for the good deal it is. I can see Opteron being a step above, but
939 is pure bull****. Dual channel ? Give me a break. Didn't anyone
learn anything from all the nforce2 bull**** ?

Its all in your mind and marketing put it there.

You clearly don't have any understanding of the concept of a bottleneck.
Dual channel memory on the nforce2 wasn't very helpful because the
frontside bus on the Athlon only had sufficient bandwidth for single
channel memory. Think of a 4 lane highway that narrows down to two lanes,
the thoughput of the road is that of a two lane highway it doesn't matter
howmany extra lanes the rest of the road has the number of cars that pass
through is limited by the two lane section. The AMD64 has on chip memory
controllers so it doesn't have a bottleneck, the highway is always 4
lanes. Memory bandwidth is one of the most important factors in
performance. Dual channel memory makes a big difference in overall
performance on a lot of applications.

"john" wrote in message
...
| On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 02:55:32 +0100, "Ben Pope"
| wrote:
|
| ...
| Different chip, different socket, different board, different market.
|
| Ben
|
|
| Personally, I'm kind of sick and tired of all this marketing bull****.
|
| On the other hand I think it's funny people don't recognize socket 754
| for the good deal it is. I can see Opteron being a step above, but
| 939 is pure bull****. Dual channel ? Give me a break. Didn't anyone
| learn anything from all the nforce2 bull**** ?
|
| Its all in your mind and marketing put it there.
|
|

Yeah, another kill file candidate. Ignorance and unnecessary swearing all
rolled up in one post.

john wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 02:55:32 +0100, "Ben Pope"
wrote:

...
Different chip, different socket, different board, different market.

Ben


Personally, I'm kind of sick and tired of all this marketing bull****.

What marketing "bull****"?

On the other hand I think it's funny people don't recognize socket 754
for the good deal it is.

Compared to what? The price difference between socket 754 and "equivalent"
socket 939 processors is minimal.

I can see Opteron being a step above, but 939 is pure bull****.

The 939 is an Opteron without the requirement for registered (buffered) RAM.
So if the Opteron is so great, how can the 939 be "bull****"?

Dual channel ? Give me a break. Didn't anyone
learn anything from all the nforce2 bull**** ?

Why don't you go away and read up on the architecture of processors or look
at some benchmarks?

The Dual channel implementation on the XP with nForce2 is completely
different to that of Dual Channel on Socket 939 or Opteron. Is "bull****"
word of the day or something? Given what you've just said, perhaps it's
concept of the day?

Its all in your mind and marketing put it there.


No it's not. It's all in the spec sheets, AMD put that there so that you
can find out, if you could be bothered to engage brain before opening mouth.
It's also reflected in the benchmarks.

Ben
--
A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 06:18:08 -0700, john wrote:

Personally, I'm kind of sick and tired of all this marketing bull****.

On the other hand I think it's funny people don't recognize socket 754
for the good deal it is. I can see Opteron being a step above, but
939 is pure bull****. Dual channel ? Give me a break. Didn't anyone
learn anything from all the nforce2 bull**** ?

Its all in your mind and marketing put it there.

Well, I'll get my 2 cents worth in hopefully before my defective HD
crashes. I've read all the replies so far, and i agree with both you and
them. Them in the sense that's it's not BS, and you in the sense that
there's not a lot of performance to gain with dual channel. Damn, I should
go into polotics.

Everyone knows the difference, simply bandwidth, So running a program that
doesn't require a lot of bandwidth will run about the same on both 754 and
939 with the clock speeds and the rest the same. This can be best viewed
by just looking at the ratings from AMD themselves. At the same clock
speed and cache there's not a large difference in the performance ratings
between the 754 and 939. So it's my contention that everyone wins this
arguement.:-)

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm