Athlon 64 X2 4600+ (939) & Abit AN8 'Fatal1ty': Compatible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aether
  • Start date Start date
A

aether

The AN8 is, of course, also a Socket 939 based motherboard. Does anyone
know the full extent of the AN8's upgrade capabilities?
 
The AN8 is, of course, also a Socket 939 based motherboard. Does anyone
know the full extent of the AN8's upgrade capabilities?
Click to expand...

AN8 BIOS Version 1.5 supports dual-core (released 20-June-2005)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With regard to the general issue of Socket-939 BIOS updates for X2,
please note the following:-

No mention of X2 in the BIOS update docs, then beware. Especially
if you are contemplating a new purchase. Also, even if the BIOS is
updated, remember it takes quite a while for the retail channel to be
purged !!! Check with the supplier as to the BIOS version shipped
in the board, if they know....( and their return-policy !!! )

An X2 might just not work at all in a board which has not had its
BIOS updated ( the BIOS docs are silent on this subject ).
And if the board does not work at all, obviously you will not be
able to read the BIOS version, to find out whether the BIOS
might be the problem, or something else in a new installation is
screwed up. Hence, a perfect Catch 22 - you may need to install
a non-X2 just to check motherboard functionality and update the
BIOS :-(. No problem for a small system-builder. A big problem
for the do-it-yourself guy building a first-time Socket-939 X2 system.

And of course, if you are upgrading an existing Socket-939
board to X2, remember to update the BIOS to add X2-compatibility
BEFORE removing the old processor..................

John Lewis

- Technology early-birds are flying guinea-pigs.
 
John said:
AN8 BIOS Version 1.5 supports dual-core (released 20-June-2005)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With regard to the general issue of Socket-939 BIOS updates for X2,
please note the following:-

No mention of X2 in the BIOS update docs, then beware. Especially
if you are contemplating a new purchase. Also, even if the BIOS is
updated, remember it takes quite a while for the retail channel to be
purged !!! Check with the supplier as to the BIOS version shipped
in the board, if they know....( and their return-policy !!! )
Click to expand...

Another reason I posted this thread. The BIOS for the dual-core is
probably quite different from the regular 939 processor. I wonder,
though, would the dual-core BIOS be completely different or have some
compatibility with the regular 939 processor which would allow me to
merely upgrade the BIOS first, then install the processor?
An X2 might just not work at all in a board which has not had its
BIOS updated ( the BIOS docs are silent on this subject ).
And if the board does not work at all, obviously you will not be
able to read the BIOS version, to find out whether the BIOS
might be the problem, or something else in a new installation is
screwed up. Hence, a perfect Catch 22 - you may need to install
a non-X2 just to check motherboard functionality and update the
BIOS :-(. No problem for a small system-builder. A big problem
for the do-it-yourself guy building a first-time Socket-939 X2 system.

And of course, if you are upgrading an existing Socket-939
board to X2, remember to update the BIOS to add X2-compatibility
BEFORE removing the old processor..................

John Lewis

- Technology early-birds are flying guinea-pigs.
Click to expand...

Much appreciated, John.

By the way, here's some information on dual-core benchmarks:

"Benchmarks revealed significant performance gains for multithreaded
benchmarks, with Cinebench showing an 87% performance gain going from
one core to two. Interestingly enough, the dual-core Athlon 64
outperforms a true dual-CPU Opteron 250 2.4GHz setup, coming in second
only to a dual 3.6GHz Xeon setup with Hyper-Threading turned on (four
logical CPUs)."
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2005Mar/gee20050314029588.htm
 
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips aether said:
The BIOS for the dual-core is probably quite different
from the regular 939 processor.
Click to expand...

Why would you think this? From a software perspective,
there is almost no difference between dual core and SMP.

SMP BIOSes have been around forever, and aren't particularly
complex. One CPU is hardwired as the BSP (Boot Service
Processor) and runs all BIOS functions and uniproc OSes like
MS-DOC and MS-Windows9*.

It also loads SMP OSes which _then_ activate the other
processors via various IPIs.
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2005Mar/gee20050314029588.htm
for multithreaded benchmarks, with Cinebench showing
an 87% performance gain going from one core to two.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a fetch stalled app, governed by memory
latency.
Interestingly enough, the dual-core Athlon 64
outperforms a true dual-CPU Opteron 250 2.4GHz setup,
Click to expand...

Yep. For sure. Dual core has only one memory
controller, so will be faster than bus arbitration.
coming in second only to a dual 3.6GHz Xeon setup
with Hyper-Threading turned on (four logical CPUs)."
Click to expand...

That can have four outstanding fetches at once. Yawn.

-- Robert
 
Another reason I posted this thread. The BIOS for the dual-core is
probably quite different from the regular 939 processor. I wonder,
though, would the dual-core BIOS be completely different or have some
compatibility with the regular 939 processor which would allow me to
merely upgrade the BIOS first, then install the processor?
Click to expand...
If your current bios supports the core of the X2 CPU you buy, but doen't
support dual core, it should boot only using one core. Then you can
upgrade the bios to get dual core support. OTOH, if your current bios
doesn't support a non dual cpu of the same core, you're screwed until you
upgrade the bios by some other means.
 
Another reason I posted this thread. The BIOS for the dual-core is
probably quite different from the regular 939 processor. I wonder,
though, would the dual-core BIOS be completely different or have some
compatibility with the regular 939 processor which would allow me to
merely upgrade the BIOS first, then install the processor?
Click to expand...

Of course.... all the upgrades do !! Cannot have a board shipping with
the latest BIOS not work for >95% of current purchasers - those who do

not choose to buy a X2, at least initially.

John Lewis

- Technology early-birds are flying guinea-pigs.
 
If your current bios supports the core of the X2 CPU you buy, but doen't
support dual core, it should boot only using one core.
Click to expand...

Likely, but no guarantee at all !!! If not confirmed in the BIOS docs,
you always have to assume that Murphy's Law applies.
Then you can
upgrade the bios to get dual core support.
Click to expand...
OTOH, if your current bios
doesn't support a non dual cpu of the same core, you're screwed until you
upgrade the bios by some other means.
Click to expand...

If the BIOS has been upgraded to support X2, then it will always work
with a non-X2 A64. Otherwise, 2 different versions of a MB would have
to be shipped, the only difference being the BIOS - a non-starter.
Backward compatibility is guaranteed.

John Lewis
- Technology early-birds are flying guinea-pigs.
 
Me, I have this nazi fanboy killfiled. I wouldn't reply to him if he was
along side the road on fire.
Click to expand...

Hmm.. I didn't even notice it was the same moron. I just stopped
reading that thread as soon as he started pointing to Nazi Germany as
some sort of example of a "good" society. Clearly anyone who believes
such nonsense is well beyond the point of having a meaningful
conversation with.
 
Hmm.. I didn't even notice it was the same moron. I just stopped
reading that thread as soon as he started pointing to Nazi Germany as
some sort of example of a "good" society. Clearly anyone who believes
such nonsense is well beyond the point of having a meaningful
conversation with.
Click to expand...

Kinda of like calling Guantanamo a gulag! When this dude is running around
as president elect of Iran oh, the irony.

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/new...1720Z_01_SPI555308_RTRUKOC_0_AUSTRIA-IRAN.xml

Its funny how much the media distorts things just to suite their agenda.

Gnu_Raiz
 
Small-minded buffoons. In a way, it's somewhat delightful to see
America, Canada, and Britain gradually vanish into international
irrelevancy.
 
aether said:
Small-minded buffoons. In a way, it's somewhat delightful to see
America, Canada, and Britain gradually vanish into international
irrelevancy.
Click to expand...

But not till after the 2012 Olympics.
 
aether said:
Small-minded buffoons. In a way, it's somewhat delightful to see
America, Canada, and Britain gradually vanish into international
irrelevancy.
Click to expand...
Sort of like France did 60 years ago.
 
from the said:
At least France won the recent Presidential hissy-fit and food-fight,
though lost the '12 Olympics in the process. ;-)
Click to expand...

And they won two world wars .. oh wait, they needed help, didn't they.
Lucky those English, Canadians, and Americans were around (Doesn't Oz
and NZ deserve a mention?)

Chirac is probably still all p1$$ed off that we're still celebrating
Nelson chasing his fleet around and then defeating it. Couldn't happen
to a nicer chap. 8>.
 
GSV said:
Bitstring <[email protected]>, from the
wonderful person keith <[email protected]> said
Chirac is probably still all p1$$ed off that we're still celebrating
Nelson chasing his fleet around and then defeating it. Couldn't happen
to a nicer chap. 8>.
Click to expand...

The British, perhaps. Third world squatters couldn't care less about
Nelson -- and they are the future of Britain.
 
And they won two world wars .. oh wait, they needed help, didn't they.
Lucky those English, Canadians, and Americans were around (Doesn't Oz
and NZ deserve a mention?)

Chirac is probably still all p1$$ed off that we're still celebrating
Nelson chasing his fleet around and then defeating it. Couldn't happen
to a nicer chap. 8>.
Click to expand...

Even more pi$$ed off now that London got the 2012 Olympics by 4 votes
over Paris.

John Lewis
 
Even more pi$$ed off now that London got the 2012 Olympics by 4 votes
over Paris.
Click to expand...

Two from the Finns, that Chirac dissed even over the Britts! Amazing
incompetence, though not at all surprising! Were there oil chits involved
in losing this one?
 
Back
Top