Basic Features: Athlon64 Processors
The growing Athlon64 family is currently available in price range from about $200 to $1000. All Athlon64/64 FX are single-CPU processors, while the server-oriented Opteron can be single, dual, or 8-way.| Athlon64 Family - Specifications | |||||
| Athlon64 3000+ | Athlon64 3200+ | Athlon64 3400+ | Athlon64 FX51 | Opteron | |
| Speed Rating | 3000+ | 3200+ | 3400+ | Unrated | Unrated |
| Actual CPU Speed | 2.0Ghz | 2.0GHz | 2.2GHz | FX51 - 2.2GHz | x48 - 2.2GHz x46 - 2.0GHz x44 - 1.8GHz x42 - 1.6GHz x40 - 1.4GHz |
| Price 1/12/2004 | Retail $236 OEM $211 |
Retail $299 OEM $270 |
Retail $404 OEM $429 |
Retail $749 OEM $733 |
$175 (140) to $3620 (848) |
| L1 Cache | 128k 64k Code Cache + 64k Data Cache |
128k 64k Code Cache + 64k Data Cache |
128k 64k Code Cache + 64k Data Cache |
128k 64k Code Cache + 64k Data Cache |
128k 64k Code Cache + 64k Data Cache |
| L2 Cache | 512kb | 1Mb | 1Mb | 1Mb | 1Mb |
| Socket Type | 754 | 754 | 754 | 940 | 940 |
| Memory Type | Single-Channel Unbuffered DDR | Single-Channel Unbuffered DDR | Single-Channel Unbuffered DDR | Dual-Channel Registered or Registered ECC DDR |
Dual-Channel Registered or Registered ECC DDR |
| Memory Speed Supported | Up to DDR400 | Up to DDR400 | Up to DDR400 | Up to DDR400 | Up to DDR400 on later models, Up to DDR333 on earlier models |
| Maximum CPUs | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1xx - 1 2xx - 2 8xx - 8 |
| On-Chip Memory Controller | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Hyper Transport Speed | Up to 1.6GHz (800MHz Clock) |
Up to 1.6GHz (800MHz Clock) |
Up to 1.6GHz (800MHz Clock) |
Up to 1.6GHz (800MHz Clock) |
Up to 1.6GHz (800MHz Clock) |
In comparison, the Pentium 4 3.2GHz EE is priced at approximately $985 Retail, the standard 3.2GHz P4 is $397 Retail, and the 3.0GHz is $280. It certainly appears that the recent AMD product introductions and price changes are intended to once again make AMD better-priced across the line compared to Intel products. There will undoubtedly be further price moves from both Intel and AMD as we have come to expect.
AnandTech has covered the Opteron/Athlon64 extensively in the past year. If you would like to learn more about the Opteron and Athlon64, you can read our earlier articles:
AMD's Athlon 64 3400+: Death of the FX-51
Athlon64 3000+: 64-bit at Half the Price
AMD Athlon64 & Athlon 64 FX - It's Judgement Day
AMD Athlon64 Preview: nForce3 at 2.0GHz
AMD Opteron Coverage - Part 1: Intro to Opteron/K8 Architecture
AMD Opteron Coverage - Part 2: Enterprise Performance
AMD Opteron Coverage - Part 3: The First Servers Arrive
AMD Opteron Coverage - Part 4: Desktop Performance
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
20 Comments
View All Comments
EglsFly - Tuesday, January 13, 2004 - link
"AMD suggested that end-users check their list of approved power supplies for the 3400+ on the AMD web site."Can someone post the link to this power supply list? I did not find it on AMD's web site.
Wesley Fink - Monday, January 12, 2004 - link
Yeti Studios has been on the web at http://www.yetistudios.co.uk/ The link appears to be down right now. Zoo Digital released the original Gun Metal game with Yeti and their link to Gun Metal is working at http://www.zoodigitalpublishing.com/article.asp?id...brett1 - Monday, January 12, 2004 - link
Hey I'm glad to see that gunmetal (2?) is one of those games that actually relies on the VIDEO card VPU/GPU instead of the processor. Let's hope anandtech keeps it for future video card only tests.Speaking of gunmetal 2....why is there no website dedicated to the game itself? Yetistudios.com does not exist and there are little to no references to the actual game when doing a google search.
Jeff7181 - Monday, January 12, 2004 - link
#5 Please don't tell me you're saying the 9800 Pro 128 MB was a bottleneck and caused the P4 to be outperformedShinei - Monday, January 12, 2004 - link
Because the difference between the 9800 Pro and XT is marginal, and if they made the GPU less powerful the benchmarks would be GPU-bound instead of CPU-bound.KillaKilla - Monday, January 12, 2004 - link
Why do they have a 9800Pro 128? Wouldn't it make sense to make the CPU as much of a bottleneck as posible?CRAMITPAL - Monday, January 12, 2004 - link
Nice to see a quality review of all the latest and greatest chippies without bogus memory settings and benchmarks to skew the results. As most folks probably knew the 3400+ is the most practical choice for top of the line performance on a budget. FX51 which will be replaced shortly by FX53 will raise the bar for those looking for the absolute fastest X86 system available, period. The A64 3000+ is the sweet spot for most folks and the A64 3200+ ain't bad either for only $60. more.Intel's gonna have their work cut out for them Spinning how Prescott is worth purchasing when it's slower than EE and A64 by a long shot.
KristopherKubicki - Monday, January 12, 2004 - link
i play quake... on my cell phone!http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1945&p...
KristopherKubicki - Monday, January 12, 2004 - link
i still play quake... :(Icewind - Monday, January 12, 2004 - link
Wow, the differences are very minumual between all these CPU's, especially the FX vs the 3400+. Makes me wonder how the newer 128bit Channel version of the A64 will do this summer when I upgrade from this 2.8@3.3ghz P4c. The extra cost overhead for the EE as well as the FX can't be justified by any means from this comparison. I guess if you got the money though.....Well done Anandtech. Though i'd love to see a BF1942 benchmark in the future, The quake 3 bench has simply gotta go. Its no longer a rellavent and viable benchmark anymore.