Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
AMD

What Happened To SMP For AMD processors? 203

Christopher Cashell asks: "Does anyone know what is going on with AMD and support for multiple processors (SMP)? I love AMD CPU's, but I've also come to love dual processor machines. Ever since the Athlon was still an 'in progress' chip code named the K7, and AMD stated that the CPU would support SMP, I've been drooling over the idea. Now, especially, I would love to have a dual CPU Duron box. Has anyone heard anything? I couldn't find anything on AMD's site about it. As I understand it, the CPU supports SMP, so it's just a chipset issue, right? Is AMD working on a SMP chipset? And if not, are any of the other big mobo/chipset manufacturers considering it?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

What Happened to SMP for AMD processors?

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward
    The VP6 is a nice board, however it will not rival the sucess of the BP6 simply because the new FC-PGA Celerons (Celeron II) does not support SMP anymore.

    It's nice as a dual P3 board, but it doesn't have the same price/performance appeal as the BP6 did with its Celerons.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    no it's not limited by the 'bus protocol' because there is no bus in the traditional sense - Pentiums scale like this because they sit on a shared CPU<->bridge bus while k7s have a point-to-point bus - this means that you can't use the same chipset for the cheap 1 CPU systems as you do for the more expensive SMP ones (and sadly will probably mean that SMP k7s will have a cost penalty).

    Any limitations on the number of CPUs is going to be in the chipset either in the number of pins (about 100/cpu) it can support, or in internal queuing stuff in the chipset keeping track of outstanding cache probes - the bus protocol itself is refreshingly free of such stuff.

    The pin limitation is the main one - 14 CPUS means 1400 pins on the bridge chip - luckily the datapath can be bitsliced - by 16-bits can be done trivially due to the clocking scheme but the master chip's still going to need to be able to look at ~32 pins/cpu - so 14 cpus is still in the 500 pin realm - not a cheap solution - don't expect it for comodity K7s any time soon

  • by Anonymous Coward
    AMD's (really DEC's) bus is a point-to point bus - this means that you can't just pop a bunch of CPUs in parallel on the same CPU bus, you have to have a seperate CPU bus per CPU - this means a lot of extra pins on the memory chipset ('north bridge') about 100 per CPU - this means you can't use the same bridge set for SMP as you use for 1CPU (like the 440BX for example, where the cost is 1 pin per extra CPU)

    Since the SMP market is relatively small (compared with the 1 CPU market) they're not going to sell a lot of these chips with the extra 100 pins - and you will pay a premium because the volumes are small.

  • by Anonymous Coward
    I think you meant "500 MHz PowerPC G3 is approximately twice as fast as a 500 MHz Intel PII/P!!!" or "500 MHz PowerPC G3 is approximately as fast as a 1 GHz Intel PII/P!!!"
  • by Anonymous Coward
    It's the 760 and 770 Chipset (North Bridge) that support SMP and whcih are currently in development.

    The 751 was simply the south bridge to the 750 chipset, both were released over a year ago and are quite outdated now.

    The 751 South-Bridge (like any other south bridge) simply runs functions like the PCI bus, IDE bus, USB, serial ports and has nothing to do with the main CPU bus, Memory Bus, or AGP bus.

    The mainchipset is refered to the "North Bridge", this is the important one.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Not really, because AMD doesn't use the P6/GTL bus architecture like Intel does. AMD licensed the EV6 bus off DEC, this is actually superior to Intel's current offerings, it supports upto 32 processors each with their own dedicated bandwidth.

    Intel's SMP chipsets share the processor bus between them, this is why a quad Xeon isn't a powerful as you might think, because the bus can become saturated very easily which leads to starving the processor of data very easily.
  • Go here [tomshardware.com] in order to see the table that points out when (not exact dates) the SMP support chipsets will come out. The bottom line is that sometime in Q4 2000 VIA and AMD will have one.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Basically, the GeForce is one of (if not the) first "true" AGP cards. By that I mean it took full advantage of all the AGP features. However, nothing is without price. In addition to using all the features it demanded that all the specs be met. The GeForce pushes a number of things pretty close to the spec limit. Well, AMD did more than a little sloppy design with their AGP implementation and the GeForce didn't like it. The GeForce 2 is often fine on these boards since it tends to be a little more forgiving, but still.

    While Intel has fucked up, and fucked up big, that still doesn't mean that AMD is yet doing the job they should. Hopefully with the 760, they will. Plus Intel has a bonus, they have laurels to rest on. Even though the 820 and 840 are buggy peices of crap, you can still buy 440BX, GX and ZXs. Those give you ROCK solid single and dual processor performance. So even though Intel has putchered some of their latest products, they still have older ones that AMD has yet to match.

  • by Anonymous Coward
    AMD is clearly trying to overtake Intel's lead in the field of "failing to deliver".
  • How many people are really gonna buy several different speeds for a box.

    It seems to me that buying several different speeds will be the norm as multiprocessor machines move into the mainstream. Think about it--you buy a motherboard that can take 8 processors, but you only have enough cash for 2. So you go ahead and buy the 2, confident that in 6 months you'll be able to buy 2 more for the same price, but at a much higher processor speed, and just toss them into the machine.

    Incremental upgrades are a compelling benefit from the consumer's perspective, and shouldn't be dismissed.

    daniel

  • You can disable the sound if it's not up to your standards. The drivers for what OS? Linux? I love linux but I haven't seen much in the way of great driver support for AGP, USB, and FireWire on any harware platform.


    _damnit_
  • umm.. a beowulf cluster doesn't even reasonably compare to a dual-processor machine. Apples and oranges, man.

    I don't want to custom-author every piece of software I run. I just want more than one CPUs.

    And I should point out that the Athlons are supposed to support SMP, and apparently chipsets will be available early next year to take advantage of that. So it seems your argument that fast and cheap preclude SMP doesn't quite hold water.
  • Not necessarily -- various peripherals are
    likely to be at different memory addresses
    on Alpha motherboards, with possibly some
    word-size/ordering assumptions that would break
    with a different ISA like x86. WRT Alphas
    supporting x86 code, that's only in a limited
    part of the various BIOS's that you can choose
    between, not inherent to the processor or
    anything else. Additionally, some peripherals
    *are* alpha-native. I'd probably guess
    that none of the Alpha SMP motherboards would
    do the job.
  • Well, that's very interesting. Except that most of the information I've found today says that the 760MP chipset is due out in Q4 of 2000, with motherboards arriving around the same time, or very shortly thereafter.

    Once again I have to thank you for going that extra mile towards making Slashdot a better place. Your 'help' towards answering a simple question is greatly appreciated.

    --
    Toph

  • Thanks for the URL. Most of the sites I've checked for info are more general hardware and tech sites, I don't have URLs for very many AMD specific ones.

    --
    Toph

  • Fact:

    OpenPIC has been supported by linux for quite a while now as it is the SMP scheme used on SMP PowerPC boards. Do a search in linux/arch/ppc for openpic.

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

    Opinion/AFAIK:

    in theory any CPU can be used in an SMP configuration. The reason intel's newer Celeron's don't is that Intel's APIC scheme has moved a lot of the PIC logic onto the CPU core - IRQ control logic is split between an IO-APIC on the motherboard and a PIC on the CPU core (connected by a special PIC bus. Traditionally the PIC is external to the core.

    intel just disable the more advanced SMP PIC logic on Celerons. It's still there, it just can't talk to other CPU's. Still, in theory, even these crippled CPU's could still run in SMP with a special motherboard that implemented a totally external PIC. (just wouldn't be Intel's SMP scheme).

    AFAIK OpenPIC is totally external to the CPU, so it does not need explicit CPU support. So the K6 *could* have been run in SMP config *if* someone had made a K6 OpenPIC board.

    (PIC == programmable interrupt controller)
  • Well, I have a 700 and 900MHZ box. Would be a great deal if I could get board that could utilize both these babies, in about a year or so :)

    Yes, I WILL buy a board that supports this, that is if I can run Linux on it!

    -adnans
  • According to my roommate who interned at AMD over the summer, the Athlon has always been SMP capable, but a motherboard that took advantage of this has not yet come out.

    There was a Tyan board that was supposed to come out a long time back but never materialized. The KX133\KT133 chipsets are not capable of SMP, but supposedly VIA will be coming out with a board that can do it.

    What you really want to watch out for, however, is the new AMD 760MP motherboard chipset. It's the high performance multiprocessor version of the upcoming 760 chipset.
  • Hey! I have a Pro-Audio Spectrum card too! Except it also has built in SCSI. If that card works with Athlons i'll believe anything will work. That card has given me more problems than anything! It's EVIL i tell you! hehe

    Mine also had the SCSI "controler", it was really a byte-banged SCSI, no smarts on the card. At least I think that is how it worked, but it had a real SCSI connector. I don't think I ever used the SCSI at all. At one point I had thought of using it to test "IP over SCSI", but then someone published a 1Apr RFC about it, and I lost intrest in pionering the hack :-)

    FreeBSD did recognise the SCSI "controler" (well, prior to 4.0 it did). Hmmmm, I should have uncrated my old Atari ST drive (it is a 20M SCSI drive with a SCSI to ATSI converter) before it was de-supported... ah well, there is still the 1G drive on my Sun 4/110....

  • Celerons DO support smp, it's just that Intel had disabled the feature with some jiggery-foolery. A hack to re-enable it started the move to SMP celerons.

    To where now slotket adapters now include circuitry to do the workaround for you.
  • What part of "760MP will be released in Q1 2001" do you not understand?
    ___
  • Can you build SMP systems incrementally? I.e., buy a 760 motherboard and a single CPU for starters, and then add a second CPU as an upgrade a few months later?

    Man, that's the whole point of SMP. It would have been pretty useless otherwise. (see also: scalability)
    ___

  • This doesn't make any sence. The only reason I can see for buying from Dell is precisely the warranty. They have nothing else to offer besides that. If your Dells come with no warranty, you're much better off buying clones from your local hardware store. Then you actually do get warranty (not next-business-day like Dell, but it covers parts & labor which all I need), and save a lot of money as well. Oh, and you can configure your machines exactly the way you like, which is something I value a lot more than the label.
    ___
  • Totally agree. I have used Dells personally (the guy who buys computers at my company buys from Dell exclusively). I was amazed when I opened the case of one machine and looked inside. The components they use are the really cheap kind. They even cut down on CPU cooling: instead of using a dedicated CPU fan they just put a really oversized heat sink on it! Basically, there is no way I would have put this crap in a machine I was building for myself. You can't beat Dell's warranty and name recognition though (but that's mostly a PHB thing).
    ___
  • I've got a Gigabyte GA-71X

    1 AGP
    5 PCI
    2 ISA

    damn straight.

    (what to do when I next upgrade? I don't wanna buy a new pci parport card or scsi-1 controller... but most new boards dont even have 1 ISA)

    --
  • Thats not true at all.

    Look at Abit with the BP6, its the most popular motherboard they ever sold! there are entire websites dedicated to it. And dude to that, they have recently released the VP6, which looks to be another sweet dual cpu board. And with the specs that bad boy has... i don't think they will have ANY problems selling it :)
  • On whose authority? Just because Job's said so? To be fair, the benchmarks jobs was running were crooked Photoshop benchmarks that were solely optimised for the Mac, if he run a standard benchmark then I'd be interested in the performance.

    Of course, for many of the Mac power users, Photoshop is *the* application where they need as much performance as they can get. Plus, it really wasn't that crooked, since they ran a "real world" application with a "real world" use of that application. It wasn't a synthetic benchmark, but doing something graphic artists need to do on a daily basis. Now, extrapolating that result to general performance is the problem. But since most of Apple's pro market does graphics of that kind, this is relevant benchmark.

    Also, during Job's presentation when he introduced the G4 SMP, he just said "we're going to compare it to a 1ghz P3", great but I'd like to know more details than just "a 1giz P3", which chipset? how much memory? the graphics card? the hard disk type etc? You get the picture; it was hardly a objective test.

    It was an off the shelf machine... not a custom built machine. So you can get specs from the OEM. Plus they did state they had outfitted them as close as possible to identical specs.

    Also, you have to remember you could buy 3 or 4 Athlons for the price of a G4.

    Are you talking CPU's or machines? G4 chips are cheaper than Athlons (in quantity), but Apple does have one of the highest margins in the PC biz. However, 3-4 vs. 1? I think not.

    The big difference is that you can go cheap on PC components... decide instead of buying a rock solid Socket A motherboard like the Asus A7V, go buy a Biostar or something like that for 30-40% less. Same goes for components like RAM, hard drives, etc. While Apple may not use the *best* components, they use some very good components (like the latest IBM 7200rpm ATA drives). We could build almost identical (by spec) 1ghz Athlon T-bird boxes, but yet be several hundred dollars or more apart in price just by changing the quality level of some of the components.

    BTW, the cheapest dual 500Mhz G4 box you can get from Apple goes for $2449 through Build To Order. At that price, you still get two IEEE 1394 ports, gigabit ethernet, DVD-ROM, and of course, the ability to run Mac OS X (definitely worth the price premium).

  • Codenamed Dolphin the dual Athlon is based on the AMD 770 chipset. Should be available 4th qtr this year.
  • Time will tell... check out http://www.slota.com
    under motherboards.
  • You're in the same boat I am. I've pretty much personally resigned to waiting until about mid-March next year, just based on gut feel.

    --Joe
    --
  • All I want is to say I have a ``Duron-Duron'' setup...

    And I ran, ran so far away...

    And if I rack up enough puns here, I may not need to go to Kuro5hin [kuro5hin.org] today.
  • www.linux-ide.org
  • by A ( 8698 )
    So would a dual-Duron system be called a "Duron Duron?" Just a thought.
  • >That is, Linux, BeOS and WinNT would all need
    >different SMP drivers for the SMP Athlon boards
    >to replace the APIC code.

    Considering that Linux already supports SMP Alphas (up to 32-way has already been tested under 2.4-pre with no scalability problems), if Athlon uses the same technique I doubt there would be much new code required to get Linux to use it. :)

    Rob

  • Almost right..

    Indeed, Hotrail to cancel their 8 way AMD chipset, but the company who took it on themselves to work on is Alpha Processors Inc (API)
  • It's a known feature of the Athlon. In fact, one of the things AMD was proud of is that in SMP configurations, each CPU apparently gets its own frontside bus into the chipset IIRC. Even the K6 (Maybe, definately the K6-2 and K6-3) supported SMP. Problem was, it was not the same SMP scheme as used by the classic Pentium, and there was never an SMP mobo made for it. I hope the same thing doesn't happen to the Athlon. (Although from what I remember, an SMP chipset was due relatively soon on AMD's chipset roadmap. As in by the end of the year, I think.)
  • That's why the K6 had SMP support.

    But unfortunately, the workaround made the K6 SMP protocol incompatible with that of the Pentium. And AMD wasn't big enough at the time for any chipset/mobo manufacturer to justify creating a new SMP mobo for a small market.
  • Just to let you know - The K6 SMP support was OpenAPIC. Too bad no one made a mobo for it. Don't know if the Athlon is or a different protocol. (I think it may be different - Considering how different the bus/cache design is from the old Socket 7 designs in general.)
  • You named exactly the opposite reasons that one should consider buying a Dell. They are not quality systems (really - they use lesser quality components, unless you pay big bucks for their higher grade models). They are not easy to maintain (their "thumb-buster" case design is my arch nemesis). Or at least, not any easier than any other PC in the world, and in many cases harder, with their poor case design.

    They are not even homogenous. Go to Dell's site, and look up a given model, then check, say, audio drivers. There will be 15 different audio drivers mentioned. Yes, they really do use different audio chipsets in systems with the exact same badge designation (i.e. Dimension XPS600R). And no, they can't tell you what chipset you have in your system if you go to their web site and punch in your unique "service code" from the back of your system.

    About the only thing homogenous about Dells are the ugly, thumb-busting, nasty cases.

    The ONLY reason to buy Dell is that they will replace any nonfunctioning part of your system, at their cost (shipping included), if you are patient enough to sit through 3 or 4 tech calls and go through their standardized rigamarole (sp?) for determining what component is bad (yeah, you may know that it is the video card, but the Dell techie has to convince himself as well).
  • I am NOT talking "out of my hat" (a phrase I am unfamiliar with, but which I assume means, making things up).

    We have had:

    * A Dell system which would shut itself off after 3 or 4 minutes, every single time it was powered on. After being patient with Dell tech support over the course of several weeks while they tried sending new memory, a new motherboard, and a new power supply (not all at once, but over the course of several weeks), they finally took back the whole system, after determining that it was their goofy power switch (I suspected this from the beginning). The good news is that they replaced a two year old Pentium 233 system with a brand new Pentium II 400 system at no cost to us.

    * Dell's audio cards in their Dimension models of two years ago used this crummy, Dell-only version of the Montego sound card which the Turtle Beach people would not provide support for. Dell had cut a special deal with Turtle Beach to provide a cheaper version of their card that Dell would support, so that Dell could save a couple of bucks. The only drivers that Dell could provide for Windows NT would blue screen the system when you tried to install them.

    * We have had many, many of the mice on Dell systems go bad. OK, they are Microsoft Mice, not really Dell's fault, but still. They could have chosen better mice.

    * We have had two or three Dell monitors go bad. They were replaced without cost to us by Dell but it was a bit of a pain.

    We have about 65 Dell systems where I work. Maybe the above problems are par for the course for PC's, but I would have a hard time believing that they are better than average.

    Furthermore, Dell's cases DO suck. Trust me. Let one age for about a year and a half and then try to open it. You WILL bust your thumbs. Their case design is STUPID. I have worked with many cases. Screwless cases are not a big deal anymore. They are a dime a dozen. But 99% of them are designed MUCH better than Dell's cases. We have at least three or four systems on which the case no longer fits properly because of the force required to open them after they have frozen shut, and the fact that they are held in place by some rather soft plastic.

    I have an Enlight case at home and it is by no means special or unique. It is FAR easier to work with than any Dell case I have ever used. No modern case is going to make it difficult to add hard drives. Trust me, I work on these things ALOT, I know a crappy case when I see one, and Dell's really suck.

    I am NOT "spouting hackneyed Slashdot wisdom". I have quite a bit of experience supporting Dell systems. I know what I am talking about. Dell has its good points and bad points, but the original poster did not hit on the good points and spoke of some of Dell's bad points as being good.
  • Why would that be impossible? The Cray T3E managed to make use of that many Alpha processors, although they're using the EV5 and not the EV6 architecture, like the Athlon.

    No doubt he meant 1000 processor SMP machine. The T3E is an MPP machine. A 1000 processor SMP machine would suffer way too much bus contention to be worthwhile, even as a 'because I can' hack. It would be hard to imagine an application that could benefit from such a set-up. Even harder to imagine one that wouldn't work as well or better on an MPP machine.

  • If I don't want to buy all the Apple "extras," what are my options?

    The Apple SMP systems seem fairly nice, but rather expensive.

    It's not a realistic alternative unless I can specify the specs rather than living with whatever AAPL tells me I can buy.

    I've idly watched the OpenPPC [openppc.org] project; apparently the direct offspring, Pop Computers, found that they had severe procurement problems.

    This does not a viable market make.

  • Actually, he's been to a great deal of hardware sites, but he found very little solid information.

    First, he went to AMD's web site. He browsed it thoroughly, and then did a number of searches. He discovered that AMD has essentially no information on their website about SMP, period. Almost no mention of it, even.

    He then checked out Tom's hardware, Ars Technica, as well as 4 other similar hardware review and news sites. Do you know what he found there? A few rumors about AMD's supporting SMP, a single mention of 760MP chipset, without any dates or informaiton on it, and a couple of claims that AMD would have an SMP motherboard out sometime in 2001.

    He wasn't impressed with most of the information out there.

    You see, I wasn't looking for vague rumors, I was looking for facts. I was hoping that someone might have heard something from a reputable source, or someone might have a URL or two to a site that I haven't checked.

    I'm glad that you were able to provide some insightful commentary here. Thank you for helping 'make slashdot what it has become'.

    --
    Toph

  • The hardware support for those G4 machines is sparse.

    OS X doesn't offer a command line unless you buy server or developer versions for a lot more money.

    Linux, I don't think is running on those machines.

    OS X is slower than Linux on the same platform.

    Yes, there IS a SMP alternative to Intel- and it's called Alpha. They're insanely great machines- just insanely expensive as well. G4 an alternative to Intel? Only when Motorola or IBM get off their duffs and sell SMP machines with the G4's processors.
  • I think the reason people get the impression that AMD chips are not top of the line, is because of the poor compatability with other components.

    Intresting. I havn't heard about this issue. When my old (duel) PPro motherbord died, I bought a K7, and a K7 motherbord, and PC100 memory (ECC, because I'm that way), and an ATX mobo and PC Power And Cooling power supply (because it is quiet, and the same brand I've been buying for years, and was one of the few things that AMD did say there were compatability problems with). I took all the cards and drives from the old system and moved them to the new system.

    They all worked. Including my generic NCR SCSI. Including my oddball ISA sound card. Including my cheap as crap ISA video card. Both of which I had bought for the PC I first built in 1992! I did get rid of the ISA sound card a few weeks later (FreeBSD funally stopped supporting it a decade after the makers went bankrupt, and I didn't feel like fixing the driver myself). I got rid of the graphics card too (so I could be ISA free -- it is my home server, and runs with no monitor most of the time, so the crappy graphics were just fine). Both were replaces with "store brand" PCI cards costing about $30 each.

    Zero compatability problems.

    Have you personally seen any compatability problems? Did the failed part work in another machine?

    Hopefully DELL, Compaq and and company will release "Interprise Level" servers featuring 8 way AMD chipsets.

    I hope so too. But I have little hope of Compaq doing it. After all they have the multi-way chipset (40+ CPUs) for the Alpha which would take little or no tweaking to work with the K7 "just" a BIOS, which shouldn't be hard for the first compony to reverse engener the IBM PC BIOS....

    P.S. now that I think back on it, the ISA video ard may not have been from '92, it may have been newer then that. But the sound card was that old (ProAudio Spectrum bought at a Microprose employe discount not all that long before the compony that made 'em vanished, nice card though)

  • by RelliK ( 4466 )
    Slashdot has been really disappointing me lately. Besides the usual crap that is posted in the news, look at what Ask Slashdot has turned into. The dumbest questions get posted. Like "I want to find a job" thing yesterday. Now this. If Christopher Cashell ever bothered to go to any of the hardware sites, he would find the answer to his question in about 5 minutes. Let me guess, the next Ask Slashdot question will be "What is Linux?"
    ___
  • In fact, they are SMP limited by the chipsets: If a chipset existed, you could run a box with 1000 Athlon processors - of course, designing such a beast would be impossible...

    Why would that be impossible? The Cray T3E managed to make use of that many Alpha processors, although they're using the EV5 and not the EV6 architecture, like the Athlon.

    I doubt that designing that beast would be desirable, though. There aren't that many companies who know how to build systems scaling up to 1000+ CPUs. Cray is one such company, and SGI seems to be another (allegedly building a 1024-CPU Origin 3000 on special order).

    But impossible? No.

    (This is, of course, blatantly ignoring that "chipset" is a very, uhm, simplified way of speaking about multi-CPU support.)
  • >OS X doesn't offer a command line unless you buy server or developer versions ...

    Bullshit.

    >Linux, I don't think is running on those machines.

    You meam, you suppose?? Bzzt. More bullshit.

    >OS X is slower than Linux on the same platform.

    Benchmarks please. No?
    Twm runs faster than Enlightenment, but I know plenty of "power users" who don't run E, or any WM at all. If the benchmark difference comes out within -/+ 8%.. no one will care.

    >Yes, there IS a SMP alternative to Intel- and it's called Alpha. They're insanely great machines- just insanely expensive as well.

    Considering how much easier it is to buy a Linux-only box compared to a Linux-only PPC box, the Alpha community has pretty weak excuses for having less commercial software support. Loki is doing a great job at porting x86 games to PPC Linux (cept Quake, but that's up to iD..)

    > G4 an alternative to Intel? Only when Motorola or IBM get off their duffs and sell SMP machines with the G4's

    I think there lies your only valid point. But Motorola/IBM is not in this part of the systems field. You can buy CPU's, and chipsets from them but what will you use for a motherboard? IBM released a reference design, but no one implemented it.

    What needs to happen is some enterprising company to strike a deal with LinuxPPC, to get enough orders to make production worthwhile.

    I absolutely hate x86... my two boxes here have 8 and 4 fans each and they're too hot to stick in a closet.

    My problem with the Mac stuff is it's too nice for my budget, not it's "too expensive" :).

    Linux makes ALL architectures equal (well, yeah, you need good compilers). These days, even Motorola sells Intel-CPU servers.... they consider their own hardware to be too much of a gamble! With Linux possibly taking over the market, Motorola has a chance to ride tthose coattails, if only someone at the top had some vision.
  • I e-mailed ASUS and one other Mobo maker asking this question. I got one reply, 'nothing in the works right now'. About two months ago.
  • Can it use the old celeron chips?
  • I believe that Intel "owns" SMP in some intellectual property legal sense. Have they erected any obstacles to AMDs chips being more compatible with Intel SMP?

    Sorta. As I recall, Intel owns patents which cover the APIC (Advanced Programmable Interrupt Controller), and these patents are related to APIC programming in an SMP environment. The K5 and K6's used the OpenPIC standard to avoid this, but there were no OpenPIC boards and so effectively no SMP w/ K5 and K6.

    The EV6-style SMP that Athlon uses avoids both of these issues by using an SMP model which has existing boards (the SMP Alpha boards) and which isn't covered by Intel's patents. (Of course, the Alpha boards can't be used directly for some reason, but at least they're closer than the non-existant boards for the K5s and K6s). I imagine the EV6-style SMP requires different OS support, though. That is, Linux, BeOS and WinNT would all need different SMP drivers for the SMP Athlon boards to replace the APIC code. (Basically, they avoid the Intel patent by not designing to Intel's MP spec, but that would imply that OSes need to have differen't MP drivers to support it.)

    --Joe
    --
  • Any limitations on the number of CPUs is going to be in the chipset either in the number of pins (about 100/cpu) it can support, or in internal queuing stuff in the chipset keeping track of outstanding cache probes - the bus protocol itself is refreshingly free of such stuff.

    Are you sure about that? Nothing like each chip being assigned a number out of a small and fixed pool of chip IDs?

    The number 14 looks very suspicious to me in this regard (2^4 - 2).

    OTOH, I haven't read detailed specs on the EV6 bus, and Compaq has recently started offering SMP systems with maximum processor counts greater than 14.
  • You can currently do that with intel boards. A friend of mine tried it on a BP6 using a 500 Mhz celeron and a 400 Mhz celeron. As for OS support to intelligently schedule jobs that take more time it could be done. As far as I know no OS has logic for differently clocked chips. It is something that could be added but would it be worth the trouble. How many people are really gonna buy several different speeds for a box.
  • Exactly, its the motherboards. I wonder if they are running into trouble? I hope not, because I have been specifically holding out for a dual AMD system. It sure feels like a long wait...
  • I participated in the Nextech 2000 conference in Austin Texas. One part of the conference was taking a trip to AMD where we got to ask questions of the various interns there. One of the people there was working on getting the glitches out of the motherboards with multi-processors. If I remember correctly, he said that they were very close, but there were still a couple of issues that had to be resolved. Unfortunately, they weren't allowed to tell us much more than that. The trip was the end of July, just in case you wanted to know.
  • I don't remember the source offhand, but I remember reading that SMP Socket A (Tbird/Duron) mobos would be out around January.


    "If ignorance is bliss, may I never be happy.
  • Even the K6 (Maybe, definately the K6-2 and K6-3) supported SMP.

    I don't think this is true. IIRC the story was that the K5 (remember that!) was smp capable but because no-one ever made smp motherboards for it, AMD gave up on SMP for the K6. The Athlon is the first AMD SMP capable processor since the K5.


    --
  • > From what I understand, the 760MP should be finished between December and January, and on store shelves late Q1 2000.

    Can you build SMP systems incrementally? I.e., buy a 760 motherboard and a single CPU for starters, and then add a second CPU as an upgrade a few months later?

    --
  • The BX chipset gives you 2 CPU support 'for free' -- we'll see if the AMD chipset does the same, or if you need to buy a special SMP chipset.

    Seems unlikely. The electrical interface that AMD uses (which is the same one DEC's Alpha uses) is not, in fact, a bus architecture, but rather a port. Each CPU has dedicated lines to the a "hub" chip. So you would need significantly more silicon to make a dual-processor chipset, as compared to a single-processor chipset. It seems generally agreed that this design is superior to the Intel bus design (it scales to 1000s of processors, compared to Intel's eight), but it does make thing a bit trickier on the low-end.

    SMP Systems have a huge margin advantage over single CPU systems.

    Very true. Why do SMP systems cost so much more? Because the people using them are willing to pay so much more.

    With SMP you can start using the magic words "server" and "workstation" which translates into higher profits for the resellers.

    "Server". There, I just used the magic word on a single-processor system! ;-)
  • Well, I do the buying for our company and yes, I am one of you guys (techie, not PHB); I'm senior mgmt and run Linux on my desk :-) We are a startup and $$$ are important.

    My policy is to buy Dell returns from DFO for desktops (they are new, just no warranty) and yes, they all come with Intel CPU's (Dell's choice not mine). We are now getting P3-733's with 133 frontside as "used" Dells. They are single CPU boxes. The reasons for my Dell-only are quality, homogeneity, ease of maintenance.

    The cost difference between AMD and Intel is not enough to materially impact this policy, as I'd need to go with a different vendor; most business class machines (most of my desktops are for developers) only come with Intel, Compaq's AMD boxes are all low end.

    All our servers (production and office) are low end SMP capable, and are either USparc-III (Sun Ex50's) or 2-way P3 boxes (Penguin, Dell, IBM).

    Where I'd really kill for a good AMD is in the laptop arena - we use midrange laptops, mostly for business people (sales and marketing) who don't really need performance. In keeping with our frugal policy, we don't get monitors but we do make sure laptops have decent displays (1024x768 TFT) and this means we are forced to buy Celerons, which suck.

    We have one real el-cheapo laptop, a bottom of the range $1000 Toshiba which we use as a test console for the server rooms. It was mine before we got venture capital. It has an AMD, K6-3 I think. The screen sucks (800x600 DS) but it kicks a $2000 Celeron laptop for performance, and the power consumption is very modest.

    If I could get a decent midrange laptop with a good screen and an AMD cpu, I'd buy one in a heartbeat; on both performance and battery life, AMD kicks butt in the mobile market.
  • Doesn't it only support 8? Or did they change the constant in R5?
  • Uh no. SSE is uses 128bit registers, 3DNow! uses 64bit registers. SSE contains more instructions that does 3DNow! Those two facts alone mean they cannot be clones.
  • But AMD's CPUs AREN'T clones of Intel. And that analogy is still wrong because while AMD and Intel CPUs are instruction set compatible, SSE and 3DNow! aren't. Lastly, you can't say SSE is a "hacktogether" response because I'm pretty sure they were working on it before 3DNow! was released. (What, you think you can put together an instruction set in a couple of months? KNI (Katmai New Instructions) were in planning a while before 3DNow! came out.) Also, SSE is in many ways superior to 3DNow!. It has more developer support, it has a wider range of instructions, and when fully implemented (which it is not in the PIII series) it is twice as fast (due to the whole 128 vs. 64 bit thing.)
  • Intel moves to .13 in 8 months? I would like to see that..

    Here's the latest roadmap [impress.co.jp], in Japanese pastel no less.

    8 months at the earliest--i.e. Q3 of next year. And that's for Tualatin, their .18->.13 die shrink of the P3. Northwood, the .13 P4, isn't due until Q4. (It'll be a lot easier for them to test and get the kinks out of the shrink with an old core that they understand very well than with a new.) Remember, they're already working on the shrink now.

    The real story about Intel that their Pentium 4 is being manufactured here in Israel (in Kiryat Gat), and they got LOTS of problems with that (like low numbers of chips on 1 waffer, only 2 machines to product the P4), so until Intel gets more machines to produce those chips - this will take long time.

    This story was posted here in the Israeli newspapers..


    Well if it was a repeat of this piece at The Register [theregister.co.uk], it may have misinterpreted things. For one thing, 70% yield on a new chip is quite impressive. For another, while a yield of 70,000 chips/week is not enough to substantially affect the x86 market, 70,000 represents more CPUs made in a week (and before launch no less) than there were 1 GHz P3s made for the first 6 months after its "launch"!

    In any case, no OEM is going to buy many of the initial P4s, because Intel is planning a packaging change in March or so. That means new motherboards, new systems, and another entire validation process for OEM's--something that most of them are not going to want to waste time doing twice. Thus they'll only offer a couple models, in limited quantities, of the original P4, so it doesn't matter that only limited quantities will be fabbed.

    In essence the first P4 will be positioned quite a bit like the original PPro. Whether the Willamette core ends up as successful as the P6 core has (remember, the PPro introduced the core now powering Celeron and P3) will be interesting to see.
  • Who else is waiting for the PIII 1337?
  • No, AMD licensed EV6 to get around the Intel Slot1 licensing, not the SMP licensing.
  • OS X doesn't offer a command line unless you buy server or developer versions for a lot more money.

    That's not true. The terminal app comes standard with MacOS X, regardless of whether or not you get the optional developer package.

    The pricing on the developer software has not been fixed, and the decision may even end up being to include the developer CD along with the standard system CD for free. Beats me what they'll actually end up doing, though. You just never know with Steve...

  • I think the reason people get the impression that AMD chips are not top of the line, is because of the poor compatability with other components. I've had a lot of problems getting AMD chips to play nice with my other cards. For a server, I don't see this being an issue, as you can always find *one* SCSI card, video card, to work just fine with the chipset. Hopefully DELL, Compaq and and company will release "Interprise Level" servers featuring 8 way AMD chipsets. Doing so would add a lot to the credability in the mindset of the average buisnessman. -Jon
  • The company that AMD had licensed the Athlon bus to was <a href="http://www.hotrail.com">HotRail</a>, formerly Poseidon Technology, decided in June that it was no longer profitable to remain in the PC chipset business, and put their 8-way chipset on the back burner, in order to focus all their strenghs on Networking switches and transceivers.
    <a href="http://www.ebnonline.com/ecomponents/commnew s/story/OEG20000501S0051">Here</a& gt; is an article about their switch of plans
  • AMD is working on the 760 chipset which is the DDR chipset, later this year or early next there will be another revison (760MP) which will support SMP, all current Durons and Thunderbirds are SMP capable.
  • How do you think that SSE & SSE2 will be implimented in upcoming AMD CPUs starting with the mustang.

    IIRC, KNI/SSE is just a clone of 3DNow! which debuted in the AMD K6 line.


    <O
    ( \
    XPlay Tetris On Drugs [8m.com]!
  • With all other variables equal (bus speed, HD speed, etc.), a 500 MHz PowerPC G3 is approximately twice as fast as a 1 GHz Intel PII/P!!! at doing hard-core integer number crunching (Photoshop, some 3D games in software mode, d.net [distributed.net]) according to the SPEC [spec.org] integer math benchmark. And the vector unit in G4 is quite a bit easier to code for than the vector unit in PIII, giving even more speed and boosting Team Slashdot's RC5 rating [distributed.net].
    <O
    ( \
    XPlay Tetris On Drugs [8m.com]!
  • Intel holds the patent for APIC, the smp structure. AMD will need to use openAPIC or their own standard before they can release. This means the kernel may need some work before supporting it.
  • You killed the first post kiddies! You bastard!

    This has got to be the first time in recent slashdot history that a "post #1" has gotten any moderation other than down...

    I think this deserves a toast, a slashdot story, and a redundent story, just to be sure!
  • I would think that it would not currently be profitable for the mobo makers to get into the dual-processor game, with the technology moving so fast and the next generation of chips right around the corner.
  • is to say I have a "Duron-Duron" setup....
  • One of the problems with 21x64 and thus Athlon chipsets is that the busses are designed to handle high front side bus speeds. To do this, the bus is a point to point bus with the processor connecting directly to the chipset. This translates to more wires and pins on SMP chipsets. The issue is further complicated by caching issues. Alphas use an L3 cache which the chipset controls to share data amoungst SMP nodes. This increases the compexity of SMP chipsets for the architecture. Other people have also mentions, and correctly from what I have heard, that AMD had no desire to produce chipsets, and this has probably been a reason they where slower to ramp up additional higher end chipsets. VIA might very well do similar sets, but I imagine AMD does not want to place all its eggs in that basket.
  • Probably not too many people remember, but about four or five years ago, AMD acquired the twitching remains of Nationa l Semiconductor [tuxedo.org], a venerable CPU/IC company that (among other things) was also making its own x86 clones at the time.

    One of the side-effects of that merger is that AMD and Intel have a very comprehensive patent cross-licensing deal, which was "inherited" from National Semiconductor. This is why Intel has not attempted to sue AMD for patent infringement since the days of the K5 cpu. It's also the reason that Intel forced the "Slot 1" bus architecture down the throats of most of the mobo companies a few years back: it was "new" and thus not covered by the agreement. Unfortunatly, it also turned out to be both a political and an engineering mistake, leading to the current chilly relationship between Chipzilla and most of the taiwanese mobo companies...

  • Hey all, I posted a story that got declined by the forces that be at /. but "The Register" a uk web rag reported last week or the one before that the 760 chipset is going to be out 1st Quarter 2001 in SMP fashion for T-Bird and Duron chips. The Register [theregister.co.uk] Its alos the home of the BOFH stories for those that are interested.
  • Actually I heard from Tom's Hardware [tomshardware.com] that "Sledgehammer" (K8) will START with two full cpu's per die - effectively SMP on a chip.

    From there I think it likely that AMD will produce 4, 8, 16, etc chips-per-die instead of plugging them into a motherboard. Although I guess it depends when they run into the bandwidth bottleneck.

    Suppose that's when they'll start pumping that EV6 DDR bus up to 400mhz, etc.

    Drooling profusely here.

  • All Socket A Athlons and Durons are multiprocessing enabled. They only require a new chipset to do so. AMD [amd.com] is developing the 760MP for this purpose. It will also support DDR SDRAM. This topic will be discussed in much detail at the Microprocessor Forum [mdronline.com] next week. VIA [viatech.com] may or may not develope a multiprocessor capable chipset for AMD processors. Hotrail [hotrail.com] was developing a chipset that would support 4 and more processors, but they dropped the project. I'll be covering all news of the 760MP next week at AMDZone [amdzone.com], and expect Tuesday to be the big news day if you are interested in the 760MP. There should be a load of new information, and possibly a press release or two.
  • According to the hardware spec of the Thunderbird and the Duron they support SMP. As for the older Athlons (with the slower cache) they do (from what I understand) NOT support SMP! So be careful, and don't buy an old one.

    Both AMD and VIA are planning SMP chipsets. Check out http://www.viahardware.com/roadmap2000.shtm for VIA's roadmap. There should be a chipset out just in time for Christmas if we're lucky! :-)

    I remember reading an article about a test of a Dual Thunderbird board, but I can't remember where... It was a beta board with a very early release of VIA's chipset anyway. They didn't actually test the SMP, they guys were more interested in the DDR support...

    Cheers,
  • by Malor ( 3658 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @07:05AM (#723000) Journal
    There have been LOTS of problems with AMD chips. Actually, more precisely, the problems have mostly been with the chipsets, which AMD themselves didn't want to make -- they were really hoping the third-party market would do that for them, but nobody stepped up to bat with a really good chipset for the Athlon until very recently.

    Quite some time before the Athlon came out, I myself bought a K6-2/300 (which I still have, happily chugging away as a Linux server) and had all kinds of hassles with the Aladdin V chipset and various and sundry cards. I eventually ended up buying a BX-chipset board instead, and was much much happier with it. Even now Linux doesn't run as well as it should, as it doesn't seem to have any support for that IDE chipset and leaves all the drives in non-DMA mode. It doesn't do much work so that's okay for me, but it's a bit annoying.

    With Athlon machines, the biggest problem was simply inadequate power supplies. Those chips suck power like nothing else before them (I think the new P4 will suck even more!) and if you put a nice fast GeForce DDR (another power hog) in there, many motherboards and/or power supplies were simply overwhelmed by the demand. Your purchase of that PCPAC power supply was probably the best money you spent in that machine, and may have saved you lots of trouble.

    There have also been AGP driver issues with some of the Athlon chipsets, though I haven't yet owned one and don't know the details. I CAN tell you that the compatibility problems have been severe enough that I held off buying an Athlon. It sounds like the KT133 chipset has it pretty well together, finally, but I will probably hold out a bit longer and go SMP when those ship. I haven't done an SMP machine yet for myself, though I have wanted to for a long time.

    Oh, another thought: it sounds like you had pretty good luck with your system, but remember that you weren't running fast 3-d graphics and/or Win9X either -- video drivers have been especially problematic. You were running against 'old' standards that are very well documented and easily testable. A lot of people are buying Athlons to game with, and gaming taxes a system harder than almost anything else you can do with it. AGP appears to be something of an evolving standard, too, so there are all sorts of niggling little details that differ from chipset to chipset, and can cause weird behavior that you would never see on a BSD-based server.

    My $0.02.
  • by tsikora ( 6430 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @04:44AM (#723001) Homepage
    Tyan is almost done with their SMP Athlon board. It should be released soon.
  • by Andreas Bombe ( 7266 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @06:31AM (#723002)
    Can you build SMP systems incrementally?

    Should be possible with Athlon, too. You can leave CPU sockets without CPU in Intel SMP configurations and the remaining CPUs are used properly. However, you have to put in termination dummies in order to not degrade the CPU bus signal quality. Since AMD uses the Alpha way for SMP, it won't have a CPU bus but separate ports on the chipset for every CPU, so you may not need terminators for those.

  • by Christopher Thomas ( 11717 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @09:07AM (#723003)
    In fact, they are SMP limited by the chipsets: If a chipset existed, you could run a box with 1000 Athlon processors

    Actually, my understanding was that limitations in the bus protocol limited SMP machines to 14 processors, as with Alpha machines. For more than that, you use a hierarchical scheme or clustering.
  • by Pengo ( 28814 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @03:11AM (#723004) Journal

    It is not the CPU but the Motherboard that can't support SMP. Maybe the MB manufacturers are waiting on a reference board or chipset from AMD? Does anyone know if the Irongate chipset is the holdback or is it simply the Motherboard configuration? (I have a feeling that the AMD motherboard chipset is not ready)




    --------------------
  • by Hadean ( 32319 ) <hadean.dragon+sl ... g m a i l . c om> on Sunday October 08, 2000 @04:19AM (#723005)
    Kyle at HardOCP [hardocp.com] posted up a link to an interesting synopsis of an AMD seminar. AMD confirmed that VIA would be supplying an SMP chipset which will be able to run two Socket A CPUs.

    These should be available this fall. As we all know; VIA has no problem introducing a new chipset to the motherboard manufacturers and no doubt will have no problem getting boards made with their chipset. As many of us know, the same Irongate chipset that many of us use for Slot A Athlons was perfectly capable of running the Socket A CPUs as well and was always available to motherboard manufacturers. Despite this, manufacturers still opted to use a VIA chipset instead and delay availability of their boards because of this.
  • by lscoughlin ( 71054 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @06:05AM (#723006) Homepage
    AMD uses DEC's EV6 protocal, same as alphas, which is why there is noise about alhp mb/ athlon compatibility.

    EV6 is an insanely scalable (1000's of processors) architecture (as compared to intels apic -- like 8 procs or something )

    The kernel might not need that much work as smp alpha stuff is already in place.
  • by cluge ( 114877 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @03:19AM (#723007) Homepage
    AMD has yet to finish a chip set that supports SMP. As far as has been reported from TW, no third party is producing an SMP chipset until AMD comes out with it's own chipset. Currently AMD's production is going full bore just to keep up with demand. SMP machines are a small part of the market and AMD is probably concentrating on using their advantage over Itel at this time to get as many chips "In the field".

    Plan to see SMP as production exceeds demand or at least keeps abreast of it. Also it has been widely reported that AMD is concentrating on introducing the "Sledgehammer" with an SMP MB chipset almost from introduction.

  • by MrBogus ( 173033 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @07:47AM (#723008)
    At least in the Intel world, the cost difference between a 1 CPU BX Motherboard and a 2 CPU BX Motherboard is pretty small. (The BX chipset gives you 2 CPU support 'for free' -- we'll see if the AMD chipset does the same, or if you need to buy a special SMP chipset. With BX, it's more or less the same profit margin for the Mobo guys. Custom SMP boards are more risky for them.)

    However, that's only the parts cost. SMP Systems have a huge margin advantage over single CPU systems. With SMP you can start using the magic words "server" and "workstation" which translates into higher profits for the resellers. And high profits are what endears OEMs to a particular vendor, and makes them more likely to adopt your product across an entire lineup.

    Right now, it's not that big of a deal for AMD, because they are selling out their entire production capacity, and they aren't even in the high end markets. However, if they ever want to have a chance of winning a bid for corporate machines from a big OEM like Compaq or IBM (which make huge margins on Intel SMP machines), they need SMP support. It's critical enough in the long term that they should subsidize the mobo guys if that's what it takes.
  • by fatphil ( 181876 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @04:21AM (#723009) Homepage
    The boot 'ROM' code is probably in Flash, so could be blasted with x86 code. The peripherals which have boot code have x86 code already, as the Alpha supports x86 emulation even at the lowest levels. FatPhil
  • by kinnunen ( 197981 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @05:11AM (#723010)
    JC's run a story [jc-news.com] about the AMD Reseller Confrence a while back. What really cought my eye was the following qoute (on the second page): "Also, according to the tech guy the multi-processor boards will be able to use processors with differing speed grades (i.e. a 700MHz and a 900MHz processor running on the same board simultaneously)".

    Can someone who has knowledge about operating systems, especially process cheduling, comment that a bit? Can users be sure that the most CPU hungry thread/process is run on the fastest CPU?

    --

  • by Burning1 ( 204959 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @04:03AM (#723011) Homepage
    By the way: AMD has no plans to cripple it's Duron processors.

    http://www.aceshardware.com/Spades/read_news.php?p ost_id=15000265 [aceshardware.com] - all Durons will be SMP capable, and, AFAIK, they should take full advantage of the 133MHz / PC266 DDR motherboards.
  • by isdnip ( 49656 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @04:09AM (#723012)
    The Alpha motherboard is close, but probably won't win the cigar.

    Motherboards include ROMs, for things like setup, BIOS and booting up in the first place. Alpha uses a different instruction set, so a 386-instruction chip like Athlon wouldn't read it.

    The mobo vendor could probably do an AMD port of the board. API is unlikely to since their job is to sell Alpha processors, not mobos. Somebody else with an Alpha SMP mobo would be a better candidate.
  • by jmenezes ( 100986 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @03:25AM (#723013) Homepage
    The reason SMP is still unavailable for the Athlon line of CPUs is that the current chipsets have no way of supporting it.
    The first Chipsets capable of supporting SMP, AMD's 760MP(a SMP-enabled version of the 760, due out very late this year or early next year) and the 770 chipset, which is expected to have support of up to 4 CPUs, and due out early next year.
    As far as VIA and otehr third-party chipset manufacturers, they are still awaitin a chipset from AMD, before they can begin making their own SMP chipsets.
    AMD's plans for a more advanced (4 and 8-way)chipset also had to be canceled when the company they were working with (forgot the name at the moment) decided to leave the server chipset business, leaving AMD to work on the chipsets on its own.
  • by Burning1 ( 204959 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @03:47AM (#723014) Homepage
    You are correct in regards to the processor's support for SMP. The current crop of Athlons (including the Athlon classic) are SMP capable.

    In fact, they are SMP limited by the chipsets: If a chipset existed, you could run a box with 1000 Athlon processors - of course, designing such a beast would be impossible...

    At any rate, Ace's Hardware has been covering AMD's products fairly diligently. They've posted several articles about the 760MP (The SMP capable Athlon chipset.) One good example is available here: http://www.aceshardware.com/Spades/read_news.php?p ost_id=10000214 [aceshardware.com]

    From what I understand, the 760MP should be finished between December and January, and on store shelves late Q1 2000.
  • by techsupersite.com ( 211454 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @03:32AM (#723015) Homepage
    From what I read awhile back, the next VIA chipset will have SMP for Thunderbird AND Duron. It will also have DDR support.

    I bet that not long after this chipset hits that companies like Abit have dual socket A motherboards, and for an attractive price. Especially considering that 700 MHz Durons, which are in some respects (FPU) better than a 700 Mhz P3, can be had for under $90...

    It sucks how slow SMP for Athlon has been coming, but I think when it does hit, Intel will lose a lot of face. The "Mustang" core Athlon is supposed to be the next stage, a chip that competes with Intel's way WAY overpriced Xeon line.
  • by ToLu the Happy Furby ( 63586 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @04:31AM (#723016)
    As others have said, the first SMP chipset for the K7 family is the 760MP, due out in December or January. AMD has already released the single-processor 760 chipset--which looks to be the first DDR-capable PC chipset--to motherboard manufacturers; motherboards based on the 760 should be showing up at the end of this month.

    It has been pointed out that one of the major reasons AMD has taken so long to get SMP going is that they already sell all of their processors anyways, and already have commitments for all the K7 chips they can make through the end of the year. This is true, but misses a more important point: with some few exceptions (i.e. nerds like us ;) the market for SMP boxes is primarily business servers. This presents two issues:

    1) Many if not most Intel SMP boxes are currently stuffed with Xeons. Thus, AMD has been perfectly content waiting for the release of their upcoming "Mustang" core tweak, featuring up to 1MB L2 cache--due out...you guessed it...in December or January--before rolling out the 760MP. Conversely, the big-L2 Mustangs without an SMP-capable chipset are dead-in-the-water.

    2) By and large, business still clings to the notion of AMD as a cut-rate unreliable chip company. Despite the fact that knowledgable consumers have switched over to the cheaper faster Athlon in droves, Intel still has a nearly complete monopoly over the x86 business market. This impression of AMD as the "cheapo generic brand" persists despite Intel racking up delay after delay, errata after errata, recall after recall, embarrassment after embarrassment (i820, i840, 1.13GHz P3, Itanium) in the past year and a half. AMD knows that if they release the 760MP and it runs into one rumor of one conflict with one obscure 3D graphics card no business machine would ever contain anyways, their foray into the high-margin world of business computing is over before it began. (Never mind that Intel can release the i840, their new workstation-quality top-of-the-line chipset, with an "errata" which rendered it unusable with ECC memory!) Thus they are being very careful, and rightly so, with their validation process on this one.

    Interestingly enough, if they get their act together (and purchasing departments take their heads out of their asses), AMD has a major market opportunity on their hands here. The Coppermine Xeon (i.e. a plain-old Coppermine P3 with $200 tacked on to the price) is incapable of scaling past 1GHz until Intel moves to a .13um process--in about 8 months. The 512kb, 1Mb and 2Mb L2 cache Xeons won't move above 800MHz or so in that time. Meanwhile, the new P4 chips are *not* SMP capable (or at least there will be no SMP chipsets available for them). Itanium is a joke and will likely never be launched. Now, Foster, the "P4 Xeon" will be released, possibly as soon as January, but the large-cache versions of Foster won't be out until Q2.

    That leaves AMD with a quarter as the sole supplier of GHz+ large-cache multiprocessing x86 CPUs. Will that be enough to get them into the lucrative enterprise market?? Hard to say. After all, you never get fired for buying Intel...
  • by Mike1024 ( 184871 ) on Sunday October 08, 2000 @04:03AM (#723017)
    Hey,

    I have read on internet (www.aceshardware.com I think) that you can use existing alpha mb to put K7 into it; word is the K7 uses the Slot A (DEC Alpha) interface and so is supposed to support alpha style SMP. So the K7 should have nice SMP, scable up to 32 processors.

    If you wanted just dual processors, this implies A UP2000 [alpha-processor.com] or suchlike would do the job, but I can't say for sure.

    Here's a qoute from Paul Jakma

    Interestingly the new *Alpha* 21264 UP1000 motherboard uses the AMD Irongate chipset.. they also have a dual 21264 UP2000 board based on a DEC chipset. So it seems K7/Alpha chipsets are interchangeable, so then K7 SMP is probably possible using the DEC chipset.

    And here's a qoute from Acehardware.com:

    Alpha:Slot-A:Slot-B:Athlon KH Yeap Wednesday,
    June 23, 1999 (10:00 AM EST)
    Ok, at the ongoing PC Expo in New York, Alpha
    Processor Inc. is demo'ing its new
    Alpha-21264 750 Mhz, which is expected to
    come out in July. More interestingly a 1 Ghz
    versions of the processor, which runs under
    regular air-cool condition, is also demo'ed
    along with a Slot-A motherboard, UP1000, and
    a Slot-B motherboard, UP2000. For further
    details check out this News.com report.

    Now, a lot of people have been wondering
    about the possibility of running a K7 on an
    Alpha Slot-A or Slot-B motherboard. According
    to Alpha, yes, this is possible. To make
    things even more interesting Alpha's new
    Slot-A motherboard, UP1000, uses a chipset
    that is a hybrid between AMD's very own K7
    chipset, Irongate (AMD-751), and ALI's
    M1543C!! PC Watch Japan has a great shot of
    this UP1000 motherboard. Also appears on PC
    Watch is a photo of the Slot-B UP2000 and a
    photo of the 1 Ghz Slot-B Alpha processor.
    Special thanks to Daiki for this wonderful
    tips.


    So, you could try an Alpha dual-processor Motherboard but I can't give you any garuntees.

    Michael

    ...another comment from Michael Tandy.

All seems condemned in the long run to approximate a state akin to Gaussian noise. -- James Martin

Working...