I have buying 3 Ware 6000 series and i test at AMD Athlon... :mad: , it;s not work .... crash and crash... again...

and then i change to duron... it's works :eek:.

3Ware bad or AMD bad ???

AMD bad in my exp. anyways, alot of people will disagree...

I love AMD processors, in general. The problem is with the Athlons because of motherboard chipsets. The Athlon was released and Intel threatened to cut off every major board manufacturer, if the used Intel chipset boards to supply Athlon platforms. AMD then had to race to get chipsets out that could support their processors. I don't think they ever got it quite right on the Athlon support. The Thunderbird series, however... way good!
;)

Originally posted by IPC PRO
if the used Intel chipset boards to supply Athlon platforms.

Umm... No.

Athlons use an entirely different chipset-processor connection (it's not even a bus anymore, it's a port, which is one reason why dual processors aren't out yet) and Intel's chipsets wouldn't work with Athlons anyway.

Intel didn't do anything evil or monopolistic here... AMD just dropped the ball.

The KT133A chipset is perfectly stable, as is the AMD760.....

Now, as to switching to a Duron and it working, when it didn't with a T-bird.... that makes no sense..... unless they were different mobos, or a BIOS change.

When the big Slot A (not to be confused with Socket A) processors were released, Intel's 440BX chipset was being used extensively. Intel did, indeed, make the threat to several mainboard manufacturers. I speak with representatives in Taiwan 3-4 times a week. Our manufacturing facility is right next-door to ASUS.
The KT133A, and the AMD760 have both been released lately. In addition, they were not available when the big Athlon's were released. In fact, have you ever noticed that the Slot A interface, is really a socket 1 interface turned around backwards?? Also you noticed that the AMP manufacturer part number for that interface is identical for both types??? Hmmm..... AMD got stepped on. Everyone in the manufacturing arena is aware of this. It isn't a rumor, it's common knowledge.
Take a look at this 1999 article about the Athlon 650, there is a little paragraph that lists "production model mainboards, currently available". Every single one of those boards was 440BX-based!!
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www.amd.com/news/prodpr/9988.html+AMD+Athlon%2BNo+chipsets%2BIntel&hl=en:rolleyes:

The AMD Athlon uses the Alpha EV6 architecture, whereas Intel chips use the GTL+ architecture.....

And I didn't see a mention of an Athlon production board model number, just a list of manufactures... although I did see mention of the model numbers for P3 boards....

Hence, AMD released the 750 chipset, in the interim, while VIA prepped the KX133...

Let me make this simple. I am relatively certain that everyone here is familiar with the Tom's Hardware Guide site, right? He is undeniable authority on this type of subject. Here is an article that spells it out in black & white. Exactly what i have been saying.....

http://www.tomshardware.com/mainboard/99q3/990818/athlon_boards-02.html
(i just edited this link, the first one did not work)


Let the pro's defend my point......

(Is Intel Involved?

So what is the real reason why there were only a handful of motherboard makers at the platform launch-event in Taipei last week? Well, as you might have guessed already, there's a very strong rumor that the one company that hates and detests AMD's Athlon really badly is throwing its whole weight in to threaten the entire Taiwanese motherboard industry. We heard rumors of an artificial 'BX-chipset shortage' and other unpleasant threats that put a motherboard maker into a tough position. No motherboard manufacturer is particularly keen on making Intel upset. In the past such behavior resulted in lagging shipments of Intel-chipsets, chipset- shipments of only small quantity or in the worst case even in a complete cancellation of the 'cooperation' between Intel and the motherboard maker. This is a serious thing, because so far the vast majority of systems used Intel-processors and Intel chipsets. The motto used to be "stick with Intel, and you'll make money", and thus all motherboard makers stuck to it nicely.

The current situation doesn't make things easier. Athlon may be a great product, but will it ship in quantity? If it should, Intel could be left sitting on its chipset until kingdom come, but who can assure that? If Athlon should not ship in decent amounts, the majority of users will have to stick to Intel-systems and thus the big money is still made with Intel-systems, including motherboards with Intel chipsets. So the motherboard makers don't know. Shall they take the risk and upset Intel, or should they turn their backs on AMD to score some points with Intel?

The Sad Situation

Let's pick three examples, Abit, Asus and FIC. Abit already announced that they won't do Athlon-motherboards. Does that surprise anyone? Abit never made any Super7-boards as well. It doesn't seem too unlikely that Abit wants to stay on good terms with Intel. Asus is the next and saddest example. I know for a fact that Asus has designed a highly excellent Athlon-motherboard. However, who expected Asus at the launch-event in Taiwan last week waited in vain. Asus is chicken, they could easily supply Athlon-boards, but they are afraid of Intel's reaction. Well, well. Example number three is FIC. FIC has got a relationship with Intel too, they are actually a significantly big customer for Intel chipsets. However, FIC belongs just as VIA to the Formosa Plastic empire, and thus FIC used to be one of the first to supply motherboards with VIA and thus non-Intel chipsets. FIC doesn't have the slightest problem with launching their Athlon-motherboard. They weren't afraid of Intel in the past and they're not afraid of them now as well. That's the spirit, dear readers! Asus is one of the very best motherboard makers in the world, but being afraid of Intel doesn't score them any points with me.

Praise the Three Musketeers!

This motherboard review includes the Athlon boards from Gigabyte, FIC and Microstar International (MSI). Let's commend them for their courage and let's hope that others will follow. I will not rest until I either find out that Intel never threatened anyone, or until I found some hard evidence to once and for all stop this ridiculous behavior. I will fly over to Taiwan and talk to key people in the motherboard business. Intel is either free of sin or it should better stop threatening businesses as long as there's time. The FTC is waiting and so am I. )
:D :D

Well Intel did threaten manufactures if they shipped Athlon boards.... now as to the chipsets, Tom's Hardware Guide, clears that up...

http://www4.tomshardware.com/mainboard/99q3/990818/athlon_boards-04.html

:)

Well, believe it or not, I do have one of the first K7 (AKA Athlon) ASUS boards right in my tech area, and it is 440BX based. It was never put into production because ASUS is scared. MSI also had a 440BX chipset based board that never made production. Regrettably, one of my sales people sold it, but I would love to have the model number for you. Regardless, I know for a fact that the K7 was electronically different, but comparitivly the same as Slot 1. AMD delivered the chip set for Athlon, the AMD-750, with basic features that were available from the Intel 440BX chip set a year earlier.
http://www.chipanalyst.com/mpr/h/2000/0117/140304.html
There was originally an offshoot 440BX chipset (www.tennmax.com/443bx/agp440bx.htm+K7%2B440BX&hl=en) some called the 443BX chip. It is an "enhanced version of the 440BX.
Without actually shipping the product, you are going to have to trust me on this one.

The 82443 chip is the "north bridge" part of the 440BX chipset. All 440BX motherboards contain it -- it isn't an "offshoot chipset" or anything of the sort. The "slot A" connector is physically the same as the "slot 1" connector because that way motherboard companies could save a few dollars per board; the electrical specifications are completely different.

As for you haveing a K7 440BX motherboard, well, I don't believe it.

I don't believe it at all.... the two chips use entirely different bus protocols....

OK, no sense in beating a dead horse. I'll bow out gracefully, as it really means nothing to me whether I win this debate or not.....
:rolleyes:

Here is my support!!!!! Some of use ICQ, right? Well, I found a column where they are talking about the Athlon 650's on ASUS Flagship 440BX boards!! Why don't you tell them that their systems are pipe-dreams??
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:lists.suse.com/archives/suse-linux-e/2000-Mar/1684.html+run+Athlon+on+440BX&hl=en

Yatsen Ng
> > yatsen.ng@brunel.nl
> > Den Haag, The Netherlands
>
> Here are my 2 cents:
>
> I just bought an Amd Athlon 650 on an Asus 440BX Flagship mobo, 128MB
> mem, IBM 15GB harddisk (7200rpm) and a Matrox Millenium Dual Head, 32MB
> AGP.
>
> The machine I already had is exactly the same, but for the CPU is a
> P-III 500 and the harddisk is an IBM 15GB 7200 rpm. I installed SuSE 6.3
> on both.
>
> Now for the troubles and performance:
>
> - The installation was (as usual) flawless. No trouble at all.
>
> - I didn't see any differences between the installation on the Pentium
> or the Athlon, only the kernelmessages about the bugs were slightly off.
>
> - The performance on the Athlon is quite a bit better. I'm not sure how
> to express the rates, but I run SETI@Home (maybe you know it) and one
> block of data runs approx. 10 hours on the P-III and about 8 hrs on the
> Athlon. Quite some difference I'd say.
>
>
> Greetz,
> Rogier
>
>
> +---------------------------------+
> | Rogier Maas |
> | icarus@guldennet.nl |
> | http://www.guldennet.nl~icarus/ |
> | ICQ# 2403780 |
> +---------------------------------+

:angry: