hosted by liquidweb


Go Back   Web Hosting Talk : Web Hosting Main Forums : Colocation and Data Centers : AMD X2 4400 vs X2 4600
Reply

Forum Jump

AMD X2 4400 vs X2 4600

Reply Post New Thread In Colocation and Data Centers Subscription
 
Send news tip View All Posts Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-26-2006, 05:20 PM
devonblzx devonblzx is offline
Web Hosting Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 3,716

AMD X2 4400 vs X2 4600


Which do you think would be better for hosting? audio streaming/web hosting content...

Athlon64 X2 4400+ (2.2ghz 1MB Cache per Core)
or
Athlon64 X2 4600+ (2.4ghz 512K Cache per Core) ??

Also do you think Socket AM2 would be good for hosting? They have DDR2 800mhz RAM and less power consumption...any disadvantages that you know of?



Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 07-26-2006, 05:22 PM
[inx]Olly [inx]Olly is offline
Web Hosting Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Bluesquare dc, Uk
Posts: 1,591
We've been using the 4400 for gaming for good while now.

Absolutely delighted with the overall performance.

__________________
Olly | INX-Gaming
Call of Duty 4 hosting

  #3  
Old 07-26-2006, 05:47 PM
timdorr timdorr is offline
Formerly orange-y
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 632
Depends on your pricing, but I think the 4600+ is in a better sweet spot right now. However, power usage over time could change that, as the ADV4400DAA6CD is 89W, versus 110W for the 4600+. So, 21W could add up over time. It's also a 4.5% performance difference we're talking about, so it's probably better to go with the 4400+ in the long run.

__________________
Former owner of A Small Orange
New owner of <COMING SOON>

Sponsored Links
  #4  
Old 07-26-2006, 05:48 PM
devonblzx devonblzx is offline
Web Hosting Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 3,716
Well you can get 89W for both actually...but I was more interested in the extra 1MB cache (4400 with two cores) vs. the extra 400mhz (4600 with two cores).

  #5  
Old 07-26-2006, 05:56 PM
timdorr timdorr is offline
Formerly orange-y
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 632
Well, that's Socket AM2, which they weren't sure about from the way the original post sounds.

__________________
Former owner of A Small Orange
New owner of <COMING SOON>

  #6  
Old 07-26-2006, 06:08 PM
devonblzx devonblzx is offline
Web Hosting Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 3,716
Yeah I'm not ;-)

But it looks to be better in most aspects...

  #7  
Old 07-26-2006, 06:17 PM
cwl@apaqdigital cwl@apaqdigital is offline
Web Hosting Master
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 3,834
AM2 is definately the future! in order to compete with Intel P-D or core2 duo's pricings, AMD has slashed AM2 price drastically! at this time, A64-X2 AM2 costs about half of s939 version, you just can't pass that! except FX62, all AM2 X2 chips use 89w max (ADA), or 65w max (ADO), and ultra low-power version is 35w max (ADD), and they all support DDR2-800 modules, unbuffered ECC or non-ECC.

also, Tyan has released s3950g2nr AM2 board using the same serverworks' HT1000 chipset with spermicro H8SSL-i board, so Linux compatibility won't be an issues at all! it also comes 133mhz PCI-X for high-end PCI-X SATA/SAS/SCSI RAID card, IPMI SODIMM socket, and Intel dual-port Gb NICs (purportedly better than the usual Broadcom Gb NICs on most AMD server boards). it's fully 1U optimized with passive cooling and front-back DIMM slots (4x 2G DDR2-800 max)

so, AM2 is here, folks!

__________________
C.W. LEE, Apaq Digital Systems
http://www.apaqdigital.com
sales@apaqdigital.com


  #8  
Old 07-28-2006, 10:08 PM
mperkel mperkel is offline
Web Hosting Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Gilroy CA.
Posts: 458
When it comes to that the real difference is being on a fast network. It doesn't take a lot of power to stuff files down a pipe. So - having said that the new AMD AM2 socket 3800+ is dirt cheap. Get a couple 300gig sata II drives and maybe 2-4 gigs of ram and you have a box that screams.

__________________
Marc Perkel
/root
http://www.junkemailfilter.com
marc@perkel.com

  #9  
Old 07-29-2006, 10:06 PM
PixelManual PixelManual is offline
Web Hosting Master
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,493
Lee, any word on when the FX-50's and the like will come down big-time? I heard a rumour they'll drop to $350 from there current $1K+ ratings. Although, it was a rumour and I'm sure there are people here with a lot more knowledge than me.

edit: more specifically the FX-60 Dual Core 2.6GHZ 2MB L2 Cache

__________________
GeeksGather - Undergoing redevelopment. Stand by.

  #10  
Old 07-29-2006, 10:11 PM
mgphoto mgphoto is offline
Web Hosting Master
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,114
Listen to cwl@apaqdigital. he knows more about servers than about anyone on this forum. I'd suggest buying them from him too. He builds great servers and has clients all over the world.

__________________
SiteSouth
Atlanta, GA and Las Vegas, NV. Colocation


  #11  
Old 07-29-2006, 10:34 PM
cwl@apaqdigital cwl@apaqdigital is offline
Web Hosting Master
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 3,834
Quote:
Originally Posted by PixelManual
Lee, any word on when the FX-50's and the like will come down big-time? I heard a rumour they'll drop to $350 from there current $1K+ ratings. Although, it was a rumour and I'm sure there are people here with a lot more knowledge than me.

edit: more specifically the FX-60 Dual Core 2.6GHZ 2MB L2 Cache
fx-60 s939 or fx-62 AM2 is still up there! but X2-5000 AM2, also dual 2.6Ghz/1M L2 cores, will be few hundreds cheapper than fx-60.

really, X2-4400 (2.2G)/4800(2.4G)/5000(2.6G) are great buys right now because they all come with 2x 1M L2 which are basically identical to Opteron 175/180/185, and cost less than half of corresponding Opteron.

and again, 1U optimized tyan s3950g2nr (AM2) make it possible to use these low-cost dual-core AM2 chips to be immediately implemented in production servers!

well, core2 duo (Conroe; un-dualable Woodcrest) is out now, and it should beat X2 AM2/Opteron s939 by wide margin. the pity is that there is no 1U optimized server board available yet from any manufacturers (well, fortunately for AMD)!

__________________
C.W. LEE, Apaq Digital Systems
http://www.apaqdigital.com
sales@apaqdigital.com



Last edited by cwl@apaqdigital; 07-29-2006 at 10:41 PM.
  #12  
Old 07-29-2006, 10:36 PM
PixelManual PixelManual is offline
Web Hosting Master
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,493
Thanks for the, as usual, extremely knowledgeable response.

__________________
GeeksGather - Undergoing redevelopment. Stand by.

  #13  
Old 07-30-2006, 12:09 PM
Katatonic Katatonic is offline
Web Hosting Master
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Support Ticket Near You!
Posts: 1,106
He's quite right.

AMD's flagship processor the FX-62 won't be anywhere near $350. It will always be high priced but is coming down to ~$750 thanks to Conroe.

  #14  
Old 07-31-2006, 02:06 PM
cwl@apaqdigital cwl@apaqdigital is offline
Web Hosting Master
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 3,834
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwl@apaqdigital
fx-60 s939 or fx-62 AM2 is still up there! but X2-5000 AM2, also dual 2.6Ghz/1M L2 cores, will be few hundreds cheapper than fx-60.

really, X2-4400 (2.2G)/4800(2.4G)/5000(2.6G) are great buys right now because they all come with 2x 1M L2 which are basically identical to Opteron 175/180/185, and cost less than half of corresponding Opteron...
I need to correct myself! X2-5000 AM2 comes with 2x 512K L2 only, not 2x 1M as I indicated previously.

just to make it clear about the entire dual-core AM2 line:
Athlon 64 FX-62 2.8GHz 1MBx2 125W
Athlon 64 FX-60 2.6GHz 1MBx2 125W
Athlon 64 X2 5000+ 2.6GHz 512KBx2 89W
Athlon 64 X2 4800+ 2.4GHz 1MBx2 89W or 65W
Athlon 64 X2 4600+ 2.4GHz 512KBx2 89W or 65W
Athlon 64 X2 4400+ 2.2GHz 1MBx2 89W or 65W
Athlon 64 X2 4200+ 2.2GHz 512KBx2 89W or 65W
Athlon 64 X2 4000+ 2.0GHz 1MBx2 89W or 65W
Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2.0GHz 512KBx2 89W or 65W or 35W

89W:ADA version, 65W: ADO, 35W: ADD

__________________
C.W. LEE, Apaq Digital Systems
http://www.apaqdigital.com
sales@apaqdigital.com


  #15  
Old 07-31-2006, 02:38 PM
devonblzx devonblzx is offline
Web Hosting Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 3,716
Lee,

Do you think that the 4400 would outperform the 4600 in a hosting environment or the other way around? I like the 4400 AM2 because it's real close to the opteron 175...the only difference I've seen is the total bandwidth is 20gbps for the AM2 and 24gbps for the opteron but only 14gbps for the S939. So let me know your thoughts on the whole thing and any differences between the three (opteron s939, a64 s939, and AM2).

Thanks,
Devon

Reply

Related posts from TheWhir.com
Title Type Date Posted


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Postbit Selector

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump
Login:
Log in with your username and password
Username:
Password:



Forgot Password?
Advertisement:
Web Hosting News:
WHT Membership
WHT Membership



 

X

Welcome to WebHostingTalk.com

Create your username to jump into the discussion!

WebHostingTalk.com is the largest, most influentual web hosting community on the Internet. Join us by filling in the form below.


(4 digit year)

Already a member?