Talk:Socket 939

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What has the Athlon64 spot got to do with this socket 939 article? You could rather say like "These CPUs are available for this socket, check out their features at their own article"

Contents

[edit] POV

Although it does not support DDR2 memory, the combination of various Socket 939 motherboards and Athlon 64/Athlon 64 FX CPUs has been repeatedly shown to either match or outstrip Intel's offerings in performance per dollar ratios when it comes to content creation and gaming. In business applications and multimedia, Intel continues to hold a slight advantage.

Although this is conventional wisdom, there is no actual reference for any of this. As such, I'm removing it from the article. Themindset 19:27, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Seems S939 does indeed not support DDR2 AMD64 Technology: Wired For DDR Memory Technology
Vic 12:24, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CPUs

Can we get a list of CPUs supported by this socket? There can't be that many. Tronno (talk | contribs) 01:28, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Athlon 64 FX
Clawhammer (130 nm SOI)
San Diego (90 nm SOI)
Toledo (90 nm SOI)

Athlon 64
Clawhammer (130 nm SOI)
Newcastle (130 nm SOI)
Winchester (90 nm SOI)
Venice (90 nm SOI)
Manchester (90 nm, SOI)
San Diego (90 nm SOI)

Athlon 64 X2
Manchester

Vic, 14:19, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Socket features? CPU features?

Hmm... The "key features" chapter says things like Eight new 64-bit integer registers, for a total of sixteen. Is this really relevant for the socket? I think that's a CPU feature. The socket does not have anything to do with the registers, and the motherboard can't even detect whether they exist (besides trying to run a program in the CPU, of course). Bisqwit 12:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chronological order?

This article and the corresponding socket 940 article disagree about the chronological order of the sockets. Rōnin 03:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Socket 940 (which needs a rewrite) came before Socket 939. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 01:32, August 20, 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Too many links

I've removed all of the external links from the 'Context' section. Wikipedia is not a link farm. Imroy 09:30, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Availability

Are Socket 939 A64s really as hard to find as the article says? I'm asking because I just bought a new Socket 939 3400+ with motherboard and memory from a reputable online vendor for a decent price. This really needs to be sourced, and it should indicate which models are affected. -lee 23:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

And upon reading it again, I see the part about dual-core processors. D'oh. Still, though, eBay isn't exactly the best of sources for this sort of thing. -lee 23:55, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I think the whole statement could be removed, I agree that the claim and whole eBay mention has no place. Anyways, this article is not about the X2; this claim about 939 X2s being hard to find should be in the X2 article, not here. The hardcore icon the sandman 03:59, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
To add to the fun, I checked Newegg a few days ago and they still had Socket 939 X2s in stock, with no indication they were going to run out any time soon. That whole block of text can go. -lee 04:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fastest CPU available

The Athlon 64 X2 4800+ model was the highest speed processor available in the Socket 939 package.

It actually looks like the Athlon FX-60 is the fastest processor available for Socket 939, but I'm no expert. Should this be changed? PenguiN42 (talk) 18:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep, so I went ahead and changed it. The Opteron 185 is almost identical to the FX-60, though (lacking only the unlocked multiplier), and in terms of clockspeed the single-core FX-57 had the edge, so talking about which is fastest is a little ambiguous - so I reworked the section a bit to clear things up. Previously, it seemed to contradict itself... 82.44.114.217 (talk) 06:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)