AMD Athlon-64 vs. Opteron

[Kurt Wall]

On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 08:28:44PM -0600, Collins Richey took 33 lines to write:
> On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 22:11:41 -0400, Kurt Wall <kwall at kurtwerks.com> wrote:
> > 
> > What is the difference, if one exists, between AMD's Athlon 64
> > and AMD's Opteron? As far as I can tell, both are 64-bit CPUs and both
> > can run 64- or 32-bit software. So why would I buy one instead of the
> > other, if I take the price difference out of the calculation?
> > 
> 
> As you must have seen, there doesn't appear to be much info that
> addresses this specific question. The only for sure difference, other
> than the fact that Opteron is future direction, is the fact that
> Opteron requires ECC memory. Also the Athlon64 series comes in two
> variants - one with a single memory path, and the other (more
> expensive) with a dual memory path.
> 
> Ah, I did find a decent discussion. The net of this is that "As
> mentioned before, the Athlon 64 will be essentially a slightly hobbled
> (and more economical) version of the Opteron processor, intended for
> the desktop and mobile markets."
> 
> Try this url: http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1466

Dude! You are such a stud. It still looks like Opteron is the way to go,
then. The reason I asked was that I'm currently thinking about building
a dual Opteron workstation...

Kurt
-- 
Information Center, n.:
	A room staffed by professional computer people whose job it is
to tell you why you cannot have the information you require.