VOGONS


Any love for AM2?

Topic actions

Reply 20 of 42, by douglar

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

OK, this board is kind of dirty, but kind of fun-- M2N61-AR
Back in the days before HDMI, I was always looking for electrical SPDIF connectors to run to my receiver, so that always gets me nostalgic, even though this was never anything but a hobby board for me.

IMG_8543.JPG
Filename
IMG_8543.JPG
File size
1.48 MiB
Views
299 views
File license
CC-BY-4.0
IMG_8541.jpg
Filename
IMG_8541.jpg
File size
1.56 MiB
Views
299 views
File license
CC-BY-4.0

The motherboard was donated in 2015 or so, but I purchased the ATI x800xl card new and added the aftermarket cooler.
Came with a capacitor knocked off, but I was so eager to try out the new card that I soldered it back on instead of returning it like a sensible person.
That's why there's a crooked cap on the top left. My solder skills tap out somewhere between good enough and cringey.
The back plate on the cooler is mauled because it didn't fit in the low profile case without taking the tin snips to it.
Both parts spent some time at a smoker's house. Computers are like tar magnets.

Reply 21 of 42, by feipoa

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
RoberMC wrote on 2020-02-13, 19:13:

IMHO, i prefer a fast Core 2 Duo.

Windows XP games do not benefit from multiple cores, and a fast C2D runs pretty cold and overclock like crazy, a 3,3 Ghz easily to over 4 Ghz with default voltage, while still running cool and silent. It beats even any Core 2 Quad for WinXP gaming because of the lower clocks and more heat of the C2Q. It is also a cheap and stable platform with a lot of mainboard choices in all kind of form factors, chipsets, colors, and memory types (I like Micro-ATX boards the most for all my retro systems).

AM2 is just not as fast in general, not as efficient, noisier, fast processors are harder to find, not so many choices, some say drivers are not as stable, but anyway, still valid and fun to play with.

I currently run a Core2Duo T7800 (2.6 GHz) on my Thinkpad laptop in the kitchen, and an FX-60 desktop in my office. Both run XP with 3.x GB of RAM. Even with the FX-60 running at 2.6 GHz, it feels a bit more responsive than the T7800 with general browsing. Maybe the hybrid drive on the FX-60 system is responsible for that; I don't know.

EDIT: The main issue I have found with the AMD FX-60 and AM2 systems was that some old and new software doesn't work on it, like the version of Snagit I have, or the new printer drivers for my M281 HP laser printer. Probably an issue with the drivers not being tested for this hardware, but it is still something to consider.

Ultimate 486 Benchmark | Ultimate 686 Benchmark | Cyrix 5x86 Enhancements | 486 Overkill Graphics | Worlds Fastest 486

Reply 22 of 42, by swaaye

User metadata
Rank Moderator
Rank
Moderator

Intel chipsets are certainly superior to what AM2 has going for it.

I upgraded some work and co-worker LGA 775 machines to E8600 a couple years back. The CPUs are so cheap it's silly. Performance might as well be a modern machine for the most part. I also grabbed some cheap second hand GPUs for some of them, things like GeForce GT630. Gets the GUI acceleration to modern standards and full H.264 acceleration for web videos.

If Windows 10 were to stop supporting Core 2 or Phenom that would be the time to move on but until then if they are operational they are quite adequate.

Phenom doesn't support SSE 4.1 and that has been a problem with some software. Sometimes a patch is released to revert that requirement but can't really count on that anymore.

Reply 23 of 42, by Standard Def Steve

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

The E8600 is powerful enough that 264 and VP9 acceleration aren't even necessary, unless of course you want 4K.

My E8600 w/ GMA X4500HD can handle VP9 at 1080p/60 or 1440p/30 in Chrome quite nicely. I'm seeing nothing wrong with Win10 GUI performance either. Of course, having dual-channel DDR3-1333 is probably helping IGP performance quite a bit.

Reply 24 of 42, by The Serpent Rider

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
RoberMC wrote:

Windows XP games do not benefit from multiple cores,

They do benefit from 2 though.

wiretap wrote:

Here's my only AM2 board, an Asus M2N32-SLI Deluxe WiFi

I have an Asus M2N32-SLI Premium, which has SSD cache instead of WiFi module. The only real downside of this series is the lack of 8-pin 12V connector. That's a noticeable limiter for quad core CPUs like Phenom II.

Get up, come on get down with the sickness
Open up your hate, and let it flow into me

Reply 26 of 42, by appiah4

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

I don't consider post Socket 754 retro but I used AM2/2+/3 platform as a daily driver for around 13 years from 2006 to 2019 and love it dearly.

Last edited by appiah4 on 2020-02-14, 11:24. Edited 1 time in total.

Retronautics: A digital gallery of my retro computers, hardware and projects.

Reply 27 of 42, by jaZz_KCS

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Currently writing from / using a 2x Opteron 285 dual Dual Core system with 32GB of DDR1 memory
This is a PCI(X)-only system.

2020-02-10-17-06-48_scrot.png
Filename
2020-02-10-17-06-48_scrot.png
File size
88.51 KiB
Views
236 views
File license
Public domain
uglyspitze.png
Filename
uglyspitze.png
File size
300 Bytes
Views
236 views
File license
Public domain

Reply 28 of 42, by Sago7

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

On my living room I have a Phenom II x4 using an ECS A785GM-M with 12GB of ram + MSI GTX 950 GAMING 2G. Mainly to play some casual games with a XBOX 360 controller and watch some movies.
It works perfect. And I love it. I was looking a long time for a decent configuration for that Phenom, until a friend told me he has a computer to gave me. Originally It came with another graphics card and only 8GB of ram.

Reply 29 of 42, by swaaye

User metadata
Rank Moderator
Rank
Moderator
jmarsh wrote on 2020-02-14, 02:35:
swaaye wrote on 2020-02-14, 01:32:

Phenom doesn't support SSE 4.1 and that has been a problem with some software.

Most of the C2D lineup doesn't support it either, only the later 45nm chips.

Good point. I don't have a lot of experience with the issue, but it comes up for games every now and then.

Reply 30 of 42, by swaaye

User metadata
Rank Moderator
Rank
Moderator
Standard Def Steve wrote on 2020-02-14, 01:51:

The E8600 is powerful enough that 264 and VP9 acceleration aren't even necessary, unless of course you want 4K.

My E8600 w/ GMA X4500HD can handle VP9 at 1080p/60 or 1440p/30 in Chrome quite nicely. I'm seeing nothing wrong with Win10 GUI performance either. Of course, having dual-channel DDR3-1333 is probably helping IGP performance quite a bit.

Yeah that's all true. Actually the main motivator for some cheap discrete cards was two of the old systems I maintain are 780G AM2+ and the HD 3200 IGP seems to be somewhat unstable and there are occasional BSODs from its driver.

Last edited by swaaye on 2020-02-14, 18:26. Edited 2 times in total.

Reply 31 of 42, by SPBHM

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I used AM2 as my main platform from 2007 to 2009, I liked some aspects of the platform better than LGA 775 (like adjusting clocks, having an nvidia IGP and not GMA 950 as the most common option)

the performance wasn't really up to the task against the better C2Ds, but it could kind of hang in there with similarly priced Core 2 based CPUs (my X2 was cheaper than a e2140 when I got it, and while I consider it inferior it wasn't by a huge amount, specially not with a budget motherboard that couldn't OC the e2140 much)

the higher clocked models were power hungry, and it didn't age well, but oh well, I stopped using my X2 because the motherboard became unstable after 10 years or so, I kind of think at times about looking for a replacement board just to run the CPU again for something (specially one that can overvolt it higher than 1.30v which was the limit with mine), but... I have too many LGA 775 systems covering that era, and they are superior, kind of hard to justify for now....

the Phenom IIs are much easier to like, and some older AM2 boards like the one I had could run them, but lga 775 stuff is more accessible, cheaper, easier to find, lower power...

Reply 33 of 42, by Brawndo

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

The only AM2/AM3 system I've ever built was for my first arcade cabinet PC, and honestly I chose AMD because the whole build was cheaper than an Intel build, and for the purpose of running MAME and other emulators I didn't need a high performance system. At the time, the C2D platform just dominated the enthusiast and gaming markets and no AMD CPU could hold a candle to it. All of my other builds since have been Intel.

Reply 34 of 42, by j^aws

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

What is the lowest clocked build you can get on AM2/ AM2+ sockets? I recall seeing somewhere on this forum around 300 MHz - is this possible? I have some parts and wouldn't mind building one that clocks this low and is Win98 compatible.

Reply 35 of 42, by matze79

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

i still have a nice AM2 Board with 12Gbyte RAM and a Athlon 6400+,

but i did not want to spend a Lot of Money for cooling.
This CPU runs sooo hot... it crys out for Watercooling.
Maybe some day.. a budget Cooling Solution will find its way into my Hands.

Thats why it still sits inside a Cardbox 😒

https://dosreloaded.de - The German Retro DOS PC Community
https://www.retroianer.de - under constructing since ever

Co2 - for a endless Summer

Reply 36 of 42, by SPBHM

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
j^aws wrote on 2020-02-15, 17:45:

What is the lowest clocked build you can get on AM2/ AM2+ sockets? I recall seeing somewhere on this forum around 300 MHz - is this possible? I have some parts and wouldn't mind building one that clocks this low and is Win98 compatible.

I think the lowest I managed was 4x150 (600MHz)
the bios or software that I used couldn't go lower than that

Reply 38 of 42, by The Serpent Rider

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
j^aws wrote:

I have some parts and wouldn't mind building one that clocks this low and is Win98 compatible.

Only Asrock Nforce 3 board is Win98 compatible. Maybe some obscure boards with VIA chipset, but that's it.

Get up, come on get down with the sickness
Open up your hate, and let it flow into me

Reply 39 of 42, by SPBHM

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
The Serpent Rider wrote on 2020-02-15, 21:49:
j^aws wrote:

I have some parts and wouldn't mind building one that clocks this low and is Win98 compatible.

Only Asrock Nforce 3 board is Win98 compatible. Maybe some obscure boards with VIA chipset, but that's it.

there is a board that is easy to find over here that I think works with 98
Biostar k8m800 Micro AM2