Socket AM2: DDR2 according to AMD - BeHardware

>> Processors

Written by Marc Prieur

Published on May 23, 2006

URL: http://www.behardware.com/art/lire/625/

Page 1

Introduction

Released only three years ago for desktop computers, the Athlon 64 now sees
its second Socket modification. With its release in September 2003 the Athlon
64 used the Socket 754. The Opteron was renamed Athlon 64 FX and used
the Socket 940. The Socket 754 only allowed DDR management on a single
channel unlike the 940 and Opteron, whose disadvantage was the high cost of
registered memory.

The standardization of the two lines on a single Socket was made in June 2004 with the release of
the Socket 939. This time, standard dual channel DDR memory was supported. However, a month
later AMD released the Sempron line on the previous Socket A and also on the Socket 754. So for
desktop computers, the situation hasn’t evolved much and we still have two Sockets.

- Socket 754 for Sempron

- Socket 939 for Athlon 64, 64 X2 and 64 FX

Today, AMD releases something new that will support the entire desktop product line, the AM2. Not
only does it support the Sempron and Athlon, but also a whole new range of CPUs. It will be
distinguished by a new memory controller leaving the DDR to DDR2.

What is DDR2 ?
First of all, it is important to remember the originality of the K8 architecture (compared to Intel or the
K7 architecture). This is the integration of the memory controller right into the processor and no
longer in the Northbridge chipset. This solution bring many advantages in terms of performance but
its counterpart is a certain lack of flexibility since you have to change of processor and motherboard
to benefit from the next generation of memory.

The DDR that AMD introduced into our computers is distinguished from SDR by the use of the rising
and falling edges of the signal to send data. DDR can transfer two 64 bit words per clock cycle. At a
frequency of 200 MHz, the attained bandwidth for a single channel is 3.2 GB/s.

In fact, DDR2 works like external DDR and internal QDR. DDR2-533 communicates with the other
elements of the computer via a DDR bus (Dual Data Rate, two pieces of information sent per clock
cycle) at 266 MHz, but internally it works at 133 MHz QDR (Quad Data Rate, four per clock cycle).
This reduced internal frequency makes it easy to increase the memory modules’ raw transfer rates
at the expense of latency time. The voltage decreases from 2.5 to 1.8V, whereas the number of pins
increases from 184 to 240.
With this system, DDR2 can go much further than DDR in terms of theoretical bandwidth. Here are
the characteristics of the best sellers:

- 133 MHz : DDR266/PC2100, 2.1 GB /s per memory module

- 166 MHz : DDR333/PC2700, 2.7 GB /s per memory module
- 200 MHz : DDR400/PC3200, 3.2 GB /s per memory module
- 200 MHz : DDR2-400/PC2-3200, 3.2 GB /s per memory module
- 266 MHz : DDR2-533/PC2-4200, 4.2 GB /s per memory module
- 333 MHz : DDR2-667/PC2-5400, 5.4 GB /s per memory module
- 400 MHz : DDR2-800/PC2-6400, 6.4 GB /s per memory module.

Of course, memory module manufacturers produce faster ones for overclockers, for example, a 275
MHz DDR or 533 MHz DDR2. These bandwidth figures are purely theoretical because latency is
also important. We already saw that good timings were required for DDR-2 for Intel’s platform (the
DDR2-533) to reproduce the good performances of the DDR-400 with good timings. Below, we will
see how this works for AMD.

Page 2
Memory divider, Socket, fixations and chipset
Divider & memory frequency
If the integrated memory controller is beneficial for latency and performances, it also has its
downsides. The release of DDR2 is also the occasion to address an often forgotten problem.
Memory frequency is obtained from processor frequency, to which a whole number divider is
applied.
With a 200 MHz memory frequency and processors whose frequencies were multiples of this value,
like with the Socket 754 and 939 and DDR400, this restriction wasn’t particularly problematic unless
you wanted to use DDR266 or DDR333. With the release of DDR2 and its varied frequencies, there
are many cases in which the memory simply won’t run at full speed. For example, at 2.6 GHz, if you
divide by 6 you get 433 MHz, which is too much for DDR2-800. The coefficient of 7 is applied, or in
other words, a speed of 371 MHz.

Here is the frequency table:

As you may have noticed, each frequency has disadvantages. DDR2-800 will only be fully exploited
at 2.8, 2.4, 2.0 and 1.6 GHz and the DDR2-667 only at 2.0 GHz. Of course 371 MHz instead of 400
MHz isn’t too dramatic, but if AMD could have introduced half whole number dividers (6.5 here) we
would have been closer to the “real” frequency.

Modified socket and CPU cooler fixations

The Socket AM2 is physically different from the Socket 939, first of all, because of the number of
pins, which increases from 939 to 940. The position of the pins is modified, so it’s impossible to fit a
Socket 939 processor on AM2 and vice-versa (unless you push really hard).

It isn’t the only platform modification, because the fixation system is also different. The previous one
used a 3 point fixation per side while now it has been reduced to one point. This isn’t a real problem
in itself, however, because many older coolers work with the new system and vice-versa.

There are systematic problems for CPU coolers that don’t use this system and which require a direct
fixation on the motherboard. Indeed AMD’s retention system is no longer fixed on the motherboard
by two screws but rather four, which makes that many high end fans incompatible without an AM2
kit. We wonder if this was really that useful as we have never heard of a ripped off retention system.

... no chipset modifications !

If changing your memory means changing processor and motherboard, this isn’t case for the
chipset. It’s still connected to the processor via a 1 GHz HyperTransport bus. NVIDIA, ATI, VIA, ULi
and SiS current product lines are compatible. NVIDIA decided to release a new chipset, the nForce
5, with the AM2, but the former will also work with Socket 939 or 754. The nForce 4 won’t be a
problem on AM2 too.

Page 3
AMD's product line on AM2
AMD’s product line on AM2
Up until now, we found the following Socket 939 (Athlon) and 754 (Sempron) processors:

The product line released by AMD on Socket AM2 is:

There are no major modifications for the Athlon. Of course, there’s the release of the FX-62 at the
same price as the FX-60 Socket 939 despite a higher frequency, and the Athlon 64 mono core with
1MB of L2 cache isn’t on the Socket AM2. We noted the release of two new X2, the 5000+ and
4000+.

There is a general increase of the Sempron P-Rating by 200 with the

modification from Socket 754 to AM2 and of single channel DDR to dual
channel DDR2. We found a couple of surprising modifications. For example,
the modification from 1.6 GHz to 1.8 GHz increases the P-Rating by 400,
while the modification from 1.8 GHz to 2.0 GHz increases it by 300 with 128
KB of cache, and by 200 with 256 KB of cache. We are still looking for a
logical explanation.

In addition to the standard version, AMD will release an « Energy Efficient »

model of these processors. With Sempron, voltage will be decreased from
1.35-1.4V to 1.2-1.25V and the TDP from 62W to 35W on the « EE » 3400+, 3200+ and 3000+. This
has an increased cost as they are at $145, $119 and $101, respectively, as compared to $97, $87
and $77 for standard versions.

With the Athlon 64, the voltage and TDP reduction is the same for the 3500+ at $231, as compared
to $185 for the standard version. Finally, for dual core there is a single « EE » model at 32 watts and
1.025-1.075V. It’s the 3800+ priced at $364 as compared to $303 for the standard version. All other
X2s, except for the 5000+ are available with a TDP of 65W in 1.2-1.25V, as compared to 89W in
1.3-1.35V: the 4800+, 4600+, 4400+, 4200+, 4000+ and 3800+ are $26, $43, $44, $52, $25 and $20
more expensive than the standard versions.

To release this type of processor, AMD uses a die that requires less voltage to accomplish their
tasks. According to the quality of the die produced by AMD, it’s possible that some of the “standard”
processors could be under power levels supported by “Energy Efficient” models. Of course, only this
label goes with the warranty and AMD makes you pay for it.

Page 4
Processors and test platforms
Test processors
For this test, we selected three Socket AM2 processors:

- Athlon 64 FX-62
- Athlon 64 X2 3800+
- Sempron 3600+

In tests we reduced the Athlon 64 FX and Sempron multiplying coefficient to measure the Athlon 64
X2 4800+/4400+/4000+ and the Sempron 3400+ and 3000+ performances.

We could have expected this because of the TDP announced at 125 watts. Even if AMD always
overestimates TDP, the Athlon 64 FX-62 begins to reach power consumption levels usually
associated for Intel and not AMD. Of course, it isn’t at the same level as the Pentium D, but overall
power consumption of the AM2 configuration in load under Prime95 perfectly shows this (2x512 MB
of DDR2 phenomenon, with Radeon X700, and Raptor in addition to the motherboard and the
processor):

- Sempron 3600+: 137 Watts

- Athlon 64 X2 3800+: 163 Watts
- Athlon 64 FX-62: 221 Watts

The difference in power is 84 watts with the Sempron and 58 with the Athlon 64 X2. Of course, these
losses are recorded from the PC power supply and the power stage of the motherboard, but these
figures are rather high. In full load, AMD’s box should reach 4,000 Rpm to cool down the computer
and at this speed it’s rather noisy. We clearly prefer something bigger with a 120 mm fan on top.

Test platform
For this test, we selected ASUSTeK’s M2N32-SLI Deluxe. Based on NVIDIA’s latest nForce 590
SLI, it embeds all functionalities, and amongst other things, 6 Serial ATA and two Gigabits networks
ports. There is HD audio with a soundMAX AD1988B codec and ASUSTeK has also additionally
included a Texas Instruments PCI FireWire 400 chip, a Silicon Image SiL3132 for 2 additional SATA
including one external, and a WiFi 802.11a/b/g Realtek RTL8187L controller, which uses a USB
hub. Four DIMM for the DDR2, two PCI Express x16, one PCI Express x4, one PCI Express x1 and
two PCI are also included.

This impressive density of functions is a little problematic since many SLI motherboards that use
dual slot cards will block the PCI-E x4 port and one PCI port. We noted that two out of the six SATA
natively supported by the nForce 590 also have difficult access in this type of configuration. To make
a little more room, ASUSTeK placed the WiFi on some sort of mini daughterboard. The M2N32-SLI
Deluxe, cooled down by a passive cooling system based on heatpipes is available at 225€.

For memory, we have 2 x 512 MB XMS-2 8500 Corsairs, DDR2-1066 in 5-5-5-15. Because the AM2
only initially supports DDR2-800 (which isn’t bad), this type of memory module has no real interest
except in overclocking. It did make it possible for us to test a wide range of frequencies and timings.

Page 5
DDR2 in practice
DDR2 in practice
What does DDR bring in practice compared to DDR2 for AMD? This is what we have wanted to
verify from the start by comparing DDR-400 and DDR2-800 with a CPU frequency of 2.8 GHz
(Athlon FX-62 on AM2 and FX-60 at 62 on 939) for the DDR2-800 to be really at 400 MHz (see page
2).

To do this, we measured performances in four domains. We first focused on a reading bandwidth

test and random reading latency test with RightMark Memory Analyzer. These results are
respectively expressed in MB /s and in number of cycles. Finally, two applicative tests complete the
above, with WinRAR and Far Cry, which are particularly dependent on the speed of the memory sub
system.

For reading there is a relatively interesting increase of 20% and this is approximately the same
percentage as the performance loss for latency in this test. In the end, practical results aren’t really
surprising. We expected something better. WinRAR remains in the lead with DDR-400 and with Far
Cry, the DDR2 improvement is only 2.5%.

Here are other figures, this time obtained at 2.6 GHz. Note that DDR2-800 is only at 93% of its
potential, while DDR2-533 and 667 are at 98% compared to 96 and 93% at 2.8 GHz.

Results are rather dramatic. If we take an entry level DDR-400 memory module at 3-3-3-8, we see
that with WinRAR you have to select the highest end DDR2 to be faster. With Far Cry, you have to
use DDR2-667 in 3-3-3-8. The most worrying aspect, however, is the performance gap between
entry level and high end products, where the performance loss is 9% with WinRAR and 7% with Far
Cry in DDR and 17 and 13% in DDR2. We’ll let you guess, which memory will equip computers sold
in superstores…

The next question was, which memory should we use for the rest of the test? Up until now we were
using DDR400 2-2-2 on a DDR platform and DDR2-667 4-4-4 on a DDR2 platform. We decided to
continue this and also test the FX in DDR2-800 at 4-4-4. You might criticize this choice but we felt
that it wouldn’t be appropriate to test all AM2 processors with an expensive DDR2-800.

Here is our test protocol. Because of the enormous amount of results (50 configurations), we will
separate each test into two parts. We made comments on the first and it focuses on the AM2
compared to the Socket 754/939. The second is just a graph with all the results.

Page 6
3d studio max 7
3d studio max 7
For 3D-studio max we used a rendering via the 3Ds internal engine (scanline). Developed by Studio
PC this scene mainly uses radiosity. The result is more realistic in terms of lighting and is also
slower. 80% of this scene is based on this type of effect.
Here, Socket AM2, 939 and 754 are relatively close, because even if we note some gaps, this type
of load isn’t really hungry in terms of memory speed. Therefore, we mainly see the inadequacy of
AMD’s P-Rating in some cases since the AM2 Sempron 3600+ isn’t faster than the Socket 754
Sempron 3400+.