[Jason Dunn]

http://us.shuttle.com/SN95G5.asp

Shuttle sent me a new XPC to review, and it's a looker: the SN95G5. It's an AMD-based system, so I can't just gut my current Shuttle to get a CPU. The SN95G5 has a bevy of tasty technologies: nForce3 Ultra chipset, Serial ATA RAID, a 240 watt power supply running at 32 db, stealthed drive bay doors, gigabit LAN, an 8X AGP slot, and a single PCI slot. PCI Express would have put more of a smile on my face, but there's shortage of AGP cards just yet. ;-)



It's been three years since I've used an AMD-based system as my primary computer, so I'm a little out of the loop when it comes to AMD-based CPUs. The SN95G5 takes Socket 939 AMD CPUs, which as far as I know means either the AMD64 or the AMD64 FX. I'm looking at local prices for the two types of CPUs, and the differences are mind boggling:

• AMD Athlon 64 3500+ w/ 512K Cache: $389 CND
• AMD Athlon 64 3800+ w/ 512K Cache: $879 CND
• AMD Athlon 64 FX-51 w/ 1MB Cache: $919 CND
• AMD Athlon 64 FX-53 w/ 1MB Cache: $1179 CND

The only reason I'm having to look at AMD CPUs at retail is because the media relations representative from AMD hasn't returned either of my phone calls requesting a review loaner CPU (and you wouldn't believe how hard it was to even find the right person to talk to). The AMD Web site is rather vague on the differences between the 64 and the 64 FX line - is it just the extra cache? There's so much marketing jargon I can't figure out if there are any other differences between the two CPUs. Since I'm evidently going to buying this out of my own pocket, I'm going to have a very hard time justifying getting anything faster than the AMD 64 3500+...the price jump on the 3800+ and the FX chips is just too crazy for me.

Any input from your AMD-lovin' types?

[Jason Dunn]

http://us.shuttle.com/SN95G5.asp

Shuttle sent me a new XPC to review, and it's a looker: the SN95G5. It's an AMD-based system, so I can't just gut my current Shuttle to get a CPU. The SN95G5 has a bevy of tasty technologies: nForce3 Ultra chipset, Serial ATA RAID, a 240 watt power supply running at 32 db, stealthed drive bay doors, gigabit LAN, an 8X AGP slot, and a single PCI slot. PCI Express would have put more of a smile on my face, but there's shortage of AGP cards just yet. ;-)



It's been three years since I've used an AMD-based system as my primary computer, so I'm a little out of the loop when it comes to AMD-based CPUs. The SN95G5 takes Socket 939 AMD CPUs, which as far as I know means either the AMD64 or the AMD64 FX. I'm looking at local prices for the two types of CPUs, and the differences are mind boggling:

• AMD Athlon 64 3500+ w/ 512K Cache: $389 CND
• AMD Athlon 64 3800+ w/ 512K Cache: $879 CND
• AMD Athlon 64 FX-51 w/ 1MB Cache: $919 CND
• AMD Athlon 64 FX-53 w/ 1MB Cache: $1179 CND

The only reason I'm having to look at AMD CPUs at retail is because the media relations representative from AMD hasn't returned either of my phone calls requesting a review loaner CPU (and you wouldn't believe how hard it was to even find the right person to talk to). The AMD Web site is rather vague on the differences between the 64 and the 64 FX line - is it just the extra cache? There's so much marketing jargon I can't figure out if there are any other differences between the two CPUs. Since I'm evidently going to buying this out of my own pocket, I'm going to have a very hard time justifying getting anything faster than the AMD 64 3500+...the price jump on the 3800+ and the FX chips is just too crazy for me.

Any input from your AMD-lovin' types?

[KidKomputer]

I remembered reading this article from Tom's. It has three of the processors you are looking at.
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/2004...et_939-03.html

[Gary Sheynkman]

Wow....those are UBER hot!

It just shows that a little innovation goes a long way and that Apple is not the end all to design and packaging. Now fit PCI express in there and it will be perfect

[Kati Compton]

If I remember correctly, the FX's have 1MB L1 cache. Major drool there. They're noticeably faster than the 64's at the same speed for that reason. I think I saw that an FX beat an equivalent P4 EE.

The other nice thing about Athlons is that they're now actually (in general) cooler-running than P4s of similar power. AFAICT the processor self-adjusts its clock rate based on how much you are (or are not) hammering the CPU. If it's idle a lot, it can slow down without really impacting what you're doing, and so it uses less power, generates less heat, is easier to cool, and is therefore also easier to keep quiet.

But YOU let US know how it goes with the unit.

I've heard a few people complain about static in the audio, which concerns me, as I'm considering one of these as my next machine.

[Phoenix]

Those are very nice desktop systems.

What amazes me is that all of that technology, including PCI-E and more is found in Sager's upcoming 9860 laptop (to be released this year). This Sager will be sporting Intel's P4 HT processor (with 1MB L2 Cache and 915P+ICH6 chipset).
See Sager 9860

Technology just keeps blazin' along. 8)

[Jason Dunn]

Originally Posted by Kati Compton

If I remember correctly, the FX's have 1MB L1 cache. Major drool there. They're noticeably faster than the 64's at the same speed for that reason. I think I saw that an FX beat an equivalent P4 EE.

Yeah, twice the cache - that seems to be the only difference. While I'm all for extra speed, my wallet can't justify the almost tripling in price it takes to get that.

[Filip Norrgard]

Jason, be sure to check the number of pins (or socket model) on the processors that you're buying. I saw that there are varying number of pins on the AMD64s sold over here. "Luckily", the price is higher for the AMD64s having some more pins, though.

I'm looking forward to your review of this Shuttle beauty, I have myself been looking at it for a while and wondering if it is worth buying. The drool rating on this Shuttle is "open the floodgates", IMO.

[ShinKen]

Jason, the FX chips can be seen more as a enthusiast chip in addition to the 1 MB of L1 Cache, it also is not multiplier locked, and therefore will overclock a hellava lot easier than the non-FX chips. Also the new 4000+ A64 is nothing more than a FX-53 with it multiplier locked.

Hope that helps.

[Jason Dunn]

Originally Posted by ShinKen

Jason, the FX chips can be seen more as a enthusiast chip in addition to the 1 MB of L1 Cache, it also is not multiplier locked, and therefore will overclock a hellava lot easier than the non-FX chips.

Thanks, I read about that on Tom's Hardware as well - I tend not to OC very much...the older I get the more I value stability over raw speed. :wink:

[KidKomputer]

Jason,
Just posted this in another thread, thought you might be interested. The best site for all things Shuttle is sfftech.com, especially the forums.