Talk:AMD Quad FX platform

Please Discuss
I did a major rework of the article as everything was discussed twice because of a poor merge. I also removed some of the titles and removed the cleanup tag. Feel free to revert if you think you can add more to the article that way. Also, If there are no objections I'm going to remove the stub tag, because the future product tag covers that.--Donutey 20:43, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Merge with Socket 4x4
This article should incorperate Socket 4x4 mostly because AMD announced the product as "Socket 4x4 chipset" instead of "Socket 4x4" because it's not a new socket, but a dual socket implementation of AM2. (so far as we know).--Donutey 22:06, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * A merge sounds good to me. -- ZeWrestler  Talk 12:39, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Why not just call the merged article as "4x4 chipset"? --idle.man5216202.71.240.18 08:57, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Well I'd prefer to keep the name as close to what AMD called it, we might wait until more information is released before deciding on a merge. --Donutey 20:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

New Information
The original article, frankly, wasn't the truth. Socket 4x4 is NOT a quad core CPU, the linked article says as much. I rewrote the entry completely, hopefully it can be improved upon further, however, the title is not the best as Socket 4x4 is a socket not a chipset. If someone wishes to delete this article, I would have no qualms. --71.113.173.36 03:03, 3 June 2006 (UTC) okay Rubber cat 03:04, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I take that back, AMD has been calling it "Socket 4x4 chipset" so I guess that's the correct title, it seems like a market-ese name, similiar to AMDs LIVE! and Viiv. So it's not a good idea to delete it. --71.113.173.36 03:10, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I added some more information and the future product tag. Does anyone know the release schedule or more specific details?--71.113.173.36 17:42, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

A Term "Quad FX"
See here: Well, what do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AMD64 (talk • contribs) 10:52, 24 November 2006

multiple graphics
The 4x4 system will also have support for multiple graphics cards which is a feature that few workstation boards have.

not true

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe The Dragon (talk • contribs) 01:10, 30 September 2006
 * http://www.tyan.com/products/html/thundern4250qe.html
 * http://www.tyan.com/products/html/thundern6650w.html
 * http://www.supermicro.com/Aplus/motherboard/Opteron2000/MCP55/H8DA8-2.cfm
 * http://www.supermicro.com/Aplus/motherboard/Opteron2000/MCP55/H8DAE-2.cfm
 * http://www.nvidia.com/page/nforce_pro_workstation.html

4x4 is not a workstation mobo. The 4x4 mobo from NVIDIA named nForce 680a, have four PCI-E slots. -210.0.209.178 06:25, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Reception
Time to add a section on the reception of the platform, or the controversy caused by the exclusive nature of AMD's choice of Asus? Particlebry 15:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


 * A cursory Googling turns up some performance issues, however I don't care to run the risk of using questionable sources. 68.39.174.238 05:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Maybe it's ASUS is willing to do Quad FX mobo, and the others do not. --202.71.240.18 12:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

NUMA
Sadly, Vista's improved NUMA-aware core has done virtually nothing to help 4x4. Scortiaus 00:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Examples as? --202.71.240.18 12:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Why the tech report article is quoted as a reference for the non-NUMA vs NUMA OS? In their first review they used the Windows XP x64 edition, based on W2k3 kernel SUPPORTING NUMA, the comparison shouldn't be between a OS without suport (the 32bits XP for example) with a OS with suport (XP x64, Vista)? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by EduardoS (talk • contribs) 03:11, 13 May 2007 (UTC).

Still a realistic AMD platform?
I've read recently that AMD was going with a 12-core processor, how is this impacted?

It would be good to understand how this fits into the architectural roadmap. Nothing has been updated here since 2006, and I was expecting that by 2008 we'd be adding FPGAs and GPUs to our motherboards, in that second socket. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.185.15.204 (talk) 05:37, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Outdated
Article discusses "the future" as 2008. Time-neutral phrasing could accurately archive this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.151.108.107 (talk) 04:38, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Still an issue in 2023. Perhaps it might be best to revamp/summarize the information better and merge it into the main Athlon 64 article under the Athlon 64 FX section.216.209.138.138 (talk) 19:01, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

I've updated it to be more time neutral, but there's a lot of unsourced material, so I'd be in favour of a significant rework / slimmed down and merged into another article. 185.62.159.164 (talk) 12:22, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on AMD Quad FX platform. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0%2C1697%2C1970271%2C00.asp
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0%2C%2C51_104_543~117412%2C00.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0%2C%2C51_104_543~114483%2C00.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929140542/http://blogs.mercurynews.com/aei/2006/06/amd_puts_pressu.html to http://blogs.mercurynews.com/aei/2006/06/amd_puts_pressu.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0%2C%2C30_118_9485_9488%5E14602%2C00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:17, 24 June 2017 (UTC)