If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
FX-55 still the way to go?
yes?
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 26 May 2005 03:39:19 GMT, Nobody wrote:
yes? Nope. A64 4000+ Rev. E San Diego ( 90nm, SSE3 ), 2.4 GHz. Very likely to be able to overclock to near 2.6 GHz. Newegg $494.99 Retail boxed. ( FX55, 130nm, no SSE3 is $815.99 ) A64 4800+ X2 when available. Will be in the $800 -$900 price range. John Lewis |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 27 May 2005 01:17:42 GMT, Nobody wrote:
(John Lewis) wrote in news:42954bd1.8010287 : On Thu, 26 May 2005 03:39:19 GMT, Nobody wrote: yes? Nope. A64 4000+ Rev. E San Diego ( 90nm, SSE3 ), 2.4 GHz. Very likely to be able to overclock to near 2.6 GHz. Newegg $494.99 Retail boxed. ( FX55, 130nm, no SSE3 is $815.99 ) A64 4800+ X2 when available. Will be in the $800 -$900 price range. John Lewis Ok, I see your point. However, why is the FX55/Clawhammer twice as much? There's got to be more than just 200MHz... FX-55 old-technology, larger die, poorer yield, runs much hotter. AMD is not bothering to lower the price... People will still buy the older parts for a while, if they are not closely tracking developments. And many worship at the altar of clock-speed. You can probably over-clock the Fx-55 to near 3GHz, if you have decent fan-cooling.... YMMV, of course. However, dual-core is the future, and the A64 4800+X2 has exactly the same functional features and clock-speed per processor-core as has the A64 4000+ Rev E. Just need a BIOS update for the dual-core on the 939-motherboards. Check with the board manufacturer. Any 939 motherboard capable of powering a FX-55 will have no problem with the dual-core 4800+. Decisions, decisions................ John Lewis John Lewis processor-core |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
There's got to be more to it than just the speed difference.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 27 May 2005 18:43:30 GMT, Nobody wrote:
There's got to be more to it than just the speed difference. Well, you are welcome to use Google to find out more.... IMHO, the FX-55 is now passe... and the FX-57 may never see the light of (production) day --- swept away by market demands for the AMD dual-core desktop processors. Remember that, unlike Intel, AMD is silicon-capacity limited. The current generation of Intel dual-core processors is horribly power-inefficient, compared to AMD... they are architecturally no more than 2 Prescotts jammed together on one substate. AMD can hit Intel where it hurts with their dual-core silicon, but Intel will be introducing revised-architecture dual-cores mid-end of 2006, so AMDs window of opportunty is limited. Intel is also pricing the lowest-speed version of their dual-core Pentium-D at fire-sale prices to keep AMD out of the desktop mass-market while they scramble for their updated architecture. Unfortunately for Intel, they made another mistake -- unlike AMD, Intel's dual-core also requires a brand-new motherboard based on the 945 or 955 chip-sets, or appropriate new 3rd-party chipset-offerings such as nVidia's Intel nForce4. John Lewis |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 28 May 2005 23:36:31 GMT, Nobody wrote:
I think I'm going to wait a bit and see what the prices on the x2 will be. I've looked at some benchmarks and, while the x2 doesn't perform better than the FX55, it does a better job of maintaining overall system 'perceived' performance while running multiple tasks. FYI, the one other significant difference between the FX-55 and the (now old) 130nm A64 4000+ :- The FX-55 clock multiplier is unlocked -- hence the ability to overclock more readily without 'straining' the memory system. John Lewis |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 29 May 2005 03:58:10 +0000, Nobody wrote:
What about the San Diego 90nm A64 4000+...is that locked or unlocked? All Athlon 64's are multiplier locked on the high end, but it doesn't matter. A 4000+ will have a multiplier of 12x200 for a default speed of 2400MHz. Raise the FSB clock to 233 and then you have 12x233 for 2800MHz if you think it'll run that fast. Probably not, so chose a number in between, say 217 for about 2600MHz. Now you've got just a little better than an FX/57. -- Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB) My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php Verizon server http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|