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 vs. X2 4800+
I am running with an FX-55 CPU on the ASUS A8n-SLI Deluxe board. My CPU is
always at full load because SETI is running 24/7. Could I expect any noticeable performance gains from the 4800+ X2? Presumably the SETI calculations would be primarily confined to one of the two cores. My memory is running at DDR 400, 2T. I've read somewhere that the newer X2 Athlon 64s have improved memory bus performance. Is there a chance that my chips will run at 1T with the newer CPU? I have 2x1gb 3,3,3,8 DIMMs. All help will be most gratefully received. Good wishes to all. formerprof |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
FX-55 vs. X2 4800+
On Fri, 4 Nov 2005 08:17:50 -0800, "formerprof"
wrote: I am running with an FX-55 CPU on the ASUS A8n-SLI Deluxe board. My CPU is always at full load because SETI is running 24/7. Could I expect any noticeable performance gains from the 4800+ X2? Presumably the SETI calculations would be primarily confined to one of the two cores. My memory is running at DDR 400, 2T. I've read somewhere that the newer X2 Athlon 64s have improved memory bus performance. Is there a chance that my chips will run at 1T with the newer CPU? I have 2x1gb 3,3,3,8 DIMMs. All help will be most gratefully received. Good wishes to all. formerprof An X2 CPU would undoubtedly give you a huge increase in performance, since as you say one core would run SETI while the other would be free to run whatever else you are doing. As far as the 1T/2T, I would not expect the CPU to change that, since the command rate is determined by the motherboard, not the CPU. In any case you would see no measurable difference in overall performance even if you did change the command rate to 1T. The 4800+ X2 is a good upgrade; it will run single-threaded applications about as fast as your FX-55, and since it is fabricated with a 90nm process instead of the 130mm process of the FX-55 and runs at 2400mhz instead of 2600 mhz, it will run much cooler. Phil |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
FX-55 vs. X2 4800+
"Phil DeBecker" wrote in message
... An X2 CPU would undoubtedly give you a huge increase in performance, since as you say one core would run SETI while the other would be free to run whatever else you are doing. As far as the 1T/2T, I would not expect the CPU to change that, since the command rate is determined by the motherboard, not the CPU. In any case you would see no measurable difference in overall performance even if you did change the command rate to 1T. The 4800+ X2 is a good upgrade; it will run single-threaded applications about as fast as your FX-55, and since it is fabricated with a 90nm process instead of the 130mm process of the FX-55 and runs at 2400mhz instead of 2600 mhz, it will run much cooler. Phil I thought SETI ran in the background only when other tasks are not running. If so, then you would likely see a decrease in performance when running other stuff if you switch to the 4800 X2. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
FX-55 vs. X2 4800+
"Mark A" wrote in message . .. "Phil DeBecker" wrote in message ... An X2 CPU would undoubtedly give you a huge increase in performance, since as you say one core would run SETI while the other would be free to run whatever else you are doing. As far as the 1T/2T, I would not expect the CPU to change that, since the command rate is determined by the motherboard, not the CPU. In any case you would see no measurable difference in overall performance even if you did change the command rate to 1T. The 4800+ X2 is a good upgrade; it will run single-threaded applications about as fast as your FX-55, and since it is fabricated with a 90nm process instead of the 130mm process of the FX-55 and runs at 2400mhz instead of 2600 mhz, it will run much cooler. Phil I thought SETI ran in the background only when other tasks are not running. If so, then you would likely see a decrease in performance when running other stuff if you switch to the 4800 X2. 1. Phil -- Thanks for your note. I was under the impression that the Athlon 64 chips had the memory controller built into them rather than as part of the chipset, and I also vaguely remember that the 1T/2T issue was supposed to have something to do with insufficient "drive" (or whatever) for large chips. Am I mistaken? 2. Mark -- do I understand you to mean that each individual X2 core is slower than the FX-55? D you know what the comparative "number" of the FX-55 would be if it were numbered in the series with the rest of the Athlon 64 CPUs? Thanks so much to both of you for your help. formerprof |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
FX-55 vs. X2 4800+
formerprof wrote:
"Mark A" wrote in message . .. "Phil DeBecker" wrote in message ... An X2 CPU would undoubtedly give you a huge increase in performance, since as you say one core would run SETI while the other would be free to run whatever else you are doing. As far as the 1T/2T, I would not expect the CPU to change that, since the command rate is determined by the motherboard, not the CPU. In any case you would see no measurable difference in overall performance even if you did change the command rate to 1T. The 4800+ X2 is a good upgrade; it will run single-threaded applications about as fast as your FX-55, and since it is fabricated with a 90nm process instead of the 130mm process of the FX-55 and runs at 2400mhz instead of 2600 mhz, it will run much cooler. Phil I thought SETI ran in the background only when other tasks are not running. If so, then you would likely see a decrease in performance when running other stuff if you switch to the 4800 X2. 1. Phil -- Thanks for your note. I was under the impression that the Athlon 64 chips had the memory controller built into them rather than as part of the chipset, The AMD64 chips all have the integrated memory controllers, but those controllers look to the BIOS settings to see what memory timings/latencies to use. and I also vaguely remember that the 1T/2T issue was supposed to have something to do with insufficient "drive" (or whatever) for large chips. Am I mistaken? This recent article has a good, basic, description of what the various latency/timing numbers is all about: http://techreport.com/etc/2005q4/mem...y/index.x?pg=1 2. Mark -- do I understand you to mean that each individual X2 core is slower than the FX-55? D you know what the comparative "number" of the FX-55 would be if it were numbered in the series with the rest of the Athlon 64 CPUs? Thanks so much to both of you for your help. formerprof |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AMD x2 4800 slower than a AMD64 fx53 | pete | AMD x86-64 Processors | 12 | August 20th 05 07:27 PM |
RECH: Drivers+Docs sur Scanner Microtek Phanton 4800 | Castor | Scanners | 0 | January 20th 05 01:44 PM |
Problem regarding Geforce4 TI 4800 SE VideoCard (128 mb ram) | Nicolado | Nvidia Videocards | 10 | July 26th 04 10:01 PM |
Wanted :Compaq Presario 4800 Series restore CD | DarthVader000 | Compaq Computers | 0 | April 8th 04 02:47 AM |
Leadtek A280 Ti 4800 Drivers Rebooting WinXp | Justin McLaren | General Hardware | 0 | July 13th 03 04:12 PM |