• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

AMD 64 FX-51 vs. AMD 64 ?

J

jdub12

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 23, 2003
Messages
250
Aside the obvious differences in clock speeds and socket type, is there really anything that much different between the two that would justify a 300 price difference? Why would anyone want the FX-51 when there is a 3400+ now which I believe runs at the same clock speed? Thanks for the advice.
 
The FX has dual-channel, but has to use registered ECC RAM, while the Athlon64 won't be using dual channel until the real Newcastle core chips.
 
FX is just about spending money, and the 3400+ is the same cache and clockspeed as the FX.

'Nuf said really.

Ditto on the memory stuffs, its soo easy to get corsiar or geil value 3200 at 2gb and be way happier for the same money as finding 2gb of registered XMS. Not to mention cheaper.
 
Wow, did you guys forget about the fully unlocked multipliers on the FX-51? To me, that's the biggest selling point.
 
I've been seing the 3400+ OUTPERFORMING the FX-51 in several benches. I definately wouldn't spend the extra money on an FX-51 for dual channel and an unlocked multi. Dual Channel is only taken advantage of by a few programs so theres almost no real gain from having it.
 
There are many programs that would take advantage of dual channel. Its just more memory bandwidth.

That being said, I don't think its worth 300 bucks.
 
Originally posted by reflex33
There are many programs that would take advantage of dual channel. Its just more memory bandwidth.

That being said, I don't think its worth 300 bucks.
Click to expand...

Well the majority of programs can't use up near the bandwidth from even dual channel on the Intel platforms. If you've got something that can take advantage of that much bandwidth then its a good things but games and most applications wont so it has no benefit. Sisoft will be about the only area you'll see a difference and SiSoft definately isn't a reason to buy anything. The biggest advantage on the A64's comes from the on-die memory controller which has lower latency then running it from the northbridge. Its another reason why games do so well on the A64 is because of timings. Thats why i say its timings that are important and not bandwidth.
 
Originally posted by Retro Rex
You can't clock it much faster anyway right?
Click to expand...
I guess the norm among those who have FX-51s is in the area of 2.4 GHz with air cooling, but those with some serious cooling handy have clocked the FX-51 to 3.0 GHz+.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top