• 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.

Are the FX chips worth it

D

dclem9834

n00b
Joined
Mar 10, 2005
Messages
29
one tax season rolls around i plan on getting a nice chunk of change back and was looking at finally getting rid of the pentium 530 i have and going to amd. i heard the m2 fx dual core chips will be out second quarter next year and was wondering if they are worth the price tag, i do plan on overclocking so i am also keeping that in mind. and if they are not worth it then what is the best chip out there that is worth the price?
 
IMO, HELL NO they're not worth it.

A dual core FX chip is likely to cost over 1000$.

Unless you're planning on running some phase change and have tons of disposable income to waste, you're far better off with a dual core opteron. Not sure what specific chip is the best but someone will know.
 
Yeah definately get opteron. Opterons out right now can oc very high to FX speeds and performance if you get cabne. cab2e is also very good.
 
They are going to be good chips but incredibly expensive. But why have a kick ass chip if your video card, with all due respect, sucks? Go fx if you want, but I would get an Athlon X2 M2, some good "low" latency DDR2 and atleast a PCI-E 6600(gt). That would be a very good computer.
 
If you're not going to get at least a 6800/X1800 series card, don't bother getting an FX IMHO. Might as well OC a Venice.
 
Never ever worth it to get an FX. Just get your hands on a dual-core Opteron [hopefully you'll be able to find one] and overclock it. Most people [myself included] have been able to surpass FX-55 speeds on air cooling, with little voltage increase.
 
if i upgrade i would also get at least a 7800gt card to go with it and i have contemplated water cooling too but get a little nervous with the idea of water around that much money. also i thought the operton is a server chip, not that i know how it matters, but how is it ag gaming since that is my primary concern, after that it will be multi media such as tv video editing radio other such things i do to relax with my computer
 
If you have ANY OC savy, you don't need to spend $1000 on the latest FX (or even $800 on the FX-55). You can get 2.6Ghz out of a SD 3700+.
 
Opteron 940's are for servers but AMD also makes Opteron 939.

The 939 Opterons are the exact same as the X2's with 1MB cache, but they tend to OC better because of the testing they go through.

If you're going to do video editing your two choices would be X2 with 1MB cache or 939 Denmark Opteron.
 
EQTakeOffense said:
Opteron 940's are for servers but AMD also makes Opteron 939.

The 939 Opterons are the exact same as the X2's with 1MB cache, but they tend to OC better because of the testing they go through.

If you're going to do video editing your two choices would be X2 with 1MB cache or 939 Denmark Opteron.
Click to expand...

Any of the X2's or "Denmark" Opterons (true Denmark or are they Toledos?) would be fine for you. They all OC fairly well (up to 2.4-2.5Ghz) and with or without the extra cache are still great chips.
 
i plan on waiting till the m2 sockets are out since a) tax return will take till feb. at the earliest and b) the m2 are supposed to be out around feb-june so its worth waiting then for me since i can then get ddr2

so i guess what i am asking is does anyone know the road map for chips on m2 and i guess especially opertons and x2's
 
5000+ is the only X2 I've heard of for it. No idea what the specs are, but I'd assume 2.6Ghz.
 
kirbyrj said:
5000+ is the only X2 I've heard of for it. No idea what the specs are, but I'd assume 2.6Ghz.
Click to expand...

5000+ = 2.6GHz/1MB
5200+ = 2.6GHz/2MB
FX-60 = 2.8GHz/2MB

All are dual-core, FX included. I wouldn't wait for M2...DDR2 is going to kill AMD.
 
kirbyrj said:
If you can clock it high enough, DDR2 won't be a problem.
Click to expand...

I guess my real gripe is latencies. They do make a different to current-generation AMD processors, which have an onboard memory controller. So what would AMD have to do to offset latencies of 4-4-4 and the like?
 
Bona Fide said:
I guess my real gripe is latencies. They do make a different to current-generation AMD processors, which have an onboard memory controller. So what would AMD have to do to offset latencies of 4-4-4 and the like?
Click to expand...


You won't care about 4-4-4 when the ram is running at DDR800.

To the OP:
If you have to ask, the answer is no.
 
robberbaron said:
You won't care about 4-4-4 when the ram is running at DDR800.

To the OP:
If you have to ask, the answer is no.
Click to expand...

Your HTT would have to be running at 400MHz, unless they start quad-pumping like Intel.
 
Bona Fide said:
5000+ = 2.6GHz/1MB
5200+ = 2.6GHz/2MB
FX-60 = 2.8GHz/2MB

All are dual-core, FX included. I wouldn't wait for M2...DDR2 is going to kill AMD.
Click to expand...

I heard FX 60 is 2.6 dual core ^^
 
ok since we got into the drr2 latency subject anyone have a link to a really good article about the subject i would like to read up more about ram since my know how is limited there
 
my know is not that limited but I would also like to read up on it and learn more.. been a while since I've read up on any computer stuff and this is the first I've read on amd going with ddr2... or keep the subject going :D
 
Bona Fide said:
Your HTT would have to be running at 400MHz, unless they start quad-pumping like Intel.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. You don't have to run the FSB of the CPU and the memory synchronous to each other.
 
Bona Fide said:
Your HTT would have to be running at 400MHz, unless they start quad-pumping like Intel.
Click to expand...
:confused:

htt is the base clock, straight up. the HT link is another story, but that's ~800-1000mhz (1600-2000mhz effective ;)


also, just to prove a point about ddr

which do you think would be the lowest latency, 200mhz ddr at 2-2-2, 266mhz at 3-3-3 or 333mhz at 4-4-4?

they're all actually pretty equal on an intel rig, with the ddr2 just barely edging out the ddr:

1_86.png


now, this is ram that is far from being rated well. i've seen some ddr2 rated for 3-3-3 at 333mhz:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820146557
and 4-3-3 at 350mhz:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820220055

both of which will turn in much lower latencies than we're seeing in our limited sample.
also, remember that K8's latency is ~1/2 the p4's, so we'll be seeing sub 40ns at stock speeds on some of these, even lower with high mhz cpu's like the FX's



the mhz definitly makes up for the timings :D
 
No, I meant this:

RAM speed = HTT bus x 2

200MHz HTT = DDR400
300MHz HTT = DDR600

Assuming you're running w/o a divider...

Now let's look at DDR2-1000...500MHz bus? Or am I missing something? Is DDR2 quad-pumped, per se? In which case you would only need a 250MHz bus.
 
Bona Fide said:
No, I meant this:

RAM speed = HTT bus x 2

200MHz HTT = DDR400
300MHz HTT = DDR600

Assuming you're running w/o a divider...

Now let's look at DDR2-1000...500MHz bus? Or am I missing something? Is DDR2 quad-pumped, per se? In which case you would only need a 250MHz bus.
Click to expand...

dont you mean fsb? AMD announced that M2 will have a 533 fsb using DDR2-533
did I miss something? :confused:
 
fuelvolts said:
dont you mean fsb? AMD announced that M2 will have a 533 fsb using DDR2-533
did I miss something? :confused:
Click to expand...

Well I wanted to be politically correct, seeing as AMD doesn't have a front-side bus. They call it the hypertransport tunnel (HTT).

Is it really going to have a 533MHz HTT? I thought it was going to be 333MHz, seeing as the standard supported DDR2 is going to be DDR-667. I'm pretty sure it will be a 333MHz bus times whatever multiplier. In that case, you'd only need a 67MHz boost on the bus in order to run DDR2-800 :D
 
Bona Fide said:
Now let's look at DDR2-1000...500MHz bus? Or am I missing something? Is DDR2 quad-pumped, per se? In which case you would only need a 250MHz bus.
Click to expand...
sorta not really. the signal speed of ddr2-1000 is 500mhz, that's what "counts"
though tecnically, yes, the dram cell can be said to run at 250mhz, but nothing outside of the ram stick sees that 250mhz
 
Well I wanted to be politically correct, seeing as AMD doesn't have a front-side bus. They call it the hypertransport tunnel (HTT).
Click to expand...

Well, depends on how you define FSB I guess....

An Intel FSB is the speed at which the computer 'talks' to the rest of the computer and between the cores (Intel Dual Cores don't have a cross link for direct communication, they have to talk over the FSB, right?).

AMD has a 'FSB' but it really only has to do with memory. HTT is the link to the rest of the computer and is based on the 'FSB'. Right?
 
EQTakeOffense said:
Well, depends on how you define FSB I guess....

An Intel FSB is the speed at which the computer 'talks' to the rest of the computer and between the cores (Intel Dual Cores don't have a cross link for direct communication, they have to talk over the FSB, right?).

AMD has a 'FSB' but it really only has to do with memory. HTT is the link to the rest of the computer and is based on the 'FSB'. Right?
Click to expand...


I personally think the Athlon64's FSB should be referred to as equal to the CPU speed.

I'm bad with words so I'll only explain my opinion if you really care to know. It's sort of an opinion, I guess.
 
Well, it's getting off topic but...

The AMD has an intergrated memory controller, so yeah, it's the same as the CPU speed. But, the speed of the RAM is still linked to the FSB and is a ratio.

HTT is the link to the rest of the computer and from what I know is the FSB times a multiplier.

So, AMD does have a 'fsb', but it's not universal like Intel. everything for AMD is pretty much based on ratios from that one number: RAM Speed, CPU Speed, HTT Speed. Intel is just one number FSB.

That's what I understand of everything. If you wanna chime in, feel free.
 
^^--

Well there is no middle man, so even though teh memory is still only at 200MHz, the memory controller can talk directly to the CPU, which makes for better memory benefits...i think

And FSB is technically the speed between the mem controller and the CPU. Threrefor, AMD64 CPUs FSB is the same as the clock speed.
 
Stereophile said:
IMO, HELL NO they're not worth it.

A dual core FX chip is likely to cost over 1000$.

Unless you're planning on running some phase change and have tons of disposable income to waste, you're far better off with a dual core opteron. Not sure what specific chip is the best but someone will know.
Click to expand...

i like my fx55 bn

:D
 
everest tells me my latency is 46.8ns....@ 3-4-4-8 ;) thats about 1ns slower than the fastest 2-2-2-5 in eclipse's photo and faster than all the rest.
 
baldrik said:
everest tells me my latency is 46.8ns....@ 3-4-4-8 ;) thats about 1ns slower than the fastest 2-2-2-5 in eclipse's photo and faster than all the rest.
Click to expand...
latency is dependant on cpu mhz with a64's... very dependant :p
 
Bona Fide said:
LoL do you use phase 24/7?
Click to expand...

Phase is fine 24/7 however i use my computer only to play games. During the time i am not gamming its off, no reason to leave it running. Anything past 3.3 gighertz on th FX55 rocks

running 283HT 12 x multi
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top