is the 4000+ really that special?

B

bob

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 13, 2002
Messages
2,971
Since the 4000+ is out, at the same price of which the first A64 was 1 year ago, im wondering about it. It is still running at 2.4ghz, not much faster mhz-wise from the other 64bit cpus.

I always thought Mhz did matter untill i bought my K7 athlon. It had more power, in some cases, than a 1ghz PIII. But the extra 500mhz of the PIII had it beat for speed. Is this like comparing a dump truck to a 200hp 2 stroke motorcycle? fast, but cant pull a load, versus slow steady while hauling.

The PIV-EE 3.4Ghz still has 1000mhz on the 4000+. Wouldnt it still make the PIV faster for something like seti@home? or number-crunching like running windows xp cd generator?

Im sure the 4000+ would beat out anyone for heavy-duty stuff, like real-time video. Also, would someone notice much difference going from a fast 64bit, like a 3200+ to the 4000+ when gaming or 3d-marking?
 
It is special in the eyes of marketing because Intel killed off the 4.0GHz P4.

And I would think the Athlon would kick a P4s ass in number crunching, at least it does in D2OL.
 
The only thing that Intel is till ahead on is what? MP3 encoding? Something like that?
The Video Editing was won over by AMD recently.
 
ShepsCrook said:
The only thing that Intel is till ahead on is what? MP3 encoding? Something like that?
The Video Editing was won over by AMD recently.
Click to expand...
Nah, the 4000+/fx55 own the pentiums even at that last thing. Although, by very little... but a victory is still a victory, no matter how small.
 
It's pretty back and forth when it comes to content creation, depends on the particular apps used really... Games it's no contest, AMD has the lead... Anand's article on AMD's 4000 and latest FX had some pretty comprehensive test and comparisons to the top of the line P4s. The only real edge the P4 has at this point imo is HT, and the increase in temps doesn't even make it worthwhile for any enthusiast not running WC imo.
 
Yeah, the 4000+ and the FX-53 are the same chip except:

1. FX is not multiplier-locked.
2. FX-53 sounds dope compared to 4000+
 
You all forgot the “E-Penis Factor”. :cool:

It’s a great CPU for those willing to pay and still costs less then Intel’s best. ;)

I won't lie, if I had the bucks...well, I'd have one for sure.
 
Isn't the fx-55 unlocked as well? And prices are pretty similar, when it comes to different-rating fx chips. The 53's are being phased out, but don't expect any astronomical price drops on them. They might become $50 cheaper....
 
The FX-55 is like $150 more than the 4000 I think... But when you're spending $700+ for a chip I guess that's chump change. Unless you're honestly saving hard earned money for these things, then you're just a fool... And you know what they say about fools and their money. :cool:
 
No it is nothing special w the 4000+ except that it is now the fastest A64 (non FX) you can get.

But when concidering that Intel over the last 2 years have stumbeled really badly, actually that started with the 1,13GHz PIII, and havn't been able to ramp their CPUs according to their own roadmaps. And then tore their roadmaps up completly killing an entire core and are now heading in the direction AMD have been working for the last 4-5 year, and that they had to give up on their P4 4GHz recently while AMD trotts along according to plan. Yes from a marketing point of view there is someting VERY special with the 4 GHz. Its not as big as AMD reaching the 1GHz line first but when all is accounted for not far from it.
 
Impulse said:
The FX-55 is like $150 more than the 4000 I think... But when you're spending $700+ for a chip I guess that's chump change. Unless you're honestly saving hard earned money for these things, then you're just a fool... And you know what they say about fools and their money. :cool:
Click to expand...


all i have to say is look at the history of chip prices and youll see there cheaper then what they use to be.
 
Damnit I wish the A64's were still open-core so we could pencil-mod them... FX is too expensive for something like that...
I'm happy to see that A64 is now definately holding the crown. All intel has keeping them in the race is HyperThreading.
 
Filter said:
all i have to say is look at the history of chip prices and youll see there cheaper then what they use to be.
Click to expand...

I didn't say they were more expensive than past comparable parts, tho they're not that much cheaper either. The ultra-fastest top of a line chips have always been in the $1k range, 'least that's what I remember the first P3 1GHz going for.

I gotta admit I even bought one of the first socket (die slot die!) P3 933s for like $850. :p And yes, I was a fool, wasn't one of my smarter purchases looking back but I knew way less then. The FX and 4000 are certainly cheaper than Intel's P4 EE at 'least.
 
krizzle said:
All intel has keeping them in the race is HyperThreading.
Click to expand...

Not to mention Dell and a mostly ignorant consumer market.

Oh, and the Pentium M is working well for them, to be fair.
 
robberbaron said:
Not to mention Dell and a mostly ignorant consumer market.

Oh, and the Pentium M is working well for them, to be fair.
Click to expand...

HyperThreading is like a tampon, every pussy has one.
 
Impulse said:
I gotta admit I even bought one of the first socket (die slot die!) P3 933s for like $850. .
Click to expand...
lol, i got one of those from my girlfriend for free a few months ago :p pulled it from a gateway profile that she didnt want anymore, i couldnt fit in my bag (she lives in new mexico, me in texas)

CreamySoupUSA said:
Sigged!
Click to expand...

strange, i cant see your sig
 
krizzle said:
Damnit I wish the A64's were still open-core so we could pencil-mod them... FX is too expensive for something like that...
Click to expand...

Has anyone seperated the spreader plate on an A64 yet? I remember seeing it done on a K6 back in the day. Some crazy germans then direct-die cooled it!
 
yeah, but the bridges are no longer exposed like they were on the k7 series, you cant unlock the a64.. unless someone figures out a pin mod, i suppose
 
Darth_Fluffy said:
People do it on P4s, so I suppose, it could be done on A64s..
Click to expand...

Past tense, people did it on the first P4s... Can no longer be done on current P4s (just about any Prescott) as Intel started gluing them much more solidly. Removing it will damage the core, same holds true for the A64s I believe... The advantage of removing it wouldn't be access to the bridges as it could also allow you to lower temps slightly (obviously at the risk of damaging the unprotected core), but since it can't be done it's a moot issue.
 
Yeah, they had a few A64 nude pics up when they first came out...
You take some floss and a lot of patience and then you kinda... floss off the top.
I didn't know that they had no bridge contacts under there though. Good thing I didn't start for no reason.

Pinmods would be fabulous though...
Someone rich enough to buy an FX55 and a 4000+, pop off the tops, and try to notice a difference??
 
CreamySoupUSA said:
Sigged!
Click to expand...
FINALLY!!! sumthing of mine gets sigged.

I knew i was funny all along.


back on topic, yeah the 4000+ stands out in the eyes of the consumer as the first 4000 Mhz CPU when in reality it isnt. If i was an end user and i saw 4000+ i would think WOW.
 
It's not even a very successful technology at that.. It's only successful the way it is now due to a terrible architecture design in the first place. So, it's more like a "fix" to netburst.
 
Darth_Fluffy said:
Isn't the fx-55 unlocked as well? And prices are pretty similar, when it comes to different-rating fx chips. The 53's are being phased out, but don't expect any astronomical price drops on them. They might become $50 cheaper....
Click to expand...

Yes it is. I initially bought a FX-53 from Newegg about 2 days before the FX-55 was available from Monarch Computers. I figured what the hell, it's only $30 more for 200 MHZ more and I could overclock it higher than a FX-53, so I RMA'd the FX-53 as an unopened retail box for full refund. I expect to get FX-59 speeds, but we'll see. I'm still setting up all the software (and playing them too ;)), so it's not going as fast as I planned. I'm enjoying playing Far Cry and Doom 3 at this speed. They are new games again with all the eye candy on.
 
It takes me 3 days to save enough for an FX-55. I know it's not a good value, but I'm still tempted. It doesn't seem like there's anything really great on the horizon, so maybe this chip would last longer than the typical 1 year you get out of a CPU before it gets to slow to play the latest games.

There's no longer a need for Registered DDR in the FX series now, right?
 
rabident said:
There's no longer a need for Registered DDR in the FX series now, right?
Click to expand...

Nope, if it's a socket 939 part (running on a s939 mobo obviously) it won't need registered RAM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top