4800+

[Alaa]

i want to buy a new processor i was thinking about the Fx55 or Fx57 but when i swa the results for the 4800+ i just felt tht its worth waiting wut do u think? am interested in games n from 4800+ Results in games i think its very good in games so wut do u think should i get the 4800+ instead of the Fx ?? gimme ur opinion..

 

[Leper Messiah]

yes.

 

[bjc112]

You mean the X2 4800+?

You still have a long ways off.

I don't think we will see them till August.


Look how long Venice took.

 

[Alaa]

i dont care about waiting i just care about perfromance and future..

 

[anandtechrocks]

Theoretically no current games take advantage of dual cores. If your sole purpose spending over $1000 for a X2 4800+ is for games, I'd say buy a high end single core (3800+, 3700+, 4000+) and use the money you saved to buy a better video card.

 

[MBrown]

But once he buys a single core processor all of a sudden there is going to be waves of multi threaded apps coming out likes games and stuff. I'd get a 4400 and overclock it. And that way your pc would be somewhat future proofed

 

[Viditor]

If you're just getting a processor, then it will be August (at least)...if you're buying a system, then probably June.
I would suggest that the 4200+ is probably a better bang for the buck if you game while running other background tasks. If it's strictly gaming, no background tasks, and can afford to upgrade again next year, then go with the FX-57 and a dual SLI 6800 rig.
JMHO

 

[StrangerGuy]

Originally posted by: anandtechrocks
Theoretically no current games take advantage of dual cores. If your sole purpose spending over $1000 for a X2 4800+ is for games, I'd say buy a high end single core (3800+, 3700+, 4000+) and use the money you saved to buy a better video card.

In terms of absolute gaming performance in raw FPS, then yes a faster single core will outperform a slower dual-core in typical, single-threaded games, but not much really.

Even a "gaming-weak" 2.8GHz Pentium-D will have sufficient CPU power for every single game unless the game is a extremely CPU-heavy one, since nowadays the main bottleneck will almost always be the video card.


Just take a look at the numbers from the Anand's P-D 2.8:

Doom3
P-D 2.8 : 77fps
A64 3500+ : 100fps

A large 23fps difference, but still very playable on the slower P-D.

SC Chaos Theory: Minimum Frame rate
P-D 2.8 : 48.9fps
A64 3500+ : 54.6fps

A small difference of a mere 6 fps. Both are equally playable IMO.


The advantages of dual-core (with multi-threaded apps, much better multitasking) far outweigh the slight single-threaded performance edge of higher-clocked single core.

So my recommendation to the OP is to wait for the cheapest A64 X2, if he could. Getting the flagship chip is always very silly.

 

[Alaa]

also no problem with money i just want a processor that can stay with me in the next 2 years or more...will multi-threaded apps grow up? or its the single ones future? plz answer my question about the processor not the graphics card..thnx

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: Alaa
also no problem with money i just want a processor that can stay with me in the next 2 years or more...will multi-threaded apps grow up? or its the single ones future? plz answer my question about the processor not the graphics card..thnx

Multi-threaded is the way of the future. The next Unreal engine is one thing which will be multi-threaded.
And graphics cards are important too, if a game is GPU limited, CPU won't matter.

 

[imported_Kensai]

Actually, games will become CPU *and* GPU limited. If you have a super high end video card system (6800U SLI) and you've only got a 3000+ chip running at stock, it won't perform to it's potential.
In the future, games will be increasingly CPU and GPU limited, with the idea of the developpers giving each mob an AI.

 

[MBrown]

I would just wait for DC and get a 4400 and overclock to mabey 5000 or higher. Get an SLI motherboard with two 6800gts. IMO the few fsps the fx has over the X2 isnt enough to say that the fx is way better at gaming and the X2 is a waste of money. The X2 will still be VERY good in games and especially the multi threaded ones in the future. And plus if your that picky about a few fps in single threaded games then just overclock it. I think it will be an smart investment to get an X2 because of the future.

 

[Alaa]

so i get X2 4800+??

 

[UzairH]

Yup dual-core is a better bet. In a year or so games will start to be multi-threaded. Even in single-threaded games you won't find much difference between a 4800+ and an FX-57. And once the games are multi-threaded the slowest X2 will smack the FX-57.

 

[MBrown]

Originally posted by: Alaa
so i get X2 4800+??

I'd get either a 4400 or if you really have the money a 4800. I think most people will get the 4400 though. The reason I wouldnt get a 4200 or 4600 is because they only have 512

 

[christopherzombie]

Originally posted by: MBrown
I'd get a 4400+ and overclock it.

I'd do the same. The 4600+ and 4200+ only have 512Kx2 while the 4400+ and 4800+ both have 1024Kx2 cache. And the 4400+ is only $60-$70 over the 4200+.

 

[Zebo]

Yeah wait sorta. Get a cheap 3000 now, slam it with total disregaurd for safty (i.e. almost free FX) then you'll be able to use everything you buy now, mobo and ram when X2 comes... That's what I'm doing. (cept I'm gettin the 4200 or 4400 and making it a 5400)

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: StrangerGuy

Originally posted by: anandtechrocks
Theoretically no current games take advantage of dual cores. If your sole purpose spending over $1000 for a X2 4800+ is for games, I'd say buy a high end single core (3800+, 3700+, 4000+) and use the money you saved to buy a better video card.

In terms of absolute gaming performance in raw FPS, then yes a faster single core will outperform a slower dual-core in typical, single-threaded games, but not much really.

Even a "gaming-weak" 2.8GHz Pentium-D will have sufficient CPU power for every single game unless the game is a extremely CPU-heavy one, since nowadays the main bottleneck will almost always be the video card.


Just take a look at the numbers from the Anand's P-D 2.8:

Doom3
P-D 2.8 : 77fps
A64 3500+ : 100fps

A large 23fps difference, but still very playable on the slower P-D.

SC Chaos Theory: Minimum Frame rate
P-D 2.8 : 48.9fps
A64 3500+ : 54.6fps

A small difference of a mere 6 fps. Both are equally playable IMO.


The advantages of dual-core (with multi-threaded apps, much better multitasking) far outweigh the slight single-threaded performance edge of higher-clocked single core.

So my recommendation to the OP is to wait for the cheapest A64 X2, if he could. Getting the flagship chip is always very silly.

Luddite!

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Yeah wait sorta. Get a cheap 3000 now, slam it with total disregaurd for safty (i.e. almost free FX) then you'll be able to use everything you buy now, mobo and ram when X2 comes... That's what I'm doing. (cept I'm gettin the 4200 or 4400 and making it a 5400)

lol .. what frequency will that equate to .. 2x 3Ghz ???

 

[Zebo]

That's the goal.. 6Ghz haha


Hey are these forums slow or is my cable jacked? Meh I'm out the door anyway..

 

[Alaa]

ok am goin 4 it i'll buy 4800+

 

[sunilv]

well if I were you I would buy a 4400+ because it has the same cache 1MB and both are very similare in performance.

You can also save the money to buy something really important for the computer, like graphic card or cards (SLI)

AMD 4400+ = $581
AMD 4800+ = $1001
------------------------
Differenct = $420

could buy a 6800 GT

Man, these are expensive, but Dual Core is the way to Go!:thumbsup:

 

[MBrown]

Originally posted by: sunilv
well if I were you I would buy a 4400+ because it has the same cache 1MB and both are very similare in performance.

You can also save the money to buy something really important for the computer, like graphic card or cards (SLI)

AMD 4400+ = $581
AMD 4800+ = $1001
------------------------
Differenct = $420

could buy a 6800 GT

Man, these are expensive, but Dual Core is the way to Go!:thumbsup:

Definately

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: sunilv
well if I were you I would buy a 4400+ because it has the same cache 1MB and both are very similare in performance.

You can also save the money to buy something really important for the computer, like graphic card or cards (SLI)

AMD 4400+ = $581
AMD 4800+ = $1001
------------------------
Differenct = $420

could buy a 6800 GT

Man, these are expensive, but Dual Core is the way to Go!:thumbsup:

Whooa ... bit of a price difference, this will be true with the £ aswell .

I think that i will still go for a 4800+ becasue the higher end procs have better yeilds, the better procs that come from the FAB will be put on the 4800+ chip, especially being dual core these chips i think are going to be quite sensitive to OCing .. like Zebo i am defo goin to get one of these (4800+ i am feeling rich ) and i intend to hit 3Ghz on both cores aswell (wishfull thinking maybe)..

Zebo i think water cooling is the only way to hit this, so looks like more saving for me.

 

[Alaa]

thnx i think 4800+ is worth money i'll get it