• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD 64 vs AMD 64 FX

B

billsbury

Member
I'm not rich, so I'd like to know if I can get away with building a new gaming system with just an AMD Athlon 64 instead of an AMD Athlon 64 FX or Dual-Core. My current system has an AMD Athlon XP 2600+. Yea, I know, nothing compared to today's standards.

I just got Call of Duty 2 and the frame rate seems awful unless I crank the volumetric shadows and res and such waaay down. My Half Life 2 also has a bad frame rate.

So basically what I'm looking for here are opinions from you gents, whether you think an AMD 64 instead of an AMD 64 FX or dual-core is good enough for a decent gaming system.

Thanks guys.
-Bill
 
Probably your graphics card is a better place to start (just about any A64 will give you good framerates when paired with the right video card). There can be exceptions, but most likely you are graphics card limited. For a new system, consider an A64 3500+ on an Nforce4 ultra motherboard with a 6800gs or x800gto as good mid range starting points. For a little extra cash you can opt for one of the 939 pin dual core opterons or an a64 x2 3800. Dual core will eventually (maybe sooner than later) be important. Throw in a 19in+ monitor, and you've got a very good gaming system for the next year or two.

The FX is a joke when it comes to cost/performance ratio. Don't even consider it for a mid-range system.
 
you should still go for dual core, it shouldn't be a price issue (get the AMD X2 3800+ OR the Opteron 165 if you can find it) since your considering the FX series. Your video card isn't VERY good, but it should be enough to run most games at medium at 1280x1024.


If for some strange reason you want a single core (even though it would be a VERY bad choice unless your on a budget), get the amd 3000+ Venice or the opteron 144, since you'll be much better off overclocking it.



All of the cpus that i recommended are VERY good at overclocking (OC depends on luck of draw, but they all have a very high rate).
 
Despite the dual-core fans here, I am not really sold on the idea of dual-core; for the time being anyway. For starters, most games do not utilize the second core and I am not a computer user who runs multiple programs at once.

I decided to go single-core Athlon 64 because after the new AMD M2 socket comes out, I plan to build a whole new system and make my current rig into a HTPC. At that time, I will rethink the question and see what is available in both single and dual-core.

As for regular 64 versus FX, don't waste the money on FX. I have an Athlon 64 3700+ (San Diego) overclocked to 2.8Ghz, which matches the FX-57 for $800 less.
 
Originally posted by: Pyrokinetic
Despite the dual-core fans here, I am not really sold on the idea of dual-core; for the time being anyway. For starters, most games do not utilize the second core and I am not a computer user who runs multiple programs at once.

I decided to go single-core Athlon 64 because after the new AMD M2 socket comes out, I plan to build a whole new system and make my current rig into a HTPC. At that time, I will rethink the question and see what is available in both single and dual-core.

As for regular 64 versus FX, don't waste the money on FX. I have an Athlon 64 3700+ (San Diego) overclocked to 2.8Ghz, which matches the FX-57 for $800 less.
Click to expand...

I agree.

 
Originally posted by: billsbury
Actually my video card is an ATI All-In-Wonder 9800 Pro. So you think I should go dual-core?
Thanks for your input.
Click to expand...
I was in the same situation as you, but for Christmas, I upgraded from a 2500+/9800 Pro to an Athlon 64 3200+ (now overclocked to 2.5 GHz) and a 6800GS, and I'm really happy with it .
 
I'd say go dual-core. FYI, the FX-60 will be dual-core, so you shoudln't count out FX CPUs entierly *P

Also, get a better video card.
 
wtf is up with all the dual-core fans here??? He said he was getting lag in games so I agree with considering a GPU upgrade first, then consider maybe getting a new mobo w/ a low-end opty or venice and overclocking it, making it plenty for that user. I'll just see if getting dual-core now will so call future proof yourselves, when rather you'll probably get tired of your machine within 2 years like most people here, probably right when dual-core will reaallllly start to shine. I may be wrong, but for the OP, he REALLY doesn't need dual-core in my opinion.
 
A dual-core system is certainly worth it. Since price is an issue, pick up the AMD A64 3800+ which is well worth the value.

However, CoD2 is probably GPU limited, so I would recommend a new video card. The 6800GT would be a great place to start.
 
for save money and best performance Do :
A64 3000+ E3 Venice @ 2.7Ghz
and GeForce 7800GT for gaming or u can save more with 6800GS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top