AMD FX-57

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
adairusmc

adairusmc

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2006
7,095
78
91
Wow, $399 is an exellent price for that CPU.

You could also get an X2 4800+ and overclock it a little to FX-60 levels, if thats your thing. You would get the single threaded performance of the FX-57, and the dual core performance of the FX-60.

Either one is gonna be very fast though.
 
lopri

lopri

Elite Member
Jul 27, 2002
13,314
690
126
Off topic: It's kinda saddening that CPU manufacturers can charge such a premium over unlocked multipliers.

 
StrangerGuy

StrangerGuy

Diamond Member
May 9, 2004
8,443
124
106
Originally posted by: adairusmc
Wow, $399 is an exellent price for that CPU.

You could also get an X2 4800+ and overclock it a little to FX-60 levels, if thats your thing. You would get the single threaded performance of the FX-57, and the dual core performance of the FX-60.

Either one is gonna be very fast though.
Click to expand...

$330 E6600 >>>> $399 FX-57. No need to say anymore, except that $399 for any single-core CPU is a sucker deal. Even $280 for a 4800+ @ FX-60 is hard to justify with highly overclockable C2Ds around.
 
lopri

lopri

Elite Member
Jul 27, 2002
13,314
690
126
If I was given a chance to pick between an E6600 and an FX-57, I'd pick the FX-57. Why? Because I can buy an E6600 for lower price. ;) Hence the point in my previous post.
 
SpeedZealot369

SpeedZealot369

Platinum Member
Feb 5, 2006
2,778
1
81
Originally posted by: lopri
If I was given a chance to pick between an E6600 and an FX-57, I'd pick the FX-57. Why? Because I can buy an E6600 for lower price. ;) Hence the point in my previous post.
Click to expand...

I don't see any logic in that, are you actually planning on using this processor? If AMD priced their sempron 3100+ at $500, would you take that over a e6600 too? :roll:

 
lopri

lopri

Elite Member
Jul 27, 2002
13,314
690
126
How about a multiplier-unlocked E6400 vs a plain E6600? Do you see the logic now?

Edit: By no means I accept it as a righteous. As I stated in my first post, I am not fond of AMD/Intel's practice, creating artificial demand with multipliers. (You want unlocked CPUs? Pay $1K!)
 
DasFox

DasFox

Diamond Member
Sep 4, 2003
4,668
46
91
Well, the thing is guys I already have a mobo and the box built, I had the CPU before, but I sold it off to upgrade, this is for my gaming rig in my sig, " Das' GameRig " This CPU is only going to be used for gaming, that is why I was considering the FX-57 and going single core over dual core, which is what I had before a X2 3800+. I don't see the need for dual core in gamin yet.

So what are we saying the FX-57 sucks for now, old technology at this point and still to high a price?

THANKS
 
T

TanisHalfElven

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2001
3,512
0
76
Originally posted by: DasFox
Well, the thing is guys I already have a mobo and the box built, I had the CPU before, but I sold it off to upgrade, this is for my gaming rig in my sig, " Das' GameRig " This CPU is only going to be used for gaming, that is why I was considering the FX-57 and going single core over dual core, which is what I had before a X2 3800+. I don't see the need for dual core in gamin yet.

So what are we saying the FX-57 sucks for now, old technology at this point and still to high a price?

THANKS
Click to expand...

i've fx-57 OC'd 3.6 GHz on air (chilled air though) so if you OC the fx-57 is still pretty good.
 
A

aka1nas

Diamond Member
Aug 30, 2001
4,335
1
0
That's still a pretty crummy deal. I wouldn't pay that much for a CPU that wasn't dual-core.
 
DasFox

DasFox

Diamond Member
Sep 4, 2003
4,668
46
91
Originally posted by: aka1nas
That's still a pretty crummy deal. I wouldn't pay that much for a CPU that wasn't dual-core.
Click to expand...

aka1nas I'm talking gaming!

Well the thing is I don't need dual core, this is just for my gaming rig, 100% pure nothing but gaming, and I do mean that I use this box ONLY for gaming.

I mean SLI using MS Office, LOL ;)

And from the way I see it dual core and gaming is quite a long way off. Dual core and gaming seems a bit pointless for now.

ALOHA

P.S. I just sold a X2 3800+, I didn't see any benefit for gaming.
 
M

Mucker

Platinum Member
Apr 28, 2001
2,833
0
0
IMO, AMD really needs to lower their prices even more to compete. I wouldn't waste my money on old technology....yes, the FX-57 is getting long in the tooth. This cpu should sell well under $200 by now..........considering a lowly $190, 6300 @ 3200 MHz will spank it to death.....

eWiz has a SD 3700+ for $78 that has a pretty good shot at FX-57 speeds...not to shabby for a single core.....
 
DasFox

DasFox

Diamond Member
Sep 4, 2003
4,668
46
91
A lowly $190, 6300 isn't 3200Mhz, so you must be talking about doing a OC on the CPU, and I don't like to over clock, never have, never will.

What the heck is a SD?

 
DasFox

DasFox

Diamond Member
Sep 4, 2003
4,668
46
91
Well I see this 4000+ OEM on ewiz:

http://www.ewiz.com/detail.php?name=A64-40BN

Maybe I'll go for that, yes I do think paying the extra for that FX a waste, I'm sure between this 4000+ and the FX-57 you can't tell any differences, and gee maybe I'll OC this one even though I said I never will, LOL ;)

ALOHA
 
M

Mucker

Platinum Member
Apr 28, 2001
2,833
0
0
Here's a 3700+ Mr. Fox: http://www.ewiz.com/detail.php?name=A64-3700CF

600 MHz less than a FX-57, but it has a good chance of getting to 2800 MHz. If it does get there, it will be identical to a stock FX-57 (1 MB L2 cache)

OC is really safe if you don't go overboard. Keep the load temp under 55C and the voltage under 1.50v and you'll have a healthy cpu.......

Edit: SD = San Diego (the core name)
 
DasFox

DasFox

Diamond Member
Sep 4, 2003
4,668
46
91
Mucker I saw the 3700+ on ewiz, but I thought the 4000+ has a bigger Cache and FSB, that is why I was considering it over the 3700+

ALOHA
 
M

Mucker

Platinum Member
Apr 28, 2001
2,833
0
0
Originally posted by: DasFox
Mucker I saw the 3700+ on ewiz, but I thought the 4000+ has a bigger Cache and FSB, that is why I was considering it over the 3700+

ALOHA
Click to expand...

There are 2 types of cache, L1 and L2. Both of those cpu's have identical caches. The frequency of the 4000+ is 200 more than the 3700+, that is the only difference (and $40 too)
 
M

Mucker

Platinum Member
Apr 28, 2001
2,833
0
0
OC is always a crapshoot. For either chip, I would guess your worst case scenario OC would be 2500 MHz, the best case being 3000 MHz. Or, find a new/used Opteron 146 939, most of those hit 2700-2800 MHz easily.....

If I had to choose between the 2 we were talking about, I'd get the 3700....very good bang for buck.....
 
DasFox

DasFox

Diamond Member
Sep 4, 2003
4,668
46
91
Yes the 3700 is a nice deal, but an extra $40 for a faster FSB and 2.4GHz on the CPU isn't that bad either.

ALOHA
 
M

Mucker

Platinum Member
Apr 28, 2001
2,833
0
0
Don't pay attention to FSB, the chips are identical in every way except for the extra 200 MHz speed of the 4000+. Not worth the extra $40 to me. For a non-Ocer, it will gain a bit of performance I suppose, but not really noticeable......
 
Makaveli

Makaveli

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,975
1,571
136
If your seriously looking at a FX57 your better off purchasing the FX55. Why are u guys even mentioning conroe did he say he was replacing his board and memory aswell?
 
Makaveli

Makaveli

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,975
1,571
136
Originally posted by: adairusmc
Wow, $399 is an exellent price for that CPU.

You could also get an X2 4800+ and overclock it a little to FX-60 levels, if thats your thing. You would get the single threaded performance of the FX-57, and the dual core performance of the FX-60.

Either one is gonna be very fast though.
Click to expand...


A FX57 is 2.8 Ghz / FX60 is 2.6 Ghz, the dualcore chip won't equal the single core chip in single threaded performance
 
M

Mucker

Platinum Member
Apr 28, 2001
2,833
0
0
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom