Athlon 64 and FX Review (athlonxp.com)

[AmdEmAll]

A64 Review

 

[BaboonGuy]

WOOT, if its real.

 

[BaboonGuy]

hrmm looks real enough, i need some direct intel comparisons though

 

[AmdEmAll]

Yeah, they should have compared it, still looks good though.

 

[ted]

Hi
Do you notice Athlon64 3200+ is not 2.0Ghz but 2.2Ghz,
because from picture you see serial number ADA3400AEP5A0

 

[Duvie]

Little worthless without an intel comparison on an equal platform...It is hard enough to get apple to apple comparisons anyways....

All I can say is the gaming looks great but the multimedia in spec with the a64 3200+ was worse then the xp bartons and they lost to the 3.2c by a bigger margin in past test....Then the 3200+ athlon xp ties the A64 3200+ in cinebench and we all know how poor the amd pr rating system was with the barton 3200+ in non gaming apps...


If I was a gamer this sytem would be a must have....As it stands from this and a couple of leaked and early reviews this a64 3200+ and evn the fx in most instances is either not better then current p4 systems or my oc'd system or not enough of an increase to justify an upgrade.

that being said I don't think the p4EE chips are either!!! Price to high and the extra l3 cache does nothing for multimedia and cadd....

 

[Duvie]

Sidenote:

Does anyone find it odd the FX-51 chip rumored to be 2.2ghz instead of 2.0ghz like the 3200+ is slower in cpu on the pcmark2002 and the fx with dual channel memory controller is slower then the single channel controller of the athlon 3200+????? seems maybe reversed...Or does the program not recognize something right???

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: ted
Hi
Do you notice Athlon64 3200+ is not 2.0Ghz but 2.2Ghz,
because from picture you see serial number ADA3400AEP5A0

That is odd cause I had seen it numerous times that the 3200+ was a slower speed then the fx-51...interesting!!!

 

[BaboonGuy]

these chips are supposed to run very very cool, making the A64 3200+ with its non-registered RAM a very very very nice overclocker

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: Duvie
Sidenote:

Does anyone find it odd the FX-51 chip rumored to be 2.2ghz instead of 2.0ghz like the 3200+ is slower in cpu on the pcmark2002 and the fx with dual channel memory controller is slower then the single channel controller of the athlon 3200+????? seems maybe reversed...Or does the program not recognize something right???

Guess those benchmarks may be more impacted by latency, since the A64 had CAS 2 PC3200 vs registered, dual channel CAS 2.5 PC2700 on the FX.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Accord99

Originally posted by: Duvie
Sidenote:

Does anyone find it odd the FX-51 chip rumored to be 2.2ghz instead of 2.0ghz like the 3200+ is slower in cpu on the pcmark2002 and the fx with dual channel memory controller is slower then the single channel controller of the athlon 3200+????? seems maybe reversed...Or does the program not recognize something right???

Guess those benchmarks may be more impacted by latency, since the A64 had CAS 2 PC3200 vs registered, dual channel CAS 2.5 PC2700 on the FX.

Hmmm...Thanks for the info....makes sense when you look at it that way...however it was just a synthetic benchmark and the real world gaming apps showed a nice increase over the single channel memory of the 3200+

 

[Lyfer]

The fact that they don't compare it to a P4 platform is retarded.

Wheres Anand's?