• 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.

FX-55 vs FX-53

D

dsorrent

Member
I'm looking for a comparison between the FX-55 and the FX-53. It seems all of the CPU tests done here at Anand recently have excluded the FX-53 in the round up. Does anyone know why?

Any links to benchmark comparisons of these 2 CPU's would be greatly appreciated.
 
Theres about a 5-7 % percent difference in performance ( dont flame me, im just going off from what I can remember)
 
why do people buy these? They are horrably overpriced. If you want to spend great sums of money, buy a 3500+ and overclock it. Youll never notice a differance, but your wallet sure will. If youre scared of the OC messing your chip up, but FOUR 3000+ and use three as backup.
 
Originally posted by: clarkey01
we'll see the FX57 in june
Click to expand...

Why so late...57 now....59 should be june...(but we've had this discussion of AMD holding back before)

Another thing will either be dual core?
 
Originally posted by: aeternitas
why do people buy these? They are horrably overpriced. If you want to spend great sums of money, buy a 3500+ and overclock it. Youll never notice a differance, but your wallet sure will. If youre scared of the OC messing your chip up, but FOUR 3000+ and use three as backup.
Click to expand...

1. overclcoking voids your warranty.
2. Some people want the best and pay a heavy premium for the best.
3. You can OC FX much more than 3500 if you decide to OC
4. FX is unlocked and has 1mb lvl 2 for faster and better OCing.

That said even your 3500 sugesstion is a rip off😉
 
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: clarkey01
we'll see the FX57 in june
Click to expand...

Why so late...57 now....59 should be june...(but we've had this discussion of AMD holding back before)

Another thing will either be dual core?
Click to expand...

6 months between every FX. FX 55 came Nov/Dec, so I would say May/June for sure. Intel has nothing to compete with the FX 55, so they can take thier time, fine tune FSOI/SS and 90 nm process.

Zebo, if you were Hector, would you send out even faster parts now and thrash Intel even harder which would leave not much left in the tank till dual core, or everytime Intel come close, kick the stone that bit more further away from them ?
 
Originally posted by: clarkey01
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: clarkey01
we'll see the FX57 in june
Click to expand...

Why so late...57 now....59 should be june...(but we've had this discussion of AMD holding back before)

Another thing will either be dual core?
Click to expand...

6 months between every FX. FX 55 came Nov/Dec, so I would say May/June for sure. Intel has nothing to compete with the FX 55, so they can take thier time, fine tune FSOI/SS and 90 nm process.

Zebo, if you were Hector, would you send out even faster parts now and thrash Intel even harder which would leave not much left in the tank till dual core, or everytime Intel come close, kick the stone that bit more further away from them ?
Click to expand...

Mans genious so I would do just what he's doing...😛😀 but it would be a sweet site to see total domination in every benchmark🙂
 
[/quote]

Mans genious so I would do just what he's doing...😛😀 but it would be a sweet site to see total domination in every benchmark🙂
[/quote]


mmmmmm a 3 gzh FX Does sounds nice

🙂
 
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: aeternitas
why do people buy these? They are horrably overpriced. If you want to spend great sums of money, buy a 3500+ and overclock it. Youll never notice a differance, but your wallet sure will. If youre scared of the OC messing your chip up, but FOUR 3000+ and use three as backup.
Click to expand...

1. overclcoking voids your warranty.
2. Some people want the best and pay a heavy premium for the best.
3. You can OC FX much more than 3500 if you decide to OC
4. FX is unlocked and has 1mb lvl 2 for faster and better OCing.

That said even your 3500 sugesstion is a rip off😉
Click to expand...



1. Thats why I suggested 4 3000+ lol
2. There is a line where paying for a premium and just getting ripped off is drawn.
3. Overclocking void your warranty
4. 1MB lv2 cache.. come on now. Does that really improve anything outside of server use?

My 3500 suggestion is only a ripoff when not talking about buying a FX, which we are.
 
eh, the 512 is minimal...

but the FX-55 can do 3000 mhz on air easy... you don't see a lot of 3500+'s doing that now....

i say you get what you pay for.... mostly 🙂
 
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
an extra 512 of cache does help qute a bit.
Click to expand...


In what?

Originally posted by: Shimmishim
eh, the 512 is minimal...

but the FX-55 can do 3000 mhz on air easy... you don't see a lot of 3500+'s doing that now....

i say you get what you pay for.... mostly 🙂
Click to expand...
Minimal for...?
 
Originally posted by: aeternitas
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
an extra 512 of cache does help qute a bit.
Click to expand...


In what?

Originally posted by: Shimmishim
eh, the 512 is minimal...

but the FX-55 can do 3000 mhz on air easy... you don't see a lot of 3500+'s doing that now....

i say you get what you pay for.... mostly 🙂
Click to expand...
Minimal for...?
Click to expand...

No the 512k of Cache does help out. Not immesly but it is tangible. You give any computer more cache and it will use it (ie HDD's)

2. There is a line where paying for a premium and just getting ripped off is drawn.
Click to expand...

Yes, not to be biased or anything but the EE is a prime example. At over $1000 the EE offers no improvement over the 570J (3.8GHz) Prescott. However these chips although pricey are not a waste of money. Not everyone buys chips based on money, just because they are HORRIBLE price/performance wise doesn't make them a bad chip.

-Kevin
 
Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
Originally posted by: aeternitas
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
an extra 512 of cache does help qute a bit.
Click to expand...


In what?

Originally posted by: Shimmishim
eh, the 512 is minimal...

but the FX-55 can do 3000 mhz on air easy... you don't see a lot of 3500+'s doing that now....

i say you get what you pay for.... mostly 🙂
Click to expand...
Minimal for...?
Click to expand...

No the 512k of Cache does help out. Not immesly but it is tangible. You give any computer more cache and it will use it (ie HDD's)

2. There is a line where paying for a premium and just getting ripped off is drawn.
Click to expand...

Yes, not to be biased or anything but the EE is a prime example. At over $1000 the EE offers no improvement over the 570J (3.8GHz) Prescott. However these chips although pricey are not a waste of money. Not everyone buys chips based on money, just because they are HORRIBLE price/performance wise doesn't make them a bad chip.

-Kevin
Click to expand...



This has been argued time and again, what it really comes down to is personal opinion. Some people would rather just pay more and know what they're getting, sure you can OC a cheaper chip but that's not everyone's can of worms
 
Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
Click to expand...
Yes, not to be biased or anything but the EE is a prime example. At over $1000 the EE offers no improvement over the 570J (3.8GHz) Prescott. However these chips although pricey are not a waste of money. Not everyone buys chips based on money, just because they are HORRIBLE price/performance wise doesn't make them a bad chip.

-Kevin[/quote]

The chip itself was never argued to be bad by me. Its a bad investment no matter how much money you have.
 
difference is..
the FX-53 is discontinued as its replaced by the FX-55

AMD only produces 1 type of FX processors at a time.
but u can still purcahse FX-53

anyway.
FX-53 operates @ 2.4GHz (12 x 200)
FX-55 Operates @ 2.6Ghz (13 x 200)
FX-55 uses Strained Sillicon in conjuction with SOI therefore it can yield a higher clock speed as well as generates a bit more heat. around 115watts of heat (i think)

which is why the FX-55's stock heatsink is different.. it includes (either 2 or 4) heatpipes to help deal with the heat
 
Agree with above, that some of us will pay more for a cutting edge chip looking for the most performance.

There are no guarantees with OCing. Take me for example, I bought an Asus A8V, and the most I can OC my FX53 is 230mz. It's the VIA chipset that is holding me back, no one knew this a few months ago. Both the Asus A8V and Abit AV8 don't OC very well and have the same chipset. To buy an MSI Nforce3 MB means starting over from scratch, something I don't want to do.

So when the FX57 comes out, I'll buy it, sell my FX53, and be happy with a slight OC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top