• 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.

Is this a fairly Decent 64 bit 4000 processor

Heh...

Uh, yes, usually integrated is sub par, but in this case, integrated is great. The integration referred to here is the integration of a memory controller onto the actual microchip with the CPU. It allows for much better performance.

So anyway, yes, if you need a good 64 bit processor, this will do you just fine.
 
yep amd sucks.

intel has an external FSB chip that makes it operate at a faster wavelength.

seriously though, this isn't integrated graphics. i guess it means the memory controller is built into the chip, which in my experience, is a GOOD thing... feel free to help me explain folks my knowledge is limited.
 
Yes that is a great processor. It's the same one I have. 🙂

fishmonger, why would you think that an "external FSB chip" would be operating at a "faster wavelength" compared to an on-die memory controller like AMD has?
 
Originally posted by: OCZ John
fishmonger, why would you think that an "external FSB chip" would be operating at a "faster wavelength" compared to an on-die memory controller like AMD has?
Click to expand...



Broken sarcasm detector?
 
Fate, that is a great overclocking chip you've got there. I hear you can get it up near 3ghz with nice air cooling, like an XP-90. People have pushed 3.2 with phase change, but that's just stupid to me. I have a refrigerator in my kitchen; no need for one up here too. 😛
 
What kind of name is "AMD Athlon 64 4000+ San Diego Integrated into Chip FSB 1MB L2 Cache Socket 939 Processor - Retail"

It's very confusing...

better would have been "AMD Athlon 64 4000+ San Diego On-Chip Memory Controller 1MB L2 Cache Socket 939 Processor - Retail"
 
Originally posted by: crimson117
What kind of name is "AMD Athlon 64 4000+ San Diego Integrated into Chip FSB 1MB L2 Cache Socket 939 Processor - Retail"

It's very confusing...

better would have been "AMD Athlon 64 4000+ San Diego On-Chip Memory Controller 1MB L2 Cache Socket 939 Processor - Retail"
Click to expand...

You don't get it do you? Geesh! Intel paid Newegg (incentives) to word the AMD chips in such a way to make them sound like crap. :laugh:

OP: You need to do some reviews and reading before making a cpu purchase. What are you trying to do with it? Gaming? Office applications? 3D work?

Also, you need to understand the differences, if only rudimentary, between AMD cpus and Intel cpus.
 
If you don't mind doing a little overclocking and spending a tad more, you could get a retail dual-core Athlon 4200+ for about $530 and overclock it easily past the 4000+'s stock speed, PLUS you'd have a dual-core processor:

"For an early x2 Athlon64 processor the overclocking performance on air is impressive. The next speed step of 2.4GHz (4600+) was easily reached, and we moved on past the next logical step of 2.6GHz to 2.7GHz. This is faster than any of the currently available Dual-Core Athlons. We should mention that 240x11 (2.64GHz) was an extremely easy and stable reach. That speed required just 1.45V, was exceptionally stable, and ran quite cool. The last 55MHz required a great deal more voltage and generated a lot more heat. For day in and day out the 240 setting (2.64GHz) would be our choice with this CPU (stock 2.2GHz) on air."

If you do stick with the 4000+ though, be sure you get a San DIego core - it's build on a 90nm process instead of 130nm, so it runs cooler and can overclock better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top