Mmm.. FX-55.

[magnux]

Wow, talk about dumb luck. A buddy of mine, and AMD Reseller, just got sent one of these by his AMD Rep for personal use.. I'm jealous. 🙁

http://www.havok.org/~magnus/MVC-011F.JPG
http://www.havok.org/~magnus/MVC-013F.JPG

 

[clarkey01]

2.6Ghz on 130 nm, and some ppl thought 2.2Ghz was pushing it! sweet. I am dying to see the reviews of the FX 55 and 4000+, I cant wait for the 4000+ to perform no better then a 3800+ and FX 53 , 512k cache does not equal 200+ Pr points.

Hope for AMD's sake the new FX can beat off the 3.7Ghz 1066 FSB EE out next month.

 

[cbehnken]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=19024

 

[clarkey01]

I saw that article cbehnken, but the numbers dont really add up, I'll wait for the real reviews, I though the gap would of been bigger.

 

[Drayvn]

Ive actually seen Toms Hardware review the 1066FSB and they say that the majority of the tests the AMD64 wins...

Which is a bit of a turn around for THG

 

[Mik3y]

Originally posted by: Drayvn
Ive actually seen Toms Hardware review the 1066FSB and they say that the majority of the tests the AMD64 wins...

Which is a bit of a turn around for THG

i hope you're right. 🙂

 

[bunnyfubbles]

The interesting part is what it'll do for the non EE P4s. With DDR2 and the 1GHZ fsb, the bandwidth might help a lot to make up some of the ground AMD's onboard memory controller has gained.

 

[iwantanewcomputer]

Originally posted by: Drayvn
Ive actually seen Toms Hardware review the 1066FSB and they say that the majority of the tests the AMD64 wins...

Which is a bit of a turn around for THG

thay can only lie so much...usually the just avoid the topic of amd

the 4000 is definatly not worthy of 4000 compared to the 3800. amd got more of a boost than they expected from the memory controller and fast ram and extra cache just aren't that important

amd is just trying to delay clock speeds as much as possible. back in the early days of the athlon 64 people were so excited about the 3400 newcastle at 2.4 GHZ. now they are up to...2.4 GHz witth the 4000

tehy have to streatch out the clock speed increases over the life span of the athlon 64 on 90 nm, and divide up the jumps equally. i think the worst pr rating is the 3500 at 2.2 is supposed to be better than a 3400 at 2.4. oh well, i still love em.

apps should start taking advantage of 1mb cache more now that all high end processors have it, but i think amd is planning on dropping back to 512 once they ramp the 90 nm speed

 

[karlreading]

i have to say that AMD's speed system isnt as good as intels, there model numbers make it easier to define what cpu your getting, even if it is just beacuse they can put a letter at the end of the number ( like the 3.6 on the new stepping with the nx and the EM64T enabled is the 560F IIRC)
AMD on the other hand have problems. take for example the fact there are now 3 diffrent types of 3200+ avalible (2Gh/512k d/c 939 and 2Ghz/1024 s/c 754 and 2.2ghz/512 s/c 754 )
at the end of the day hows the consumer to know what there getting.
i only got a hammer cause i knew what to look for and thats what i wanted. average joe might not be getting the 3200+ he deserves. Its all very confusing. and annoying. i dont like to see intel doing something better than amd, or have to admit they arte as well. but hats of to them, there model numbers r just better.

And whats with the 2.4ghz/1meg 939 4000+. sounds like there re-releasing the fx-53 to me. IMHO if they cant keep to a formula ( i.e cache ) that makes fx special, they should cease the fx line and just leave a64......
karlos