• 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.

Question about AMD Athlon 64 CPUS...

Originally posted by: wakawaka
no

Thought so. Am here at a LAN party and some participant (also a BB employee) said that dual-channel is only enabled with FX processors because of their "more advanced memory controller".
 
only difference in a FX is an unlocked CPU multiplier.

(well the Fx 55 does have some processing inhancements)

Any socket 939 AMd 64 has dual channel capabilities
 
Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Originally posted by: wakawaka
no

Thought so. Am here at a LAN party and some participant (also a BB employee) said that dual-channel is only enabled with FX processors because of their "more advanced memory controller".

Before Socket939 that was true.
 
Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Originally posted by: wakawaka
no

Thought so. Am here at a LAN party and some participant (also a BB employee) said that dual-channel is only enabled with FX processors because of their "more advanced memory controller".

The only thing that is "more advanced" is the BB guy's level of ignorance.
 
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Originally posted by: wakawaka
no

Thought so. Am here at a LAN party and some participant (also a BB employee) said that dual-channel is only enabled with FX processors because of their "more advanced memory controller".

Before Socket939 that was true.



I agree but there are soe other differences...

1) out of sckt 939 chips not all of them have 1mb of l2 cache l;ike the FX models...only others are the clawhammers....

2) The FX55 model was the first to use the SS/SOI which is why they overclock so well for being an 130nm process...

3) some non FX chips are currently at 90nm process (winchesters)

Otherwsie my 3000+ winchester at 2.66ghz is as fast as an FX55 in a majority of non gaming apps cause the only real difference is the less L2 cache for me and in most apps it doesn't add more then 1-2%....
 
You know what is sad with guys like this at BB....Is the fact this shows they care very little about their job. Maybe it is just "lazy americans", but if I worked in selling computers and pCs I would strive to know way more then I know now and understand it fully on a technical level....Granted I would never work in the field becuase the pay is like 1/5th of what I make now, but evidently you get what you pay for....BB that is....

I do like to go into the CC's, BB's and Fryes and school the boys...the FUD is tremendous...I for one believe 50% or more of what comes out of their mouths is false. Either as a blatant lie to sell or just ignorance in their job or product they are being trusted to sell....I by the way have in the past been asked to leave a few times by salespersons cause I cost them a sell due to me overhearing and then injecting the truth into what was being claimed.

You know it is sad enough it is usually young kids doing this, but even worse when it is like a 40 something year old man (sadly still working in the retail sector and not the manager)

I would put them in the category with car salesman except the car salesman are smarter...they just lie and make no bones about it....
 
Haha... yeah, I asked a Fry's employee one time (who noticed I was eyeing a 30" Apple cinema monitor) if I could use this with a pc. He said I'd need some adapter. When I asked why, he said that Apples were superior computers... that was the end of any serious discourse with that retard. 😛
 
Back
Top