X-Bit labs FX-57 review

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

FX-57

Check out the power consumption. Talk about wattage for Intel. It always startles me when I see them

 

[13Gigatons]

104 watts

 

[Zebo]

Yea 73 watts due to new E4 rev manufacture.. Not bad at all but still leaky past ~2600Mhz. Duel core OC'ed to 2800mhz will use 146 watts as I predicted (2 x 73W) while only using 90W @ 2400Mhz.

So a major overclock of X2 is like a Mobile XP ~2600Mhz or a stock 3.6 Ghz prescott.

 

[RichUK]

It is quite natural then that the new model in the Athlon 64 FX series is manufactured on a more advanced tech process. Fortunately, AMD?s 90nm technology has been used in manufacture for a long while already. So even though the Athlon 64 FX-57 is the first 90nm processor in its series, it doesn?t have anything new about itself. This CPU is based on the same core as is used in senior 90nm Athlon 64 model.

Wrong .. thats poor to be fair .. considering there is a FX55 SD 90nm, deary dear ..** moan moan**

 

[theMan]

yeah, but its the first fx chip to be released exclusively for 90nm. there isnt a 130nm fx57 like there is with the fx55.

it also really looked like the 4800+ killed the fx57. especially if you overclocked it.

 

[Duvie]

Here is a real review site....I like how they seem to pick older versions of the same apps techreport uses and for some reason they appear to be not multithreaded...


http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2005q2/athlon64-fx57/index.x?pg=2

... notice how they also used xmpeg (used a version 5.0.3 and Divx 5.21....yet it seems interesting where they have the intel killing the AMD X2 they also have the app look rather waek in terms of SMT....funny how techreport's app look more SMT aware...It is clear from the cpu task manager (something a "real" review site does) that in fact the app does use multiple cores....yet also the P4 670 loses by 15+% and doesn't beat the XE as seen in xbits review...

You cant fake smt awareness so I call into question Ivan's competence....This is getting lame that reviewers cant seem to get this right...I wouldn't have an issue except retards like him make these errorneous statements..

>>The Athlon 64 X2 4800+ generally handles encoding tasks somewhat faster than the Athlon 64 FX-57. And still, the 400MHz higher frequency of the FX-57 helps it to beat even the Athlon 64 X2 4800+ in some cases (see the results of encoding with the Mainconcept and XviD codecs).<<

http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2005q2/athlon64-fx57/index.x?pg=9 (proof in the pudding)

Their Xvid test is even more funny as they have the p4 670 beat the 4800+ (and 840 XE) when I haven't seen another review show that...they obviously must not know what they are doing...

Look even Toms agrees with Techreport and AT... http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050627/athlon_fx57-07.html ... they did use gknot so perhaps other then techreport's version Xbits either had an older non SMT aware version or they dont know how to use it....could be both...Fact is they shouldn't make statements like they made about "xvid codecs" when they didn't say "with using Xmpeg"....It is clear this is not the case in all apps...The fact that the 840 cant manage to beat its own sigle core Intel brothers is that it is a rather poor test to use if you plan on including dual core numbers...


http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2410&p=6 ... maybe it was also a poor choice of test at it appears obviously GKNOT ie extremely HT aware for both Intel and AMD...