L
Legend
What is wrong with the FX series of AMD CPU's
Why isnt anyone here recommending them
Why isnt anyone here recommending them
What is wrong with the FX series of AMD CPU's
Why isnt anyone here recommending them
Because they are overpriced IMO. Got plenty of money you don't care about,
go for it. They are not multiplier locked and have default clockspeed
usually 200MHz above the fastest A64.
Wes is exactly right, the FX series has lousy price/performance. For
example the FX60 (2.6GHz) is $1018, the X2 4800+ (2.4GHz) is $680 and the
X2 4400+ (2.2GHz) is $461. All three parts are identical except for the
clock speed (dual core, 1M caches). The FX60 is 18% faster then the 4400+
but it's price is 2.2X the price of the 4400+. For the difference in price
between a FX60 and a 4400+ you could but a second 4400+, a motherboard,
and a graphics card.
are they 64bit dual core?Wes said:Because they are overpriced IMO. Got plenty of money you don't care about,
go for it. They are not multiplier locked and have default clockspeed
usually 200MHz above the fastest A64.
are they 64bit dual core?
Sorry for all the doubt and negativity lately WES, but I have like 2days
to take the plunge into getting a new computer (currently own a P4 3ghz
1meg cache) with is so rock solid I am scared to make a move (last time
I took a jump to AMD was the athlon 1200 , and blew $16k Australian on
them (double that for $US) only to find that it was fast but I couldnt
upload or download any file bigger that 20k, be it floppy, usb, CD or
internet,, I couldnt burn CD's but I COuld use the ISA port.. ( I
bought AMD because I had 6 USrobotic internal Courier m0dems that cost
me a thousand australian dollars each and still wanted to use them yrt
still have the fastest machine going at the time
I had fast machimes that could do nothing... but that was back in 2000 I
think .. I understood that it was the VIA chipsets fault...
Then I saw were VIA wanted to buy out AMD... Woooo not for me.. nothing
wrong with AMD... It would have suited me better if AMD bought out VIA
and cleaned up the VIA chipsets..
anyway I remeber your name from teh old USRobotic Courier modem days and
respect your opinion ,,, so lay it on me Bro
What is the fastest, most cost effective way to go in 64bit... AMD or
INtel .. my main use is rendering movies to DVD's for people these days
I think the new FX60 is, but I'm pretty sure all the ealier ones areare they 64bit dual core?
What is the fastest, most cost effective way to go in 64bit... AMD or
INtel .. my main use is rendering movies to DVD's for people these days
Legend said:are they 64bit dual core?
Sorry for all the doubt and negativity lately WES, but I have like 2days
to take the plunge into getting a new computer (currently own a P4 3ghz
1meg cache) with is so rock solid I am scared to make a move
What is the fastest, most cost effective way to go in 64bit... AMD or
INtel .. my main use is rendering movies to DVD's for people these days
Enermax EG565P-FMA REV.2.0 ATX, 535W supply
General, how quiet is this PS?
Thanks.
A PCI-X card won't wortk in a PCI-E(xpress) MB. I don't know of any AMDOne last thing...The motherboard chipset
I see VIA, Nvidia, ATi,ULi chipsets on boards made by ABIT
and have heard some people hear swear by NVidia chipsets yet others have
all sorts of trouble with them..
I never want VIA again and if Nvidia has trouble if I use an ATI video
card then that leaves ATI and ULi
My video card of choice is the ATI SAPPHIRE X1300 256meg PCIx MODEL
Single slot passive (silent) cooling solution
Legend said:are they 64bit dual core?