Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 10th Jan 2006 15:26 UTC
AMD AMD has released its first dual-core Athlon 64 FX processor, the FX-60. The Reg puts it through its paces, and concludes: "AMD Athlon 64 FX-60 is the best consumer processor AMD has ever produced. With effectively a pair of FX-55s sat in the same socket, sharing an efficient memory controller, it's close enough to FX-57 in single-threaded apps that the multi-threaded advantage makes that slender gap moot. Targetted at the well-heeled enthusiast, the new dual-core processor should be a shoo-in for those with FX-57s already, and those with the required readies to drop on the latest and greatest."
Thread beginning with comment 84006
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Prices
by visconde_de_sabugosa on Tue 10th Jan 2006 16:39 UTC
visconde_de_sabugosa
Member since:
2005-11-14

From

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_60...

AMD Athlon™ 64 FX-60 $1,031
AMD Athlon™ 64 FX-57 $827

Why pay $200 more for worst performance ?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Prices
by Smartpatrol on Tue 10th Jan 2006 16:43 in reply to "Prices"
Smartpatrol Member since:
2005-07-06

why pay over a couple hundred dollars for a CPU! Those prices are nutts! Especially when i have no trouble playing the latest games with a decent Video card and a 2 year old 2.4Ghz HT Pentium 4.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Prices
by rayiner on Tue 10th Jan 2006 17:06 in reply to "RE: Prices"
rayiner Member since:
2005-07-06

Hmm, try playing FEAR on that thing. I played it on my brother's 2.2 GHz Athlon64 with an X800XL, and I definitely had to turn down a lot of the setttings to get things smooth.

OT: FEAR is an awesome game! First program in years that made me wish I a Windows machine. Is it too much to hope for a Mac port?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Prices
by Tom K on Tue 10th Jan 2006 17:00 in reply to "Prices"
Tom K Member since:
2005-07-06

You obviously have a weak understanding of processor performance. Multi-threaded applications = close to 2x the speed of the FX-57. Multi-threaded, dual-core optimized games (like UT 2007) = significant performance improvements.

Multi-threading/dual cores are the future. UT2007 is the first of many games that will show up to take advantage of dual cores, and eventually require dual cores,

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Prices
by klynch on Tue 10th Jan 2006 18:44 in reply to "RE: Prices"
klynch Member since:
2005-07-06

How can you "require" dual cores? It's not like it's impossible to run multiple threads on the same CPU. Sure it won't be true concurrency, but it'll still operate.

Also, let's assume the game needs two threads to run in true concurrency. These threads will be able to run well on dual processor systems too.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Prices
by gilboa on Tue 10th Jan 2006 17:02 in reply to "Prices"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

... Because:
A. Newer games (Quake4 (both Linux and Windows), Battlefield 2 (Windows) and others) already added SMP support.
B. If you, like me, rather not stop your daily work just to play Doom3, SMP is the only option. (Hence my dual Opteron machine)

For 200$ you potentially get 80% increase in performance.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Prices
by gilboa on Tue 10th Jan 2006 17:05 in reply to "RE: Prices"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

sed 's/Battlefield 2/COD2/g'

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Prices
by eMagius on Tue 10th Jan 2006 19:57 in reply to "RE: Prices"
eMagius Member since:
2005-07-06

If you, like me, rather not stop your daily work just to play Doom3, SMP is the only option. (Hence my dual Opteron machine)

I'm not quite certain how one does one's daily work while playing Doom 3. Unless one's work is sitting about waiting.

Reply Parent Score: 3