Okay, I was Newegg looking at processors and came accross someting I find interesting. The FX60 costs $811 while the 4800+ costs only $369. I compared them and it turns out everything, cache and core, is the same except for the clock speed. And even that is only 200 MHz. Does this mean that the price difference is 5% 200 MHz and 95% name? Is there a fundamental difference between the chips? And if so, how? They have the same cores. Just curiosity.
well it really all depends on what FX core you were looking at the FX-50 which performaded almost exaclty as the regular line would except in some games. Yes for certain points its is kinda of a sails pitch, they just push their regular cores farther and put a label on it, like the FX-57 which is AMD fastest core at 2.8 ghz. That said, the FX cores are usually noted for their high clock speed and a larger than normal amount of cache. They work great for single threaded applications like games but that will change, and AMD had made the FX-60 dual care model with high clock speeds at 2.6. Hope that helped
Well, it sisn't really answer my question. Both processors have Toledo cores and the exact same amount of cache. Furthermore, the FX-60 is only 200 MHz faster than the 4800+. So, if I were to overclock a 4800+ to 2.6 GHz would I have an FX-60?
You don't people listen, everything but the clock speed is the same. At least as much as is published on Newegg.
That sounds about right Max. A FX-60 is a glorified X2 4800+. Even if you look at the benchmarks the results are almost the same. Besides the bump in clock speed (200MHz) and the name, there is no difference. I think AMD was upping there FX-57, which is single core, to a dual core system. They just took the 4800+ and upped the clock speed, but even with the 200MHz advantage over the 4800+, the FX-60 is still 200MHz under the FX-57 -- this is a problem for single core applications like games, which the FX-57 will still outperform the FX-60.
yes the FX-60 is the dual core line, and what VOl has said is the truth, a marketing thing, but i have heard they are a little more robust and overclock better
Hmmm, so, overclocking a 4800+ 400 MHz, a generally easy number, would yield a pretty serious beast. FX-57 speeds with 2 cores. The wheels are turning, especially after this price drop.
Yes it will, but look at this: AnandTech: Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 & E6400: Tremendous Value Through Overclocking an FX-62 is not hard to beat with Intel's $200 processor.
The FX league is really AMD's cash cow, people look at that and think "elete" "top of the line" and assume it's just better as they've heard that the FX's in the past were "gamers' on real choice" so AMD can making a killing off the unscrupulous buyer who assumes the more expensive it is the better. But unless I'm missing something here aswell they're the same thing with a different game and a 200MHz clock difference. vol7ron, are the Conroe's commercially available now? I might have missed them somehow but I didn't spot any right off on newegg.
Newegg had the X6800 for like a day. Some shipments have been sent out already if you preordered. If not, TigerDirect will be getting 1000 in on Monday August 07th (tomorrow). Other vendors will be getting their second shipments at that time as well. You'll probably find the cheapest prices at TigerDirect because they have such good relations with Intel. I'll have mine on the 10th
