What is the best CPU for Multimedia and Gaming?

you should read the FAQ. I'd say AMD, and i think the FAQ agree's with me, but there are more things to consider. Check the FAQ for a lot of good info.

the dual core A64 X2 4800+ is todays dominant CPU in terms of performance.

If I were you I would save my money on a fx and get a opty 146 cabne and try to reach 3ghz on air... Those cpus will do at LEAST 2.8 which is stock for fx57 and they cost a lil less fx57 like 1000 and 146 opty = like $165

The FX-60 will not be faster than the FX-57 in games. The FX-60 is clocked 200MHz slower resulting in worse gaming performance on most games except Quake 4 and Call of Duty 2 which I belive are the only current games that are dual core and HT optimized. Dual core and HT drivers help a bit but not enough to overcome the 200MHz disadvantage.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28152

does opty's comes with s939's?

I know. I was just referring to best possible dedicated gaming processor. The way I do things a standard dual core wouldn't even satisfy my needs. I usually have NAV2006, Zonealarm, and 1 video encoding task going on at all times while I do other things in the foreground. What I'd really want is the 955EE. Then I could NAV 2006, Zonealarm, 2 video encode, 1 audio encode, and play a game at a decent speed. 955EE may be slower in single applications than the X2 4800+ but being able to virus scan, MP3 encode, WME encode, unzip, and still average 77.2fps in Splinter Cell is more useful to me. Sadly $999 is quite an investment even if it can get to 4.26GHz for free.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipse [...] i=2658&p=7

Well an Opteron 165 costs around $290, and can easily reach 2.6 on air easily making it the equivaland of an XP 5000+ if produced would be the Opteron 185. (word is the 165 hitting 2.8 is common and some hitting 3.0ghz on air making equivalant of a 5800+, and under 300clams)

That might be taking things a little far.
According to THG's interactive chip comparison The improvement going to an Fx57 from a 3000+ would be about
fartcry-- 30%
Doom3-- 15%
UT 04----45%
quack3---45%
wolfenstien- 38%
That is in fps.
Some games are still cpu limited, so while I agree with you in principle, it's always better to match the chip and cpu .

just got my opty 165...OC 2.6 on air 40C@load...for 2 days burn in on prime 95...CREAMY DUAL CORE GOODNESS!!!!!!!
alithough i have a 6.75 12vdc fan going @ 2000rpm pulling out roughly 180cfm 8O ...and its quiet too...

I'm forgetting?
I've never played @ 1600, so maybe I'm not.
1280 is nice, but as newer games come out, 1024 will do just fine.
Before my last upgrade I was thinking 800 might be a good idea.
If I was into dumping $500 a year into new gfx cards, and playing at 1600, then you are right.
If I just want to play @ reasonable settings, without missing any mortgage payments, I'll continue to buy gfx cards that cost the same as my chip and mobo. It's a good balance for me.

WOW!

This is why women/children should not be on there internet...THIS THREAD WAS POSTED 4 YEARS AGO!

You're probably right. I've seen interesting-looking things in the 'related content' sidebar, only to find they're five years old, although I've never been guilty of thread necromancy.