CPU Buyers' Guide updated (+ Discussion about the sticky)

I had to change many things in a single update and also had to deal with formatting issues caused by forum upgrade. So there may be quite a few errors. Please help me to correct the errors.

Somebody wrote a dual core faq a couple of months ago. I have to integrate it with the guide, and it really needs reformatting. If steve listened to my request for complete HTML support......


Re: THGC CPU Buyers' Guide (17/Feb/2006)

Great, only noticed one thing.

To the right of most of the dual core CPUs, you have the words "dual core" in red letters.
You forgot to do that with the FX-60.

OK, it's 8:30 p.m. where I am and I'm stuck in the office waiting on the server to backup so I can go home. Since I don't feel like doing real work this late at night, I took a few minutes to proofread the sticky again.
This list is mostly spelling errors and some of its a little bit picky and minor, but here goes:

Under the heading:
2.1.6 Professional level Audio/Video editing & encoding
the last sentence: "but Athlon 64s are comeptitive as well."
competitive is misspelled

Under:
3.1.1 [color]Pentium 4 (Prescott) "A"[/color] (described in 2.0.5)
"brandname" should properly be two words (brand name)

Under:
3.1.2 Pentium Extreme Edition (described in 2.0.9)
replace "is" with "its" in the following phrase:
"but by no means good enough to justify is extreme price."

under:
3.1.3 Athlon 64 FX series (described in 2.0.12 and 2.0.13)
"pricetag' should be two words, and "price tags" is probably better.

under:
3.4.3 Athlon64 X2 (Manchester, Toledo)
"nowdays" should be spelled with an "A": "nowadays"

under:
3.5.1 AMD's Socket AM2 and upgrade dielma
last word in that title should be "dilemma"

Also, I'm not technically proficient enough to challenge this statement, but maybe the following (also under 3.5.1) should be rephrased:
"AMD is not supposed to release faster socket 939 CPUs in future, which makes Athlon 64 FX60 the fastest CPU for current socket 939 platform."

Technically, isn't the FX-57 the fastest CPU? At 2.8 ghz it's the fastest single core processor to be released for Socket 939.
FX-60 is the fastest dual core Socket 939 CPU, and in some applications (especially those optimized for multple threads), it is indeed faster than the FX-57 -- but the FX-57 is still faster at games and certain applications, right?

You put in a lot of work, spitfire. Great job. Thankyou very much.

OH OH TYPo.
The 2500 actually runs @ 1.4. Good catch. Spitfire will correct that soon.

There are some errors in your posting:

Toledo is also available in A64 X2 3800+ and higher ( 3800+ (2.0 GHz), 4200+ (2.2 GHz), 4600+ (2.2 GHz)) with L2 512 MB .
It happens I do have one.

http://images5.pictiger.com/images [...] a65aae.jpg

http://server5.pictiger.com/img/70 [...] z-1.31.php

Notice WRONG reading by CPUZ version 1.31 and corrected in version 1.32

The athlon FX-51 when released cost 787.00 U$ so it was 'a liitle" less than 1,000 as quoted, and at that time there was no cheaper equivalent. The problem was however with required REGISTERED memory which was about 15 % more expensive.
Altough I do agree that with current price structure it is not wise investment.

I would also suggest to include the type of memory used by CPUs / MoBo as here the consumer is aware of upgredability limitations and options

Semprons are already manufactured for socket 939, but I do belive the distributrion channels are avoiding retail sales, and are limited for OEMs transactions.


There is also a confrontational controversy with Intel Dual Cores.

Intel slapped two CPUs on a pinframe, however they do not have any integration such as memory controler. They are called by Intel dual core to decisively match the AMDs nomenclature.

I would suggest call them somehow diferently i.e. Intel DUO to avoid any confussion, and suggestions that they are in deed integrated dual core.

To be a dual core CPU the cores MUST be integrated as it is done by AMD using memory controller.

Intel's unfair, misleading and deceptive marketing practices are well known.

Looking back when AMD released Athlon, Intel feearing competition and not having anything new in their barn to stay competitive with AMD released Pentium II with 66 Mhz bus renamed as Pentium III 450 MHz just to deceive the unsuspecting buyers.

So we must assure that same wouldn't happen to Dual Core and two cores slaped on a grid.

DUO in contrast to Dual Core would diferentiate the cores integration.

When company start using such deceptive business practices the knowleageable consumers should provide such information by all available means and openly moon such companies.

Well, 3800+ Toledo and Manchester are practically the same thing. 3800+ Toldeo is probably made only when they don't pass the quality test as 1 MB L2 cache Toledo.

S939 Semprons are not available for purchase, so it's not an option when you are buying a CPU.

Intel's dual core CPUs are effectively dual core, and the users won't notice the difference between "2 core in 1 die" dual core and "2 cores glued together" dual core in real world. So if I try to label Intel dual cores as something else, it will only increase confusion.

Very handy, made my decision based on it, am v happy with results.
Thanks

the guide is greate but i think we need an update!

Such as ?

well... i meant in near future

Such as ?
well... i meant in near future

Spitfire will most likely update his guide sometime after the AM2 release, whenever he'll get the time and feel like doing it.

In the meantime, refrain from posting on this thread unless you can make a contribution or a correction to the guide. Me too i love reading his threads.

You suggested only AMD processors.Don't you think Intel has atleast one
better CPU?