NB-This is for DUAL CORE and SINGLE CORE processors:The Athlon 64 FX-64 will be AMD's desktop flagship processor until Q3'07 when the Athlon 64 FX-66 arrives.
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3170 :lol:
NB-This is for DUAL CORE and SINGLE CORE processors:The Athlon 64 FX-64 will be AMD's desktop flagship processor until Q3'07 when the Athlon 64 FX-66 arrives.
:lol: :lol: 90nm FX-66, that thing is gonna burn the socket =)
Hopefully clovertown will be out by then.
Sad imo... that by 3rd quarter 2007 the FX-66 will be the fastest AMD has to offer... I assume that to be simply a FX-62 but running at 3GHz x2...
That will still be slower than todays Conroes E6700, which will only cost $520... And Intel's roadmap indicates by then they will have much faster chips to contend with...
Since AMD and Intel come to the market with quad-core in 1Q2007 don't you think that the FX-66 will be quad core as well ?
Don't forget that the only benchmarks from Conroe are not really accurate and were done with a NON production type chip.
THGAgain, we must emphasize that our testing situation was not optimal, because the Intel system had been preconfigured and didn't represent the final version.
extremetechServer roadmaps shown by company executives confirmed that the company's Opteron processor will move to a quad-core architecture beginning in 2007, together with the ability to scale to 32 processors and above. Similar roadmaps presented for the company's desktop processor roadmap lacked the quad-core disclosure, however, which could indicate that quad-core, AMD-based PCs will arrive in 2008 or later.
Sad imo... that by 3rd quarter 2007 the FX-66 will be the fastest AMD has to offer... I assume that to be simply a FX-62 but running at 3.2GHz x2...
That will still be slower than todays Conroes E6700, which will only cost $520... And Intel's roadmap indicates by then they will have much faster chips to contend with...
No it will not be better choice, the Core2 Duo E6600 is faster and less expencive than the 5200+. Those who bought 965EE, paid a lot of money but that was in the past and they will not buy 965EE at the thime when 5200+ will be available. They will probably buy something more powerfull and competetive, like Conore.The 5200+ will be the better choice but look how many people paid for 965EE, which is BARELY faster than my 4400+ and in a lot of cases gets whipped.
No it will not be better choice, the Core2 Duo E6600 is faster and less expencive than the 5200+. Those who bought 965EE, paid a lot of money but that was in the past and they will not buy 965EE at the thime when 5200+ will be available. They will probably buy something more powerfull and competetive, like Conore.The 5200+ will be the better choice but look how many people paid for 965EE, which is BARELY faster than my 4400+ and in a lot of cases gets whipped.
No it will not be better choice, the Core2 Duo E6600 is faster and less expencive than the 5200+. Those who bought 965EE, paid a lot of money but that was in the past and they will not buy 965EE at the thime when 5200+ will be available. They will probably buy something more powerfull and competetive, like Conore.The 5200+ will be the better choice but look how many people paid for 965EE, which is BARELY faster than my 4400+ and in a lot of cases gets whipped.
No it will not be better choice, the Core2 Duo E6600 is faster and less expencive than the 5200+. Those who bought 965EE, paid a lot of money but that was in the past and they will not buy 965EE at the thime when 5200+ will be available. They will probably buy something more powerfull and competetive, like Conore.The 5200+ will be the better choice but look how many people paid for 965EE, which is BARELY faster than my 4400+ and in a lot of cases gets whipped.
Q3 07 and no K8L?