Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

FX-60 ROCKS

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 16, 2006 3:53:34 AM

i just installed the new processor today and im in the process of running prime95 to test stability. i used to not even be able to browse the net while running prime now its running in the background and its like its not even there. i would definitely recommend it to anyone whos looking to upgrade.

More about : rocks

December 16, 2006 4:02:20 AM

It is still a good CPU. You will especially notice the difference if you never used a dual core CPU before.
December 16, 2006 4:09:31 AM

ya i came from a 3500+ venice. i cant believe the difference
Related resources
December 16, 2006 4:17:20 AM

Quote:
ya i came from a 3500+ venice. i cant believe the difference


Difference is quite big actually.
a b à CPUs
December 16, 2006 4:47:21 AM

Quote:
i just installed the new processor today and im in the process of running prime95 to test stability. i used to not even be able to browse the net while running prime now its running in the background and its like its not even there. i would definitely recommend it to anyone whos looking to upgrade.


i would also recomend the core 2 duo's ;)  there generally cheaper, faster and colder

*ducks flame*
December 16, 2006 4:59:24 AM

Quote:
i would also recomend the core 2 duo's there generally cheaper, faster and colder

Uh, no. Not if you're upgrading an existing 939 system.
Cheaper? No, because c2d means buy not only a $200+ CPU, but also a new mobo and ram which for anything decent will easily total well over the $450 for a fx-60.
Fast? Maybe, but only if you spend nearly as much for the CPU alone, nevermind the mobo and ram.
colder? only if your c2d is running in the 20's (which I doubt from all the "my 6X00 runs hot" threads). My FX60 usually stays around the mid 30s with stock cooling.

As hard as it my be to believe there still are plenty of reasons for people to by AMD. Despite what you've been told "Buy c2d" isn't the answer to everything.
a b à CPUs
December 16, 2006 5:04:43 AM

As a dual core CPU, you need to be running two copies of Prime95. Its that responsive because your only stressing one core. To make it behave more like your 3500+, run two copies. (and assign one copy to each core.)
a b à CPUs
December 16, 2006 5:30:38 AM

Quote:
i would also recomend the core 2 duo's there generally cheaper, faster and colder

Uh, no. Not if you're upgrading an existing 939 system.
Cheaper? No, because c2d means buy not only a $200+ CPU, but also a new mobo and ram which for anything decent will easily total well over the $450 for a fx-60.
Fast? Maybe, but only if you spend nearly as much for the CPU alone, nevermind the mobo and ram.
colder? only if your c2d is running in the 20's (which I doubt from all the "my 6X00 runs hot" threads). My FX60 usually stays around the mid 30s with stock cooling.

As hard as it my be to believe there still are plenty of reasons for people to by AMD. Despite what you've been told "Buy c2d" isn't the answer to everything.

temps all depend on where there read from ;)  amd typically seems to run cold, its the noobs that dont know how to mount the cooling properly.

A cheap E6300 system can clock up a storm and wipe out any AMD :D 

And with C2D mobo's quad core is waiting for you so think of it as an invesement ;) 
December 16, 2006 5:41:04 AM

Quote:
i would also recomend the core 2 duo's there generally cheaper, faster and colder

Uh, no. Not if you're upgrading an existing 939 system.
Cheaper? No, because c2d means buy not only a $200+ CPU, but also a new mobo and ram which for anything decent will easily total well over the $450 for a fx-60.
Fast? Maybe, but only if you spend nearly as much for the CPU alone, nevermind the mobo and ram.
colder? only if your c2d is running in the 20's (which I doubt from all the "my 6X00 runs hot" threads). My FX60 usually stays around the mid 30s with stock cooling.

As hard as it my be to believe there still are plenty of reasons for people to by AMD. Despite what you've been told "Buy c2d" isn't the answer to everything.

temps all depend on where there read from ;)  amd typically seems to run cold, its the noobs that dont know how to mount the cooling properly.

A cheap E6300 system can clock up a storm and wipe out any AMD :D 

And with C2D mobo's quad core is waiting for you so think of it as an invesement ;) 


Quote:
A cheap E6300 system can clock up a storm and wipe out any AMD
So true :lol: 
December 16, 2006 6:05:46 AM

Whether single-core or massively SMP, a system will remain responsive if there are not enough Prime95 threads to fill all the cores or if at least one of the threads is running at lower than normal priority.

There is a program called Orthos which automatically sets up 2 Prime95 threads and configures them to test CPU, RAM, or both. It has a setting that adjusts process priority so you can do other things while you're stress-testing your system.
December 16, 2006 7:26:51 AM

Like a few people said, you went from single core to dual, of course you can do other stuff. I am sure you are only running one instance of prime. But besides all that FX60 is a very nice chip congrats.
December 16, 2006 7:47:44 AM

Quote:
i would also recomend the core 2 duo's there generally cheaper, faster and colder

Uh, no. Not if you're upgrading an existing 939 system.

Bingo. That's why I bought my opty. A new mobo and RAM would have added a lot more cost to my upgrade. Dual core FTW!
December 16, 2006 8:03:28 AM

Heh, good for you :D  I'm still stuck on a P4...
December 16, 2006 8:26:59 AM

It is a nice chip, but too much expencive. I will not recomend it to anyone because it is being owned in 99% of applications known to mankind by a cheaper, cooler, much more enrgy efficient and much more overclockable CPU like Core 2 Duo E6600.
For the price of FX-60 you can buy an E6600 and a decend mainboard with Intel 965P chipset.
December 16, 2006 8:41:22 AM

Quote:
It is a nice chip, but too much expencive. I will not recomend it to anyone because it is being owned in 99% of applications known to mankind by a cheaper, cooler, much more enrgy efficient and much more overclockable CPU like Core 2 Duo E6600.
For the price of FX-60 you can buy an E6600 and a decend mainboard with Intel 965P chipset.


Is changing the title of the thread to

FX60 = ROCKS

Too harsh? :) 
December 16, 2006 9:05:14 AM

It's P965. Besides, the FX-60 is a very powerful CPU, and maybe he got a good deal on it. No need to rain on his parade now.
December 16, 2006 9:28:29 AM

Quote:
It's P965. Besides, the FX-60 is a very powerful CPU, and maybe he got a good deal on it. No need to rain on his parade now.
My point was not to piss on his FX-60. His deal is done, and no words can change it. My point was to inform the IT unkowledgable visitors of this forum that there are better CPUs for less money.
December 16, 2006 10:23:25 AM

if your building a new system, then yes -c2d- is the way to go right now. I love my E6400, I can't believe how much better it is than my p4.

But if you already have all else, then changing the cpu is the logical thing to do. Just because c2d are better, doesn't mean that fx-60 sucks.

OP you have a very good cpu right there! Is da bomb!!!
December 16, 2006 10:43:35 AM

Can't some one write about there good experience with out a fan boy making some comment about buying another brand CPU? He's happy, for all other enthusiasts that should be good enough. Well done enjoy your upgrade.
December 16, 2006 11:34:37 AM

I dont think so martyjs. Fan boys like to annoy people. If you got a good deal on the fx 60 that cool. But little room for upgrades. That a little downside. But I am glad your happy.
December 16, 2006 11:56:55 AM

Quote:
i just installed the new processor today and im in the process of running prime95 to test stability. i used to not even be able to browse the net while running prime now its running in the background and its like its not even there. i would definitely recommend it to anyone whos looking to upgrade.


Silly you. Don't you know you can't post anything on Tom's about a positive AMD experience without getting multiple responses telling you how stupid you are for not buying a C2D system?

Never mind that you want to upgrade an existing skt 939 system and already have MoBo and memory. Or even worse, you have actually had good experience with AMD and want the least painful and least costly upgrade.

Most of the knot heads offering glowing C2D advice never think about the cost, since they're spending Mommy and Daddy's money anyway.

One final point, as recently as this time last year, all the buzz was about AMD processors and nobody in their right mind was buying Intel for anything other than basic business apps.

I say, more power to you for a wise choice and enjoy your new upgrade. Forget about the lame advice of the kiddo "experts". :roll:
December 16, 2006 12:32:55 PM

Quote:
It is a nice chip, but too much expencive. I will not recomend it to anyone because it is being owned in 99% of applications known to mankind by a cheaper, cooler, much more enrgy efficient and much more overclockable CPU like Core 2 Duo E6600.
For the price of FX-60 you can buy an E6600 and a decend mainboard with Intel 965P chipset.

Ya a 6600 and motherboard will probably cost only a little more then a FX60. But if you say have 2gigs of decent RAM replacing that will add another $300 to the cost of the upgrade. Also there's are the hastle of basically rebuilding your entire system as opposed to just popping in a new chip. The OP, like myself, went from a single core to what was less then a year ago the absolute premier CPU on the market. What has come out or is coming out(Vista included) that makes it worth it to rebuild an entire system just to get slightly better benchmarks for that much more $$$. To the person who says "we just trying to point out theres faster CPUs for less", you don't think thats been made clear enough on this site alone? Why are you so afraid to admit that in many cases AMD is a practical alternative to Intel? To build an inferior c2d system for more money then the AMD upgrade in hopes of further possible upgrades means relying on Intel not to completely change the platform. Consider that $300 for DDR2 basically a bet on whether Intel will stick with the current platform long enough for you to get your money's worth out of it. To the OP, you definatly made the right decision and remember that you now have a system that 6 months ago all the Intel fanboys would have creamed themselves if only it said Intel instead of AMD.
a b à CPUs
December 16, 2006 1:13:07 PM

Quote:
It's P965. Besides, the FX-60 is a very powerful CPU, and maybe he got a good deal on it. No need to rain on his parade now.
My point was not to piss on his FX-60. His deal is done, and no words can change it. My point was to inform the IT unkowledgable visitors of this forum that there are better CPUs for less money.

Then start a you a new thread entitled "My Core Duo Rocks" and stop walking all over someone else's great upgrade.
He is obvioulsy quite happy and excited about his new FX60, and your point was EXACTLY nothing more than to "rain on his parade" and "piss on his FX-60".
Cheaper than his upgrade?
You just removed creditability from your point of view.
December 16, 2006 1:21:09 PM

Quote:
It is a nice chip, but too much expencive. I will not recomend it to anyone because it is being owned in 99% of applications known to mankind by a cheaper, cooler, much more enrgy efficient and much more overclockable CPU like Core 2 Duo E6600.
For the price of FX-60 you can buy an E6600 and a decend mainboard with Intel 965P chipset.
But he may already have 2GB of good DDR and replacing that with high speed DDR2 would be at least another $200. I personally think he should have gone with an X2 4200+ instead as the difference isn't worth the price with the FX60.
December 16, 2006 2:04:36 PM

Wtg with the FX-60. I'm crying buckets of tears watching the CPU prices now as opposed to last march when I built. I paid $346 for a 4000+ in February that I recently saw offered for $95. Thank goodness my wife doesnt know.

BTW I'm glad you didn't mention that the sky was blue or the Intel fanboys would have told you it was more blue with C2D. :roll:
December 16, 2006 2:25:48 PM

Quote:
Wtg with the FX-60. I'm crying buckets of tears watching the CPU prices now as opposed to last march when I built. I paid $346 for a 4000+ in February that I recently saw offered for $95. Thank goodness my wife doesnt know.

BTW I'm glad you didn't mention that the sky was blue or the Intel fanboys would have told you it was more blue with C2D. :roll:
If I was building from scratch, I'd never consider AMD at the moment; only for budget systems and 939 upgrades do they offer a competitive solution.
December 16, 2006 2:54:00 PM

I'm with you on that. I got a FX60 on one of the sales and I think its the cheapest upgrade I could have gotten. Why get rid of all the expensive ram, mobo, etc just to build a C2D machine? I'm getting 2990 mhz stable on air at 41c loaded, so that seems good in my book. I'm hoping to tweak it past 3 ghz.
December 16, 2006 3:19:34 PM

I doubt it if everything was responding as well as he claimed.
December 16, 2006 3:29:17 PM

Enjoy your upgrade! There's a big difference between upgrading and
replacing your whole system.
December 16, 2006 3:57:09 PM

Quote:
I'm with you on that. I got a FX60 on one of the sales and I think its the cheapest upgrade I could have gotten. Why get rid of all the expensive ram, mobo, etc just to build a C2D machine? I'm getting 2990 mhz stable on air at 41c loaded, so that seems good in my book. I'm hoping to tweak it past 3 ghz.


Is that load tested with P95 on both cores? just curious.

I haven't tested Prime 95 one both cores at once, but have run it at the same time as I have run other apps and games. My idle temp is 33c, so the step up to 41c under load seems in line. The temps are recorded by Speedfan, so are no more accurate than what it reads.

I'm presently running 6 fans in the case and have a Zalman 9500 on the cpu. The stock heatsink ran hotter for sure, going to about 51c under load.
December 16, 2006 4:12:26 PM

Quote:
Enjoy your upgrade! There's a big difference between upgrading and
replacing your whole system.


Here here. Kick ass FX-60 will own any apps today. Have fun and punch all intel fanboys.
a b à CPUs
December 16, 2006 4:22:20 PM

Quote:
Its a good CPU man congrats! I had an X2 4800 in my last system which ran at 2700mhz P95 stable so basically I had a chip faster than an FX60 for just $280 vs at the time $550 for the FX60

Even after my recent upgrade to a E6400@3.7ghz I can still say that I loved my old AMD socket 939! Would I go back? hell no but I did love that system.


My sentiments exactly. I had an Opty 170 @ 3.0Ghz which was my best AMD rig yet. I hated to eBay the parts, because it was so tweaked up. It was an inexpensive FX-62 equivalent, except faster. :D 
December 16, 2006 4:23:06 PM

Don't mean to Hijack this thread or anyting but I have a little question. Are all FX CPU dual core ?

BTW good thinking about your upgrade. Even though I have a 4200 I am looking around to see what CPU I could get before there is no 939 available.
December 16, 2006 4:54:12 PM

Nice due..dont be insecure with that..Enjoy your kick-ass upgrade dude..

:) 
December 16, 2006 6:44:48 PM

Quote:
Ya a 6600 and motherboard will probably cost only a little more then a FX60. But if you say have 2gigs of decent RAM replacing that will add another $300 to the cost of the upgrade.
You can use your old DDR RAM and/or your old AGP 8x graphics card with Core2 CPUs. All you need is apropriate mainboard like ASRock 775i65G, 775Dual-VSTA or ConroeXfire-ESATA2.
Quote:
Also there's are the hastle of basically rebuilding your entire system as opposed to just popping in a new chip.

Rebuilding your hardware system is not a problem. It will take you less than 30 minutes. Reinstalling software may take you more time, maybe some hours if you have many OS-es.

Quote:
Why are you so afraid to admit that in many cases AMD is a practical alternative to Intel?

WTF are you talking? :roll:
What I said was about FX-60 only. So let me repeat my words again:
It is not worth for the money and it is not practical alternative to Core2(Intel is a brand, Core2 is a product). FX-60 is slower, wastes much more energy, dissipates much more heat, overclocks less than C2D E6600. If we consider all these factors it is not even alternative to C2D E6400. FX-60 and E6400 are toe in performance, but overclocked E6400 is owning overclocked FX-60. And FX-60 costs more than twice than E6400. For a $500 CPU upgarde, FX-60 is not worth for the money.

Quote:
I personally think he should have gone with an X2 4200+ instead as the difference isn't worth the price with the FX60

I agree. I think that Opteron 170/175 is better choice if he is going to OC it.
December 16, 2006 7:06:01 PM

Quote:
Ya a 6600 and motherboard will probably cost only a little more then a FX60. But if you say have 2gigs of decent RAM replacing that will add another $300 to the cost of the upgrade.
You can use your old DDR RAM and/or your old AGP 8x graphics card with Core2 CPUs. All you need is apropriate mainboard like ASRock 775i65G, 775Dual-VSTA or ConroeXfire-ESATA2.
Quote:
Also there's are the hastle of basically rebuilding your entire system as opposed to just popping in a new chip.

Rebuilding your hardware system is not a problem. It will take you less than 30 minutes. Reinstalling software may take you more time, maybe some hours if you have many OS-es.

Quote:
Why are you so afraid to admit that in many cases AMD is a practical alternative to Intel?

WTF are you talking? :roll:
What I said was about FX-60 only. So let me repeat my words again:
It is not worth for the money and it is not practical alternative to Core2(Intel is a brand, Core2 is a product). FX-60 is slower, wastes much more energy, dissipates much more heat, overclocks less than C2D E6600. If we consider all these factors it is not even alternative to C2D E6400. FX-60 and E6400 are toe in performance, but overclocked E6400 is owning overclocked FX-60. And FX-60 costs more than twice than E6400. For a $500 CPU upgarde, FX-60 is not worth for the money.

Quote:
I personally think he should have gone with an X2 4200+ instead as the difference isn't worth the price with the FX60

I agree. I think that Opteron 170/175 is better choice if he is going to OC it.


I would say this is how my QFX post got so long. No one wants to hear you tell them their purchase sucks and they should have gotten something else. The guy is happy with this purchase and we should all be happy that he has something he likes.


Leave it alone.
December 16, 2006 7:10:24 PM

Quote:
Ya a 6600 and motherboard will probably cost only a little more then a FX60. But if you say have 2gigs of decent RAM replacing that will add another $300 to the cost of the upgrade.
You can use your old DDR RAM and/or your old AGP 8x graphics card with Core2 CPUs. All you need is apropriate mainboard like ASRock 775i65G, 775Dual-VSTA or ConroeXfire-ESATA2.
Quote:
Also there's are the hastle of basically rebuilding your entire system as opposed to just popping in a new chip.

Rebuilding your hardware system is not a problem. It will take you less than 30 minutes. Reinstalling software may take you more time, maybe some hours if you have many OS-es.

Quote:
Why are you so afraid to admit that in many cases AMD is a practical alternative to Intel?

WTF are you talking? :roll:
What I said was about FX-60 only. So let me repeat my words again:
It is not worth for the money and it is not practical alternative to Core2(Intel is a brand, Core2 is a product). FX-60 is slower, wastes much more energy, dissipates much more heat, overclocks less than C2D E6600. If we consider all these factors it is not even alternative to C2D E6400. FX-60 and E6400 are toe in performance, but overclocked E6400 is owning overclocked FX-60. And FX-60 costs more than twice than E6400. For a $500 CPU upgarde, FX-60 is not worth for the money.

Quote:
I personally think he should have gone with an X2 4200+ instead as the difference isn't worth the price with the FX60

I agree. I think that Opteron 170/175 is better choice if he is going to OC it.


I would say this is how my QFX post got so long. No one wants to hear you tell them their purchase sucks and they should have gotten something else. The guy is happy with this purchase and we should all be happy that he has something he likes.


Leave it alone.This is true. Just remember that if someone posts how happy they are with their P4 540 or something similar! :wink:
December 16, 2006 7:30:32 PM

Quote:
This is true. Just remember that if someone posts how happy they are with their P4 540 or something similar!



I have never downed someone for a purchase or even applauded them for a purchase.

I prefer to tell people the truth and let them decide. Core 2 is faster but X2 set the standard so either one regardless of clock speed will get the job done.

Toss a coin.
December 16, 2006 7:31:44 PM

Quote:
I would say this is how my QFX post got so long. No one wants to hear you tell them their purchase sucks and they should have gotten something else. The guy is happy with this purchase and we should all be happy that he has something he likes.


Leave it alone.

I dissagree. He has allready purchased his FX-60, but you have not yet wasted your money on QFX. Although he is happy with his FX-60, he can't go back in time and make other choice like you can. So, I am not saying that he should have gotten something else, but I am saying that others should think more than once before they waste $500 on FX-60. And I am saying this because the happy guy recomends this CPU which is not worth for the money.
December 16, 2006 7:33:38 PM

Dude, you must have money to burn. For me it's all about bang for buck. Would you choose pepsi over coke if the coke was buy 1 get one free????
December 16, 2006 7:34:59 PM

Quote:
I would say this is how my QFX post got so long. No one wants to hear you tell them their purchase sucks and they should have gotten something else. The guy is happy with this purchase and we should all be happy that he has something he likes.


Leave it alone.

I dissagree. He has allready purchased his FX-60, but you have not yet wasted your money on QFX. Although he is happy with his FX-60, he can't go back in time and make other choice like you can. So, I am not saying that he should have gotten something else, but I am saying that others should think more than once before they waste $500 on FX-60. And I am saying this because the happy guy recomends this CPU which is not worth for the money.


This is why I think you're a stalker. NO PC purchase based on X2 OR Core 2 is


WASTED MONEY.


GET A FRICKIN LIFE!!!!!!!!
December 16, 2006 7:40:35 PM

Quote:
Dude, you must have money to burn. For me it's all about bang for buck. Would you choose pepsi over coke if the coke was buy 1 get one free????


Here we go again. I paid $2000 last year for a decked out 4400+. Two FX60s for $2500 is a great deal. By the time Vista comes out it will be available for that much. That's when I plan on buying.


I'll let you know how sucky it is. It should barely run any games or productivity apps and cause my lights to flicker every time I move the mouse.
Hey it may even black out my whole neighborhood and take 10 minutes to type in a post here. At least I'll be ablle to put a fan next to it and heat the whole house while idle.

I figured what the hell, even my 4400+ sucks so why shouldn't two FX60s?
December 16, 2006 7:42:39 PM

8O :roll:

Meh, why bother..
December 16, 2006 7:59:50 PM

Baron is correct. Each Core 2 beats the X2 in its market sector.

December 16, 2006 8:04:35 PM

Quote:
prefer to tell people the truth and let them decide. Core 2 is faster but X2 set the standard so either one regardless of clock speed will get the job done.


Core 2 is faster? I think a more accurate statement would be, some core 2's are faster than some X2's.

Only and I mean only if your talking stock speed. Any overclocked E6300 will beat the pants off of your best overclocked X2.

We're not talking about competition we're talking about "EXPERIENCE." Either chip will play any game or run any app fast.

You sound like you have a deep-seated need for Core 2 to be faster and you have to make sure you say it at least 50 times a day as if you can barely believe it.
December 16, 2006 8:16:53 PM

Quote:
Core 2 is faster? I think a more accurate statement would be, some core 2's are faster than some X2's.

Even more accurate statement would be: some Core2's are faster than all AMD CPUs.
December 16, 2006 8:34:02 PM

Quote:
This is why I think you're a stalker. NO PC purchase based on X2 OR Core 2 is


WASTED MONEY.


GET A FRICKIN LIFE!!!!!!!!

Baron.....Baron.....Baron!
Sometimes I want to help you, but you are too ignorant and too closeminded.
I am still studying and I am working when I need money. I am not wasting my money on any brand, but I always buy what offers the best performance/price, considering overclocking.
Last year that was K8:


ASUS A8N5X NF4 A3 Rev2 s939 PCIe (moded as A8N-E)
Athlon64 s939 Venice Rev E6 2.0GHz 512kB L2
2x512MB DDR-400 CL2.5 4-4-8 CR2 2.5v Patriot
Creative Labs Audigy 2 6.1
Inno3D GeForce 6600 256MB DDR2 350/700 PCIe
2x160GB Maxtor SATA 7200RPM 8MB Cache
1x120GB Maxtor IDE 7200RPM 8MB Cache
LG DVD-ROM 16x
Sony CD-RW 40x

This year it is Core2 Duo:



Gigabyte GA965P-DS3 LGA775 Intel 965P
Core2 Duo E6400 2.13GHz 2MB L2
1GB (2x512MB) Corsair TwinX XMS2 DDR2-800 CL5 5-5-15
Creative Labs Audigy 2 6.1
Inno3D GeForce 6600 256MB DDR2 350/700 PCIe
2x160GB Maxtor SATA 7200RPM 8MB Cache
LG DVD-ROM 16x
Sony CD-RW 40x

I don't know what configuration I'll be using in 2007, but the brand is irelevant for me.
December 16, 2006 10:10:25 PM

The argument isn't whether c2d is faster then AMD or even which chips are faster then others. The point is that the OP was able to get a huge upgrade for $450 and good for him. please explain how going to c2d could have possibly given him better performance for less money. A 6600 cost only about $120 less, not leaving much for Mobo and RAM, and it would be stupid to spend that much on a CPU then try and go cheap on the rest of the system. Buying a 6400 saves you $100 on the CPU but still only $225 for Mobo and RAM, which you will need to be decent since you'll have to overclock in order to beat a FX60. You can save another $40 on a 6300 but that $40 will have to be spent on an aftermarket cooler to achieve the required OC. wouldn't recomend building a new system around a FX60, but for somebody with a single core 939 system it's a worthwhile investment to get a kickass dual core system without having to completely rebuild.
December 16, 2006 10:25:11 PM

Quote:
The argument isn't whether c2d is faster then AMD or even which chips are faster then others. The point is that the OP was able to get a huge upgrade for $450 and good for him. please explain how going to c2d could have possibly given him better performance for less money. A 6600 cost only about $120 less, not leaving much for Mobo and RAM, and it would be stupid to spend that much on a CPU then try and go cheap on the rest of the system. Buying a 6400 saves you $100 on the CPU but still only $225 for Mobo and RAM, which you will need to be decent since you'll have to overclock in order to beat a FX60. You can save another $40 on a 6300 but that $40 will have to be spent on an aftermarket cooler to achieve the required OC. wouldn't recomend building a new system around a FX60, but for somebody with a single core 939 system it's a worthwhile investment to get a kickass dual core system without having to completely rebuild.


the argument is simple: FX cpu's are overpriced, and better value could be had from buying a lower end processor and overclocking.
December 16, 2006 10:25:52 PM

Quote:
This is why I think you're a stalker. NO PC purchase based on X2 OR Core 2 is


WASTED MONEY.


GET A FRICKIN LIFE!!!!!!!!

Baron.....Baron.....Baron!
Sometimes I want to help you, but you are too ignorant and too closeminded.
I am still studying and I am working when I need money. I am not wasting my money on any brand, but I always buy what offers the best performance/price, considering overclocking.
Last year that was K8:


ASUS A8N5X NF4 A3 Rev2 s939 PCIe (moded as A8N-E)
Athlon64 s939 Venice Rev E6 2.0GHz 512kB L2
2x512MB DDR-400 CL2.5 4-4-8 CR2 2.5v Patriot
Creative Labs Audigy 2 6.1
Inno3D GeForce 6600 256MB DDR2 350/700 PCIe
2x160GB Maxtor SATA 7200RPM 8MB Cache
1x120GB Maxtor IDE 7200RPM 8MB Cache
LG DVD-ROM 16x
Sony CD-RW 40x

This year it is Core2 Duo:



Gigabyte GA965P-DS3 LGA775 Intel 965P
Core2 Duo E6400 2.13GHz 2MB L2
1GB (2x512MB) Corsair TwinX XMS2 DDR2-800 CL5 5-5-15
Creative Labs Audigy 2 6.1
Inno3D GeForce 6600 256MB DDR2 350/700 PCIe
2x160GB Maxtor SATA 7200RPM 8MB Cache
LG DVD-ROM 16x
Sony CD-RW 40x

I don't know what configuration I'll be using in 2007, but the brand is irelevant for me.

Can you not understand, I don't "go with the Joneses" just because. F OFF. I buy what I want you buy what you want. You sound like some kind of psychotic Jim Jones.

I'm not a heathen that needs conversion and neither is the person who bought the FX60.


Don't go away mad, just go away.
:twisted: :x :twisted:
!