Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD FX 55 or AMD X2 3800+

Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 19, 2005 7:58:32 AM

AMD FX 55 or AMD X2 3800+ ?
It's Clearly for gaming ... Which one Cpu will be more usefull into the 2 following years??? I'm mean which will have better performance at games into the 2 following years..

More about : amd amd 3800

September 19, 2005 1:40:40 PM

Don't buy for tomorow... buy for today today, and buy tomorow for tomorow
September 19, 2005 5:12:51 PM

Yea gotta agree with these two...

Go with the FX if you're not going to oc, or go with the x2 if you are. You can get close or better to the same perfomance oc'ing that x2 (assuming you buy all the right equipment to oc it with...which is a big assumption...).

F@H:
AMD: [64 3000+][2500+][2400+][2000+][1.3][366]
Intel: [X 3.0x4][X 2.8x2][P4 3.0x2][P4-M 2.4][P4 1.3]

"...and i'm not gay" RX8 -Greatest Quote of ALL Time
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
September 19, 2005 11:25:43 PM

You should have told him
Quote:
I am used to World Of Warcraft in a window so that I may use my IMs and look game related information up on the web at the same time. this can still be done and the game is still playable, but there IS noticable lag to the game when firefox is doing stuff as well as IM's come through on MSN

In this case, the X2 is the one.
As to OCing, the FX chip does have unlocked multipliers, so ease of OC goes to the FX, as well probably as max OC.
September 20, 2005 2:53:16 AM

I vote for the x2!

I dont know about any of you, but the extra core in there just feels so much better for everything. Anyone ever alt+tab out of a game to check email or look up somthing on the web and knotice the soooooo slow starup of your mail and internet browser because of that game is still taking up 100% CPU? The freedom and multitasking power of that second core makes me feel much much better!

Not to mention that 3800+ is a huge OC'er!


<font color=red>"Battling Gimps and Dimbulbs HERE at THGC"</font color=red>

"<font color=blue> Wusy</font color=blue> <-Professional sheep banger"
September 20, 2005 3:34:15 AM

What Wusy said. Single cote is the way to go for gaming. Today.
September 20, 2005 4:06:26 AM

U guy seriously need to check out the new beta drivers that nvidia is leaking now. There is a 52% increase in D3 when using a dual-core-cpu and 7800GTX. Apparently the new drivers offload a bunch of the vertex calculations to the 2nd core. Even a 'normal' 6800gt is seeing a nice 10% boost across the board when used with a dual-core-cpu.
EDIT:LOL had to change my DC CPU thing so that the stupid intel add wouldnt come up.

The know-most-of-it-all formally known as BOBSHACK<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by k8man on 09/20/05 00:11 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
September 20, 2005 2:52:52 PM

why not compare the 4800 toledo core? It's the same price as the FX55.

K8T NeoFIS2R
Athlon 64bit 3400
2X256 Corsaire
Maxtor 40, 120
Western Digital Raptor 74 Gig
ATI AIW Radeon 9700 Pro
NEC LCD Monitor 1760NX
Antec Tru Power 550
Windows XP
September 20, 2005 7:07:12 PM

I've read what you have read about dual core and gaming. That's why I have not upgraded my system yet. Not enough 64 bit. Plus waiting on Vista. I agree with you on 2 more years for dual core and gaming.
September 21, 2005 3:30:48 AM

Obviously u didnt read that review. Its a NVIDIA driver thing that is universal to ALL games. D3 gets such a huge boost because it is so vertex shader limited and the nvidia driver makes the 2nd core do ALL vertex calc's. These are also BETA drivers which can be IMPROVED upon in the FUTURE.

The know-most-of-it-all formally known as BOBSHACK<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by k8man on 09/20/05 11:32 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
September 21, 2005 6:13:56 AM

Yes hes not comparing same clockspeed x2 vs A64....Hes comparing a 3800+ to an FX57. Now If the very first drivers can give this much improvement do u not think that maybe in the not to distant future the diff in gaming between a 3800+X2 and an fx57 would be minimal? Now considering that the x2 is MUCH cheaper than the fx57 and gives him 2 cores which will greatly enhance general windows performance and real world gaming, wouldnt u think that the X2 would be the obvious choice?

The know-most-of-it-all formally known as BOBSHACK
September 21, 2005 9:15:08 AM

IMO X2 is the right choice for any serious computer user in any case.

The know-most-of-it-all formally known as BOBSHACK
September 21, 2005 12:50:25 PM

you have to wonder about pc games also being written for the Xbox360. It has 3 cores. I have already read that the game I am awaiting (Oblivion) will be able to take advantage of multiple cores on a PC as well!

K8T NeoFIS2R
Athlon 64bit 3400
2X256 Corsaire
Maxtor 40, 120
Western Digital Raptor 74 Gig
ATI AIW Radeon 9700 Pro
NEC LCD Monitor 1760NX
Antec Tru Power 550
Windows XP
September 21, 2005 3:58:53 PM

FX57 is what I'd use for games -- it will be at least 2+ years before game developers start coding for multiple CPUs. In a year or two, you'll see some developers claiming multiple CPU support in their games but it will be very limited support that will be of minor help to the performance of the game. Then you'll start to see more true multiple CPU supported games in the 3-5year range.

But if Dual cores raw speed can't be increased much, then we're all gonna be in a world of hurt. I still want to know what the heck happened to the 8Ghz CPU's we were promised when 90nm process was announced a few years ago?
September 21, 2005 5:23:07 PM

Thanks for taking care of this. You think he gets it?
September 21, 2005 9:41:08 PM

U make a good point and i guess its just a user preference thing right now. I myself would much rather have sufficient performance for now and more potential performance for later. Also about the nvidia only thing...Nvidia is always the inivator with things like this and ATI is sure to follow very soon.

The know-most-of-it-all formally known as BOBSHACK
September 22, 2005 2:58:26 AM

I'll give you two bucks for that bang?
September 22, 2005 2:08:31 PM

so in multitasking they really help? Like I could be rendering a movie in Studio while surfing the internet or playing a game?? Now that would be nice. I am tired of having to walk away from my computer!

K8T NeoFIS2R
Athlon 64bit 3400
2X256 Corsaire
Maxtor 40, 120
Western Digital Raptor 74 Gig
ATI AIW Radeon 9700 Pro
NEC LCD Monitor 1760NX
Antec Tru Power 550
Windows XP
September 22, 2005 6:47:20 PM

With the X2 4200+ and 1GB of RAM, I was running a virtual machine, inside of which I was encoding a DVD, all afiliated on one processor, while on the other processor I set FarCry to run at 1600x200 resolution. While there was a bit of a stagger (my guess was that the RAM was getting choked out), the game was still completely playable. It was awsome.
!