Athlon 64 FX-57

Have you seen <A href="http://A href=" target=_blank index.php?option='content&task=view&id=1467"http://www.cooltechzone.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=1467/A"' A HREF="http://www.cooltechzone.com" TARGET="_blank"www.cooltechzone.com/A http: A>this (http://www.cooltechzone.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=1467) yet?

Anyone has gotten one of these babies at this point?

---

"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return." -- Toulouse-Lautre, Moulin Rouge

I strongly doubt anyone has purchased a CPU for their home computer which has little support and costs $1000 (at the moment)

In about two years though, these will be very nicely priced and readily available :smile:

---

Blame it on Microsoft, God does.

LOL, more like 2 months...

---

-[Better to be Honest than Kind]-

Its not single core! Its dual core!

---

Life is like a box of chocolates u never know what you'll get you might get a.....scream.

I am pretty darn sure that it's single-core. There are already many dual-core processors announced, but this is the exception.

---

"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return." -- Toulouse-Lautre, Moulin Rouge

I strongly doubt anyone has purchased a CPU for their home computer which has little support and costs $1000 (at the moment)

In about two years though, these will be very nicely priced and readily available :smile:

In two years the FX-57 will be out of production and the FX-?? will be the in production. With the FX chips, when AMD comes out with a new one the previous one is no longer made.

Its not single core! Its dual core!

It's a single core. "...with the single-core AMD Athlon 64 FX-57 processor,..." (from AMD's website)

Just cus' its 64 bit, doesn't make it dual :razz:

---

-[Better to be Honest than Kind]-

It's single core. The X2 is dual core out of the AMD arena. (Which seems to be cheaper then the FX51/53/55)

Two months my ass. The FX-55 is still in the seven to eight hundred dollar range.

I don't know what YOU consider reasonbly priced, but for me it'd have to be in the $60-$150 range.

By the way, the 51, 53, and 55 FX chips are all still sold. I believe the only differences is the amount of registers in each model.

---

Blame it on Microsoft, God does.

the X2 looks absolubtly awesome, i hope they come with X3, X4 ect... cos dual core's are the way to go!

---

I need a new sig

No, actually a new architecture would be the way to go. But, way to go AMD for prolonging this ancient POS's lifespan.

The Cell stuff looks like a viable replacement. It just needs to be easier to program on a hardware level (x86 is rather simplistic in comparison as I've heard).

---

Blame it on Microsoft, God does.

correct me if im wrong but arent there not many programs that can fully take advantage of the 64-bit? or does the processor work at that level anyway?

As far as I know there are next to no games that use it (maybe 1 or 2), and only a beta of Windows, but I think thats being released properly soon.

---

-[Better to be Honest than Kind]-

The 64 line from AMD is made to optimize 32-bit applications. They run 64-bit applications normally. As in, 32-bit applications run faster. This is on a hardware level, when regarding the x64-windows that's out, it's a bad idea to use on AMD 64 chips, because, it emulates everything on a software level (SLOW!), meaning all the 32-bit stuff will NEVER run as fast as it would normally on a 32-bit machine, most of the slow down is not noticeable, you have to look at numbers which are unseen to people(cylces, etc). (In other words, x64-Windows will run slower and NOT worth the time.)

There's only one game out right now that "utilizes" the 64-bit operation and that's Far Cry in conjunction with the 64-bit patch available from AMD. To be honest, most of the advancements are just graphical. The newer recommended requirements recommend something like a 6800 to run at decent detail.

Now if you're talking about NON-x86-64 (Intel/HP Itanium for example), that's a completely different situation. Those things don't run 32-bit applications at all most of the time. Most of the time they're running some version of Unix, since there are flavors of Unix for all architectures.

---

Blame it on Microsoft, God does.

Crono, you never cease to amaze me. We all have two eyes and two ears (hopefully; apologies to the SnarkPitters who are missing a piece of two), but Crono just knows so much more. How do you do it man? You're like the Yoda of geeks.

---

"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return." -- Toulouse-Lautre, Moulin Rouge

ahhh, they still make the FX chips after the next one comes out. for example, since the release of the FX-57, the FX-55 is now the 4000+?

thats my take. i WISH i had one of those... or the money...

---

www.nysteo.com

If animals weren't meant to be eaten, then they wouldn't be so delicious and easy to catch!

Face it: if crime didn't pay, there would be very few criminals.

i running on an atholon 64 temporarily and its only at 2 GHz but everything is sooooo fast. ive use css on a 3.4GHz it takes about 4 seconds on the "preparing to play css" then about 4 sec on the acutally loading screen but this 64 spend the same time on the preparing window then goes black for about half a second then bam, css is booted up. i definetly notice a defference game-wise

As Crono says Satchmo- "Damn Straight!"

---

-[Better to be Honest than Kind]-