Curoisty, FX57or X4800+

X

Xycron

banned
Which would preform better in gaming, and general computing, the FX57 or the 4800+? Just ot of curoisity, Not like I can afford either one.

Which envirnments would each out preform the other?
 
The X2 4800+ would perform much better stock. But if you oc'd the FX-57 who then it may be a close match.
 
I would think atm with current games the fx-57 would be better? But in the near future when games start putting the dual core to use w/o a doubt 4800 x2.
 
Correct me if im wrong, but im pretty sure than an FX-57 is the same thing as an Athlon 64 except it has an unlocked multiplier.
 
34erd said:
Its better grade slicone also.
Click to expand...
Still, i dont think that it would be better than an X2 4800+ if they are both stock. Thats really the only advantage the FX series has, is great overclocking support.
 
And the frequency IMO :)

The Athlon X2 4800+ : 2.4Ghz
The Athlon FX-57: 2.8Ghz

I would believe that for current gaming needs (games do not really make use of the dual cores just yet), the FX-57 is a better choice. However, when multitasking comes into hand and the general performance is considered, the X2 4800+ would be a better choice.

JAN :D
 
That is true, Athlon X2 4800+ : 2.4Ghz = Future + Better Gaming Performance
Athlon FX-57: 2.8Ghz = Shorter LifeTime(Terms of Performance) + Better Gaming Performance for now but not for the future.
 
jancz3rt said:
And the frequency IMO :)

The Athlon X2 4800+ : 2.4Ghz
The Athlon FX-57: 2.8Ghz
Click to expand...

I was thinking that the AMD X2 4800+ was 2.6Ghz, so i guess the FX-57 would be best now.
 
They are, but the FX series has an unlocked multiplier setting which makes for better overclocking.
 
so i think an OCed frequency on an X2 would meet FX-57 stock for todays games, and with dual core enhancing games, X2 would beat FX both being stock. FX is more expensive, right?
 
redrider773 said:
so i think an OCed frequency on an X2 would meet FX-57 stock for todays games, and with dual core enhancing games, X2 would beat FX both being stock. FX is more expensive, right?
Click to expand...

the FX-57 is a little over $1000.
 
Charles_Lee said:
well if he is already willing to spend $1300 for fx-57, he can probabily add extra $200 for much better processor
Click to expand...
$1500 was the lower cost it would be at....it could go anywhere up to $2000 because its an FX with a Dual Core, so we havent seen any prices that would resemble this cpu.
 
P11 said:
$1500 was the lower cost it would be at....it could go anywhere up to $2000 because its an FX with a Dual Core, so we havent seen any prices that would resemble this cpu.
Click to expand...

well, we never know untill it is out, but IF the price is over $1500, no one in the right mind would buy that.

except for may be BILL G.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top