How long til Pentium 5??

Status
Not open for further replies.
All i'm trying to say is that a system used for gaming has no noticeble benefit from an FX over say a 3500. You won't be able to tell the difference between 120 and 140fps. Especially since many games are locked at a significally lower level of fps. It's way more important to have a powerful 3d-card that is capable to match the other components in performance. :)
 
tweaker said:
All i'm trying to say is that a system used for gaming has no noticeble benefit from an FX over say a 3500. You won't be able to tell the difference between 120 and 140fps. Especially since many games are locked at a significally lower level of fps. It's way more important to have a powerful 3d-card that is capable to match the other components in performance. :)
Click to expand...

Then you should of said that the first time :P am just teasing you. This been a long week of midterms and I have not slept for days.

I also agree with you. I just think people should try to explain there reasons rather then make statements with no explanations.
 
mgoldb2 said:
I just think people should try to explain there reasons rather then make statements with no explanations.
Click to expand...

Yes i agree 100%.

I've been abit tired the last couple of days..
Sniffles_anim.gif
 
mgoldb2 said:
I think it more reasonable to tell someone what performance increases you will get. Also what advantages you will get. Then let the person decide for him self if it worth the money. I think the goal here should be to give them the information not make choices for them (unless they ask for what we would choose).
Click to expand...
How much difference is 0.2 GHz going to make? $390 (prices from Newegg) more if you buy a FX-55 over a 4000+.
 
i read somewhere that paying the premium for 10% better product is not worth it($390 or $900+) its your decision though
 
Last edited:
How would I go about getting the fx-55 performance from a lesser processor?
Click to expand...
1. You wont notice betwen the 200fp the FX55 gets and the 150fps a nonFX gets :P
2. Overclocking

I guess you could oc a bit but I still don't think it would be matched performance
Click to expand...
Whether its the same or not is for kids who dont know the first thing to debate benchmarks over. The end result is that you wont be able to physically see any improvement :P

Waste of money.
Click to expand...
Or a quote from Republic Commando, "a waste of good genes" ... ok that was mean :P

so you reckon scrap the fx-55, and get an AMD Athlon64 4000, or 3500??
Click to expand...
Personally id get the 4000 or the 3800 but it depends on your penchent for OCing (and if you're the type to scale the HTL or just jack the multiplier and be done with it)

I just saying I dont like people telling me I wasted my money on a athlon 64 fx-55 when I have enjoyed having it greatly.
Click to expand...
True but had you bought a 3800 -- without the use of benchmarks -- you wouldnt notice the difference -- and as such, wouldnt "enjoy" it :)

This been a long week of midterms and I have not slept for days.
Click to expand...
Pfft.. sleep is overrated.

How much difference is 0.2 GHz going to make? $390 (prices from Newegg) more if you buy a FX-55 over a 4000+.
Click to expand...
Not all the much. People go for the FX for two reasons:
1. They want the unlocked multplier
2. They dont know better
 
Praetor said:
People go for the FX for two reasons:
1. They want the unlocked multplier
2. They dont know better
Click to expand...
I would get the FX-55 because I do some graphics and other processor intensive stuff but play games about 50% of the time as well at REALLY REALLY high resolutions (with AA at X8 of course...:D). Also you have no idea how long a 48 hour render on my 64+3000 really is untill you have actually experienced it (i almost commited sucide (JK I am not that sad... OR AM I :eek: )).Really, when I think of it I might go 2*opertron(if it is spelled like that?) or xeon... (so maby he is right but I don't care (compare the pirces of 2*opertron to FX)).
To awnser the question, for you I would not get a FX. and an athlon 64 higher that 3200 should be fine as long as you have a good video card.

Long live the sig:
 
I would get the FX-55 because I do some graphics and other processor intensive stuff but play games about 50% of the time as well at REALLY REALLY high resolutions (with AA at X8 of course
Click to expand...
1. Graphics and processor intensive would suggest Intel
2. AA is a GPU bound thing, not CPU

Also you have no idea how long a 48 hour render on my 64+3000 really is untill you have actually experienced it (i almost commited sucide (JK I am not that sad... OR AM I
Click to expand...
Try 4-day render on a dual-opteron.
 
Praetor said:
True but had you bought a 3800 -- without the use of benchmarks -- you wouldnt notice the difference -- and as such, wouldnt "enjoy" it :)
Click to expand...

athlon 64 fx sound more impressive :P It was worth the money just to make all my friends Jealous :P
 
Praetor said:
Try 4-day render on a dual-opteron.
Click to expand...
My friend is doing (a few) day renders on his 2.0Ghz (or something) P4. He's making his own game (www.livingrealm.net) and has been doing rendering for a good year. He's even tried hooking multiple computer together for parallel processing (which worked).

Back on topic: For games I honestly have to say AMD is better, but you won't notice the difference between a current Intel or a current AMD on any games. That extra 50 fps (like prae's been saying) won't be noticed in games, only in benchmarks.
 
Praetor said:
1. Graphics and processor intensive would suggest Intel
2. AA is a GPU bound thing, not CPU
Click to expand...
I know but you can't get SLI on an opertron (if you can il be very happy:D) and if the FX makes any difference il get it. I also hate intel with a fiery passion and for no reason what so ever. (anyways the fx has beaten an intel in most of the reviews I've seen)... I might change when duel cores come out.
Praetor said:
Try 4-day render on a dual-opteron.
Click to expand...
:eek: :dead: (< that one was made up... this site needs more smilies)
 
unfortunately all those google hits are old outdated news and pure speculation, most of the sites that have any details at all refer to the Tejas core which has been cancelled. The top rated page is from the Inquirer which has also run this story:
The Inquier said:
10.20GHz Intel Nehalem slated for 2005

Future Desktop Roadmaps Tejas to reach 9.20GHz, Prescott 5.20GHz
Click to expand...
Now, I think everyone knows whats wrong with that headline :)
 
Cromewell said:
unfortunately all those google hits are old outdated news and pure speculation, most of the sites that have any details at all refer to the Tejas core which has been cancelled. The top rated page is from the Inquirer which has also run this story:
Now, I think everyone knows whats wrong with that headline :)
Click to expand...

I thought that they seemed outdated too. I read a few of the first hits and they were wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top