Price Drop

Socket940 is discontinued that why the price drop. "Better" isnt comparable because its kinda like apples and oranges although id say the advantage leans to the FX53
 
I'd say the first one, it has more cache, although Im not exactly sure on what that is, it is necesarry, the rest looks pretty much the same...
 
Athlon64 FX53
NewEgg Code: ADAFX53BOX
Full Code: ADAFX53CE5A_ (the blank is an unknown).
Lock: None
Clock: 2.40GHz
Interface: Socket940
L2 Cache: 1MB
Description: This chip belongs to the flagship series of processors by AMD based on the 'Hammer core (1MB L2). It comes with a completely unlocked multiplier allowing for extensive overclocking however, as a limitation of the Sockey940 interface, it requires registered memory which has, at best, CAS3

Athlon64-3800
NewEgg code: ADA3800AWBOX
Full Code: ADA3800DE4A_ (the blank is an unknown).
Lock: Half (upwards only)
Clock: 2.40GHz
Interface: Socket939
L2 Cache: 512K
Description: This chip is essentially a the Newcastle equivalent of the Socket939 FX53. The drop from the FX series to the mainstream series results in a 50% reduction in L2 cache and the introduction of a upwards-multiplier-lock.
 
Yeah well the totally unlocked chip is a hell of a feature ... more than sufficient to help overcome the limits imposed by the K8T800 and CL3 but that depends a bit on the skill of the user involved and how far and hard they'll push their hardware :)
 
um... The run in server environments ... :) (which typically entails SMP and other stuff consumer users dont ever get involved with)
 
Praetor said:
um... The run in server environments ... :) (which typically entails SMP and other stuff consumer users dont ever get involved with)
Click to expand...

i got in a big argument about SMP vs. ICP. My processor did better with raw data calculation, his dual processors did better with multimedia based data. he said his could run 2 packets at once, and mine only did 1. but mine could process 1 packet in half the time his could do 2 cuz i was clocked at 2.6ghz and my RAM was loads faster thn his PC150...so it all evened out. i stick with single processor computers. we got 2 dual P3 servers...but they actually need to be dual to handle all the extra stuff.

really a pointless argument as he was told off by admin for flaming and i never got to finish it...
 
My processor did better with raw data calculation, his dual processors did better with multimedia based data. he said his could run 2 packets at once, and mine only did 1. but mine could process 1 packet in half the time his could do 2 cuz I was clocked at 2.6ghz and my RAM was loads faster thn his PC150...so it all evened out
Click to expand...
1. When you do a comparison like that you need to compare with similar platforms :P
2. Furthemore, whilst SMP does technically include dual-proc setups, when you talk to industry professionals, SMP generally means thooooooooooousands of processors (i.e., the point is that the processors are designed to scale)
 
Praetor said:
1. When you do a comparison like that you need to compare with similar platforms :P
Click to expand...

yah also a big dispute over that, he was running 2K SP6 saying it was faster than my XP version (i tweak the crap outta XP) and i disagreed. he also was giving me results from programs like 3dmark03 (almost 100% dependent on vid card) and that has nothing to do with my processor or RAM.

i'm going off topic...sry:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top