AMD Athlon 64 FX-60: A Dual-Core farewell to Socket-939
by Anand Lal Shimpi on January 9, 2006 11:59 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
The Test
| CPU: | AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (2.4GHz/1MBx2) AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (2.0GHz/512KBx2) AMD Athlon 64 FX-57 (2.8GHz/1MB) AMD Athlon 64 FX-60 (2.6GHz/1MBx2) Intel Pentium Extreme Edition 955 (3.46GHz/2MBx2) Intel Pentium Extreme Edition 840 (3.2GHz/1MBx2) Intel Pentium D 820 (2.8GHz/1MBx2) |
| Motherboard: | ASUS A8N-SLI Deluxe Intel BadAxe 975X |
| Motherboard BIOS: | ASUS: Version 1013 Dated 08/10/2005 |
| Chipset: | NVIDIA nForce4 SLI Intel 975X |
| Chipset Drivers: | nForce4 6.70 Intel 7.0.0.1020 |
| Memory: | OCZ PC3500 DDR 2-2-2-7 DDR2-667 5-5-5-15 |
| Video Card: | ATI Radeon X1800 XT |
| Video Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 5.13 |
| Desktop Resolution: | 1280 x 1024 - 32-bit @ 60Hz |
| OS: | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
94 Comments
View All Comments
Betwon - Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - link
Let's see the real test(better than anandtech).After OC, the tests bentween Intel 955 and AMD FX-60:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlo...">http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlo...
Cygni - Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - link
I have to say, im pretty surprised by the results in single threaded apps, like most games. Despite a 200mhz deficit, it still beats the 57... pretty interesting. Im guessing that the second core is getting SOMETHING to it... maybe the background OS procedures? Dunno.Betwon - Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - link
Stop surprising.Because The benchmark of Business Winstone 2004,Overall WorldBench 5 and Office Productivity SYSMark 2004 may be benefit from multi-core.(a little or more?)
For the multi-thread-paralle apps:
Not only Fx-60 but also PD 820 beat, beats FX-57.
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/amd%20athlon%20...">http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/amd%...lon%2064...
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/amd%20athlon%20...">http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/amd%...lon%2064...
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/amd%20athlon%20...">http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/amd%...lon%2064...
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/amd%20athlon%20...">http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/amd%...lon%2064...
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/amd%20athlon%20...">http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/amd%...lon%2064...
highlandsun - Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - link
Agreed. The only way you'd see truly single-threaded performance on a machine would be running something like DOS that has no task scheduler whatsoever.Betwon - Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - link
No surprise about games.FX-60 is defeated by FX-57 in most games.
Only in the SMP games, FX-60 beats the FX-57, And PD 820 beats the FX-57 too.
Betwon - Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - link
No surprise about games.FX-60 is defeated by FX-57 in most games.
Only in the SMP games, FX-60 beats the FX-57, And PD 820 beats the FX-57 too.
Avalon - Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - link
I'm still amazed at the performance difference in Quake 4 between the P-D 820 and FX-60, plus the fact that dual core optimizations in the game engine enable noticeable framerate gains.Xenoterranos - Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - link
Didn't Carmack himself day that that was basically a dry-run, that they didn't really how to go about multithreading it from the start. If Carmack is basically saying that the result we see here are preliminary and "rough", I can't wait until trully optimized code comes along to max both those cores out! Maybe then a quad-sli system will be able to do some damage without suffering the diminishing returns we've recently seen.latrosicarius - Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - link
I think the future of graphics will be single cards with multiple chips/cores.Furen - Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - link
Dont get me started on diminishing returns... lol