AMD Athlon 64 FX-57: The Fastest Single Core
by Derek Wilson on June 27, 2005 11:47 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Final Words
Clearly the FX-57 is the fastest single core processor money can buy right now. But is it worth it?The price is exorbitant, the speed increase over previous FX processors is not extreme, and the industry is focused firmly on multiple core architectures. We are no longer at point in time where this launch is extremely important. The battles have been fought and AMD already won the fight for single threaded performance.
For end users who need a high performing single core, the 4000+ is quite capable and affords a savings of more than $550. For those who have the money to burn, the X2 4800+ costs just over $1000 as well and will provide smoother multitasking and higher performance in applications that only modestly benefit from multithreading.
The FX-57 isn't as overclockable as previous parts (based on our experience with one sample). Our FX-53 would easily run at 2.6GHz, and the FX-55 could run stable at 2.8GHz if we took extra care to keep it cool. Our FX-57 didn't even pretend to make it through our stability test at 3GHz.
There may be some corporation or individual who absolutely must have single core performance at all costs. In that situation, the FX-57 is the fastest option and the best fit. Of course, that demographic doesn't even show up on the radar. The real answer to our question is that the FX-57 is not worth the price. With options almost as fast at just about half the price or hardware that has the potential for more speed and a smoother experience priced the same, the choice for the desktop end user is clearly not the FX-57.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
56 Comments
View All Comments
blckgrffn - Wednesday, June 29, 2005 - link
The warranty stops as soon as they changed heatsinks. That's it, that was where it should have stopped evidently ;)Drazula - Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - link
I hate articles like that. You go through the paces of testing and then recommend a solution that wasn't even tested. Why not include a dual core AMD for comparison? As it is, the article is useless.Viditor - Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - link
blckgrffn - "That said, where does it stop?"I would say that you stop where the warranty does...
I.e. no overclocking results except to say it was or wasn't stable at x.x Ghz...Because (as Jarred points out quite correctly) OC can be a very hit and miss proposition.
composer - Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - link
JarredWalton, I get 2.74 stable, air cooling which beats dual opeteron benchmarks, and also runs all the benchmarks stable.We use our PC's for audio, and it seems that even the X2's perform about the same as a single AMD64 overclocked to 2.75 in audio tests (VST plug ins).
Look at this chart:
http://www.adkproaudio.com/benchmarks.cfm
Top graph, it shows the X2 at 58% using 256 samples......we get 58% using AMD 64 overclocked but using the older Nuendo 2.2 version, the newer version Nuendo 3 we get 68% however it's known that the security of the new steinberg program uses 10-15% CPU cycles.
Just some thoughts.
composer - Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - link
L3p3rM355i4h - Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - link
Some one tell me why you would buy a $1000 single core proc, when you could buy a $1000 dual core proc thats going to be soooo much better?ElFenix - Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - link
i've been asking them to get an editor for a long time. at one time, one of them actually replied and asked what kind of editor. i replied that they needed an english editor, and never heard back. they especially need one with some of the newer authors they have.blckgrffn - Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - link
Gotcha, Viditor - but if that is what everyone wants, we should also include the tests done. Yes, I can see how that would have bee a better review, putting say, a 3700+ San Diego and a FX-57 vs each other with all the most expensive goodies and see who came out on top. Heck, SLI some 7800GTX's too, we might as well see how high we can go :)That said, where does it stop? We want to see it under phase, too, with the 7800's oc'ed under chilled water, and some DDR600 @ 2-2-2-10! ;P
AtaStrumf - Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - link
Calin, I meant in terms of overclocking! That's what OC stands for, doh! If you still don't get it, never mind, just know that what I said makes perfect sense ;-)Zebo - Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - link
Hey Tallon:I cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg.
The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid. Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at
Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer inwaht oredr the ltteers in a wrod
are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the
rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it
wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey
lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? yaeh and I
awlyas thought slpeling was ipmorantt.