AMD QuadFX FX-70 Platform Performance & Overclocking

A place to give your thoughts on our reviews!
Post Reply
User avatar
Apoptosis
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 33941
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Contact:

AMD QuadFX FX-70 Platform Performance & Overclocking

Post by Apoptosis »

Legit Reviews recently looked at the top AMD QuadFX platform running FX-74 processors and was left wondering what a pair of FX-70 processors could do for less money. We got in the 'budget' QuadFX processors and did what any end user would do once they got them - overclock them to the max. We turned these 2.6GHz processors into 3.1GHz beasts, but was it enough for them to catch up to the Intel QX6700?

Image

Article Title: AMD QuadFX FX-70 Platform Performance & Overclocking
Article URL: http://www.legitreviews.com/article/445/1/
User avatar
Illuminati
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 2378
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 8:48 am
Location: Wright City, Missouri, USA
Contact:

Post by Illuminati »

Nice to see another honest review on the QuadFX's...

Looks like AMD needs to scrap the 4x4 and concentrate on getting a native quad-core to market! If someone wants a server for a desktop, they can already do that. IMHO.
Last edited by Illuminati on Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
Justin West
Server Admin & Forum Moderator
Follow me on Twitter | Find us on Facebook
User avatar
dicecca112
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5014
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:40 am
Contact:

Post by dicecca112 »

Image
User avatar
Apoptosis
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 33941
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Contact:

Post by Apoptosis »

eh... that review took forever to write... Not much to say to be honest... It runs and works pretty good... The motherboard is less buggy than the 680i SLI, but the performance isn't there.

The 3DMark06 CPU score of ~4000 is impressive, but I just got back from seeing Intel's V8 test system scoring ~6100 points...
User avatar
Dragon_Cooler
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
Posts: 2405
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 10:17 am
Location: DFW Texas
Contact:

Post by Dragon_Cooler »

Hopefully AMD will do something quick because going INTEL on my new build will be the last thing i ever do!!!!!!!!!
Image
User avatar
dicecca112
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5014
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:40 am
Contact:

Post by dicecca112 »

I really don't understand the alligences some people hold to companies, I buy what gives me the best bang for my buck, irregardless
Image
User avatar
Sporg
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
Posts: 1200
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 10:22 am
Location: Kansas City Area
Contact:

Post by Sporg »

Agreed, I'm typically all about bang for buc. I do have my favorite companies that I tend to look at first, but if someone has something better for cheaper then it's a no-brainer.
I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong.
~Bertrand Russell
User avatar
Gamble
Legit Fanatic
Legit Fanatic
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 3:34 am

Post by Gamble »

Sometimes it just sucks to be the "little guy." AMD just doesn't have the number of people and man-hours to dedicate to R&D that Intel does, and they suffer for it. Hopefully their 65nm processes will catch them up a little bit, and although Intel has already booted 45nm, I think Q3 and Q4 will be interesting to see what happens.
Once a gamer,
Always a gamer.
Rock on.
-Gamble
User avatar
KingClub
Legit User
Legit User
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 3:11 pm
Contact:

Post by KingClub »

I think AMD just got complacent and dropped the ball on the whole operation, same thing happened to Motorola when cell phones went digital, they were sticking in analog thinking that digital would never happen, took them 5 or so years to recover.
Makes you wonder if AMD had the same idea on dual core, because they didn’t just miss the boat … they missed the ocean ….. Now I have to buy my first Intel Processor since I started building about 10 years ago. :roll:
User avatar
Razorbacx
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 11:27 am
Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma

Post by Razorbacx »

dicecca112 wrote:I really don't understand the alligences some people hold to companies, I buy what gives me the best bang for my buck, irregardless
My thinking exactly! I've got an AMD 3500+ right now, because it was the best bang for the buck. If I had the extra cash I'd buy a Core 2 Duo and go that route. Although I would not snub my nose at an AMD X2 proc.

Nice article Apop! Appreciate the info.
Jejking
Legit Enthusiast
Legit Enthusiast
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 9:35 am

Post by Jejking »

dicecca112 wrote:I really don't understand the alligences some people hold to companies, I buy what gives me the best bang for my buck, irregardless
Maybe this is meant for some serverwork? Gamers won't like this, it doesn't bring much more horsepower to the zone, so AMD definitely targets an other market then we think :)

By the way, the implementation of 4x4 is a good one. On the same speeds as before AMD can top the performance of an C2D Q6700 in most cases. Now they have to speed up that 65nm-proces.
Not anymore proud owner of a ATi Radeon X800XL ;)
vrioux
Legit User
Legit User
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:34 pm
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Contact:

Post by vrioux »

Yeah, 4x4 is not really worth it right now... I'm holding for the CGPU from the AMD / ATI merger... Can't wait to have a single chip do it all once again.

Vincent
Post Reply