AMD Athlon 64 FX60 Processor Rumor Mill

Kerii · Post by **Kerii** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 1:43 pm

DragonCooler wrote:well the thing you can have a high clock and still have a slow proc. Its all in the Cache and Buss, that is why 64bit rox!! If i had the money i would soooooo be all over that fx-57 in a heartbeat. But for now i will take my free 3500. LOL

Has anyone heard or seen in action the anti virus thing in 64bit procs? It suppose to keep viruses from executing. I havent had one since i got my proc, but i dont know if it is form the proc or if its because i have been careful.

There's always one way to find out.

Visit some warez and porn sites.

On topic - Anand released an AMD Roadmap yesterday.
Of special note of course:
Athlon 64 FX-62 Windsor M2 Q2'06
Athlon 64 X2 5200+ Windsor M2 Q4'06

Hey, if those can push down the price of current X2s, that'd be great.

Wonder if there will ever be an Athlon 64 FX-64.

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 1:47 pm

I'm gonna stand by 3GHz 1mb = FX60....! (most logical...)

I've read that it's changing to FX60 to allow AMD to use the same numbering scheme as the Opterons....Is this this right?

If it's not 3GHz with 1MB, then it must be either dual core with 1 or 2 mb or single core with 1mb......It also must be a better performer than the FX57! Since games are single threaded, the core must be <2.8GHz..... So this narrows down to 3GHz...
So either single with 1MB @ 3GHz
Or dual with 1MB or 2MB @ 3GHz

DragonCooler wrote:Has anyone heard or seen in action the anti virus thing in 64bit procs? It suppose to keep viruses from executing. I havent had one since i got my proc, but i dont know if it is form the proc or if its because i have been careful.

Most viri work by doing a denial of service attack, an easy way is to make your pc run code in parts of your ram it shouldn't do.. this can cause important data in memory to be overwritten... then you loose data and pc crashes.... New cpu's can block this kind of attack.... and ONLY this type of attack... you have no viri on your system because your carefull!

Dragon_Cooler · Post by **Dragon_Cooler** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 3:19 pm

phew UBARGEEK!!!!!!!

lol

gvblake22 · Post by **gvblake22** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 9:42 am

Will it be the FX-62 with the dual core Windsor core on socket M2?

killswitch83 · Post by **killswitch83** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 1:46 pm

hit it dead on the head Blake

from the article I got from Anandtech:

Windsor: Dual Channel DDR2, Pacifica enabled Socket M2 dual core

the FX-62 will be dual-core over socket M2, and of course support DDR2. All I know is I'm liking what I see, and as for what Nate's talking about with the FX-60, tryin to see what we know and all, I still believe it will be a step down from the FX-62, dual-core @ either 2.8 or 3 GHz, with dual 1MB cache.

gvblake22 · Post by **gvblake22** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 1:54 pm

killswitch83 wrote:hit it dead on the head Blake

Yeah, I cheated

http://www.legitreviews.com/newsposts.php?id=1389

killswitch83 · Post by **killswitch83** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 2:01 pm

muahahahaha, I strike again!!

gvblake22 · Post by **gvblake22** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 7:29 am

Looks like it will be 2.6Ghz and Dual Core according to the inquirer:
http://www.legitreviews.com/newsposts.php?id=1430

Legit Staff wrote:Charlie over at The Inq. has made a post saying that the AMD FX-60 is going to be a dual core 2.6GHz processor according to one of his many sources. Not much info on the post other than it's a dual core 2.6GHz processor.

Post by **Illuminati** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 7:58 am

gvblake22 wrote:Looks like it will be 2.6Ghz and Dual Core according to the inquirer:
http://www.legitreviews.com/newsposts.php?id=1430
Legit Staff wrote:Charlie over at The Inq. has made a post saying that the AMD FX-60 is going to be a dual core 2.6GHz processor according to one of his many sources. Not much info on the post other than it's a dual core 2.6GHz processor.

That would make the only difference between the FX-60 and the 5000+ the unlocked multiplier!! If this is the case, how do our readers feel about this?

gvblake22 · Post by **gvblake22** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:54 am

I think it's stupid from a practicality standpoint, but smart from a marketing standpoint. It's dumb to have to produce twice as many chips to box as two different processors. It doesn't really benefit the consumer that much. I mean, there are only a very small percentage of people that would be able to afford an X2 5000, let alone an "FX" branded version!
But it will probably be nice for AMD because they can sell the "FX" chip for way more money. Are we sure there is gonna be an Athlon 64 X2 5000 for s939? Or will the 5000 be for s939 and the FX be for socket M2? Or the other way around?

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:57 am

Illuminati wrote:
gvblake22 wrote:Looks like it will be 2.6Ghz and Dual Core according to the inquirer:
http://www.legitreviews.com/newsposts.php?id=1430
Legit Staff wrote:Charlie over at The Inq. has made a post saying that the AMD FX-60 is going to be a dual core 2.6GHz processor according to one of his many sources. Not much info on the post other than it's a dual core 2.6GHz processor.
That would make the only difference between the FX-60 and the 5000+ the unlocked multiplier!! If this is the case, how do our readers feel about this?

Pointless......with todays ram, who needs to use the higher multis???
5000+ will be alot less money, but you should still be able to overclock..

for people who don't like overclocking, they can by the FX-57 for the extra 200MHz and still save some money...
2.6GHZ is a nice for dual core, and games like Quake4 show that they have support for Dual Core cpu's, X-bit Labs done an article that shows a 4800+ outperforming the FX-57 even with 400MHz more!!!

I can see the point in going dual core, but not in using the FX name......~$1000 cpu's are like SLI....for reviewers and PR people.....

killswitch83 · Post by **killswitch83** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 11:34 am

aye, so you feel the same about SLI too eh? now, if SLI allowed both PCI-E slots have 16 lanes, rather than 8 each, it would be worth it. From a price standpoint it makes no sense, because SLI boards are more expensive, not to mention if you want damn good graphics cards, like the 7800GTX, you're looking at $900+ for just the cards!! Just like FX, I feel bad for people who pay the "FX Tax" just to try and get the best technology they can get, when they can get it elsewhere......oh well, guess AMD and Intel both will have their respective "Trump" processors, and you're right, from a marketing standpoint it's lucrative, but from a consumer standpoint, it's ridiculous.

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 12:18 pm

SLI using 2x 8lanes OR 2x 16 lanes is the same! There is NO difference, infact SLI needs less PCie bandwith than a single card config, as less data is sent to each card?
SLI mayby good for those few people who are pro gamers.....even then a true gamer should be able to play just aswell @ 640x480 than 1600x1200
I got the DFI SLI board so I have the option to get another GTX and go SLI, as I can't see the need to upgrade the a new pc for gaming again........every day I get less and less interested in gaming......
For the average Joe, if he buys a SLI rig now, what happens when the next new games come out and the CPU is causing a big bottleneck? he upgrades yet again and gets a new CPU, then the chipset gets too old soooo he has to upgrade AGAIN but this time for a new mobo, cpu, mayby ram and $1000 on GFX cards....All so he can enable AA/AF @ 1600x1200....and joe just plays UT2004 online!!!!

FX was a good idea, something to compete with Intels EE edition.....ever since about the FX-55, AMD have being the best....
Now Intel have nothing that is a threat to AMD so why still use the FX name, if all it has now is support for the higher multi's??????????

killswitch83 · Post by **killswitch83** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 12:33 pm

good question, perhaps to preserve their current position and market share in the future? It doesn't make any sense to me either....personally, I think the X2 4800+ was as far as they needed to go with the X2 line, and perhaps with their dual-core lines altogether. But, of course, they need Opterons for servers just due to their reliability considering they use the best quality cores as they can, but it still reeks of repackaging to me, in a way. I dunno, it's all a bunch of crazy crap to me.

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 12:41 pm

killswitch83 wrote:I think the X2 4800+ was as far as they needed to go with the X2 line,

Nahh, IF AMD can scale to 3GHz all the better, Just charging a few hundred bucks more for the ability to use a higher than stock multi IS outrageous!
Now If AMD brings out some way to enable NUMA with the FX60 THEN it would be an worthwhile investment.....Say open the extra locked HTT link on the cpu, but this would mean users would need to use 2GB of ram (1GB for each cpu) -> this IS opteron 2series and above territory but if you charge 1200 bucks for a cpu, you should get something with a bit of substance?

(NUMA may not work with current chipsets, really just a pipe-dream lol)

killswitch83 · Post by **killswitch83** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 1:20 pm

care to elaborate on what NUMA is, I've never heard of that. guess here's my chance to learn my new concept of the day, lol

Post by **Apoptosis** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 1:23 pm

how much of a price premium are you willing to pay for unlocked multi's?

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 1:56 pm

Apoptosis wrote:how much of a price premium are you willing to pay for unlocked multi's?

~$100 not much more, if even that....
There is the point that the better cores go into the FX line, so they normally clock higher....now IF amd do something like OCZ (guarantee using high voltages..ie. overclocking)....then I'd pay the 200 to 300 extra...

killswitch83 wrote:care to elaborate on what NUMA is, I've never heard of that. guess here's my chance to learn my new concept of the day, lol

Non Uniform Memory Access......It allows each amd cpu to have it's own seperate HTT link to system RAM.... you could run a dual cpu (not dual core) board with 2GB of ram and each cpu uses 1GB each, each cpu can still use the full 2GB but only when needed....also each cpu can see what's inside each others portion of ram....It's really for 4 and 8 cpu configs where sharing system ram can really hurt performance!

This is a shot of NUMA in action on a Tyan Thunder K8S dual opteron board...
This is taken from 2CPU.com

The motherboard must support it!!!

killswitch83 · Post by **killswitch83** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:37 pm

I see, sounds more like a server technology than a PC technology, but some good scores though.....I could be wrong about the server thing though, lol. Sounds good

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 2:16 am

killswitch83 wrote:I see, sounds more like a server technology than a PC technology, but some good scores though.....I could be wrong about the server thing though, lol. Sounds good

Its server ONLY ;)