Legit Reviews

Last summer I bought the FX-55 Single core 2.6Ghz processor because back then they were saying raw speeds are king. Now every processor being made is dual-core and now Windows Vista is out.

My mobo's cpu socket is 939, so the highest I can go is a fx-60 Dual Core 2.6Ghz. Although I will lose some raw speed in the processor speed. Not to mention I'm also running Vista x64-bit and I notice some programs are a bit laggy now. Just wondering if I should go Dual core or not...

really depends I love my fx-60 but I upgraded from a 4000+ san diego and I mostly like it more because of the multitasking I can do now that I couldn't before. It really depends on how much you are planning on spending and weighing that against that much much to buy a core 2 duo and some ram and a motherboard. at least neweggs price you could buy all of those and have a much better system. I got mine for 300 oem. Would have to say probably not worth the upgrade though unless you get lucky and can oc it to 2.8 or 3.0. i'm still working on that part.

I would go for a dual-core of course! If you get an X2 4400+ to 4800+ you should see huge improvements in performance. After all, it's literally double the processing power of an fx-55...

another vote for dual core. I know in games it's not yet fully optimzie it but you really would appreciate the smoothness when you run multiple programs, and open a lot of things.

A good question is: do you need it? I would stick with the FX-55 and save until a bigger upgrade. That's just me personally. I'm not a big fan of small "stepping-stone" upgrades.

cyberneticimplant wrote:A good question is: do you need it? I would stick with the FX-55 and save until a bigger upgrade. That's just me personally. I'm not a big fan of small "stepping-stone" upgrades.

PERFECT answer in my book! There is no need for small upgrades unless you are in an industry where you have to have the fastest thing alive - video editing, mechanical design, running Legit Reviews, etc

Mike

If you do a lot of work that actually uses the dual cpu, then by all means you will notice a HUGE difference, but if not - wait.

Before the saying use to be upgrade to at least double your clock speed. kind of tough to say that now. LOL

Okay, that's a good idea. I think I'm going to wait til my next full system upgrade before I go Dual or Quad core then. I also read that Vista is pretty lame with OpenGL at the moment, so I went back to XP and everything is alright!

Thanks!

top wrote:Okay, that's a good idea. I think I'm going to wait til my next full system upgrade before I go Dual or Quad core then. I also read that Vista is pretty lame with OpenGL at the moment, so I went back to XP and everything is alright!

Thanks!

Yeap, I think that Windows Vista is still not mature enough. That's why I'm still keeping my Windows XP, and maybe I'll move to Vista in a few months from now.

I'm currently running X2 3800+ CPU and I think I'll wait for AMD's Quad-Core CPU to be released later on this year, before upgrading.

But, if I was about to upgrade now, I would definitely go for (and EXCUSE ME, AMD ) for Intel Core 2 Duo, even though I've a huge fan of AMD.

Dual core rules. 3ds max just owns on it. On the sig rig I can run:
2x F@H w/Big WUs on
iTunes (memory leaker/hogger, goes from 30MB->50MB from several hours use)
Firefox (memory leaks from hell, often tops 60MB, 100MB if more than four tabs)
Trillian (Catch-all IM, does AIM, MSN, Yahoo! and others)
WindowBlinds (I like my Halo theme thank you!)
Xfire (gaming IM)
AVG AntiVirus
AVG AntiSpyware
Stupid Logitech background thing that is required to make my keyboard's fancy buttons work
Rhino3D
Photoshop
...all at once!
I've also been known to leave Rhino and/or 3ds max running and then complain my game is sluggish...

Bottom line: 2GB RAM and a dual core can do almost anything, thinking of 64-bit and 4GB this summer. Virtually nothing I can't do that I would want to do.

Although not many softwares are dual or multi core capable today but they will one day for sure.As dual core prices are starting to come down,I will certainly go for the dual or maybe quad core coz that's the future.

Yeah, I think that for nowadays applications, Dual-Core is just enough. One should just have at least 2GB and a decent CPU. That's it.

But, I'm pretty sure that during 2007, some applications, mainly GAMES, will start to require Quad-Core CPUs, in order to have GOOD performance. Take for example, "Alan Wake" game, that according to rumours, it's release is postponed due to "heavy" requirements, such as "Quad-Core"...

This year the singlecore will just die

More games and more programs will get dualcore-support so I think the time is right to buy one. If s939 -> AMD X2. If AM2 -> AMD X2.

If S775, wait until April, then Intel will drop prices heavily

Jejking wrote:This year the singlecore will just die

More games and more programs will get dualcore-support so I think the time is right to buy one. If s939 -> AMD X2. If AM2 -> AMD X2.

If S775, wait until April, then Intel will drop prices heavily

That's why I'm waiting for April, to upgrade my current X2 3800+ with a nice Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 . But then, I'll have to upgrade also my mobo and DDR. I was thinking on eVGA or Asus 680i mobo and for DDR2, maybe Corsair Dominator DDR2 PC-6400 or G.Skill PC-6400 2GB of RAM!

I wouldn't upgrade any S939 parts as AM2 with the support for the upcoming new dual/quad cores is much more future proof.

And for some reason demand for S939 parts is high atm.
It would be a good time to sell your S939 stuff...

If you wait a little bit more, you will skip AM2 altogether, which is good IMHO. AM2 is nothing more than DDR2, which offers nothing really better than DDR.

Wait wait wait. It's not a good time to buy CPUs right now. Unless you want to switch to Intel...

Vincent

I remeber reading that back when they released XP64 bit, it was tested on on AMD 64 computers along with regular 32 bit. regular was faster with all 32 bit apps, since they didn't have to be run in WoW type environment (32 bit emulator). I do not know if this applies to Vista 64 yet. It's a safe bet though. Try running the 32 bit Vista to see if that maybe takes care of some of the lag you're experiencing. I played with XP 64 on my AMD64 3000 and wasn't really that impressed. I'm dual-booting with 32 bit vista now and it's just as stable and responsive as my XP is. Good Luck!

This is the lastest AMD vs Intel test I've seen... take a while to see it...

http://techreport.com/reviews/2007q1/cpus/index.x?pg=1

A Dual Core socket 939 Opteron say a 170 is a great update for not a lot of money.

I just did one yesterday.

I don't think that waiting to double your speed is a bad idea...or at least close. My rig is old but I just beat Prey on almost the highest settings so why waste the money now when I can build a quad-core rig later this year for only $1400 bucks