AMD Athlon 64 FX-60 Processor Review

Post by **Apoptosis** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:38 am

Today with the launch of the AMD Athlon 64 FX-60 AMD has launched their first dual-core processor in their FX line of processors. Rated at 2.6GHz the FX-60 is 200MHz slower than the 2.8GHz sigle-core FX-57 processor. Read on to see how the FX-60 compares to three Intel Extreme Edition CPU's and several other AMD processors.

The time has finally come for AMD to bring their dual-core processor to their beloved FX processor family. Can you believe that dual-core AMD Athlon 64 X2 processors have been out for more than seven months? During these seven months the King Of The Hill (KOTH) processor for AMD has always been a single core processor. Several months ago in Texas AMD asked the reviewers what we thought the next FX processor should be and it looks like the votes for dual-core came out on top...

Article Link: AMD Athlon 64 FX-60 Processor Review

Thor · Post by **Thor** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:18 pm

Great review.

Makes me feel the warm fuzzies that I'm only 100mhz off the fx-60 with my 165 crammed into my shuttle at 2.5. Nothing like 300 dollar-come-1000 dollar processors.

Post by **Apoptosis** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:25 pm

that is sooooo true

Post by **FZ1** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 4:51 pm

Thor wrote:Great review.

Makes me feel the warm fuzzies that I'm only 100mhz off the fx-60 with my 165 crammed into my shuttle at 2.5. Nothing like 300 dollar-come-1000 dollar processors.

Makes me feel even better than I am a few hundred over @ $350

If they made a worthwhile consumer mobo that supports dual CPU I'd have the world on a string (insert evil laugh here).

Zinn2b · Post by **Zinn2b** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 5:05 am

Nice review. I will have a new 975x M/B here shortly. still waiting for 955cpu to be released . I am really excited over this release from intel.

Since My macines are all liquid cooled I don't have a heat issue or a noise issue with this intel product . I am only interested in the best attainable performance at stable speeds .
I believe that 975x and 955ee combo @ 4.7 stable should put intel out of reach of anthing AMD can achieve in the performance department.

The FX60 at stock wins hands down but once you rev the intel chip up intel is the clear winner.

Here's an example of the not yet released potentcial of the 955E
I see know reason 4.7 ghz stable is very real.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/sho ... hp?t=85757

Bio-Hazard · Post by **Bio-Hazard** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:28 am

I really don'y think Intel will beat out anyone when you start comparing apples to apples. Intel couldn't do it last generation and I don't think they will with their next. You also might remember that AMD also has a new generation CPU coming out shortly. ..................

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:35 am

Bio-Hazard wrote:You also might remember that AMD also has a new generation CPU coming out shortly. ..................

What CPU is this???
From what I can tell...AMD will only be changing their architecture to allow support for DDR2..
They are not changing anything inside the CPU except the memory controller........they are still stuck with the 90nm process and prob won't move to 65nm till the end of the year......
The only thing new from AMD will be the mobile CPU.......AFAIK

Zinn2b · Post by **Zinn2b** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:05 am

Bio-Hazard wrote:I really don'y think Intel will beat out anyone when you start comparing apples to apples. Intel couldn't do it last generation and I don't think they will with their next. You also might remember that AMD also has a new generation CPU coming out shortly. ..................

Well ya I do and here is an apples to apples review . So I say at 4.7 GHz Intel Rules.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/di ... -fx60.html

Thor · Post by **Thor** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 11:35 am

Just the fact that a 2.1ghz clockspeed differential is what it takes for intel to pull ahead a bit should tell you something.

Bio-Hazard · Post by **Bio-Hazard** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 11:38 am

Zinn2b wrote:
Bio-Hazard wrote:I really don'y think Intel will beat out anyone when you start comparing apples to apples. Intel couldn't do it last generation and I don't think they will with their next. You also might remember that AMD also has a new generation CPU coming out shortly. ..................
Well ya I do and here is an apples to apples review . So I say at 4.7 GHz Intel Rules.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/di ... -fx60.html

You might want to read a bit more on what other people are getting out of their FX60 on stock air, one review doesn't make the world............

But it also a known fact that Intesl work better at video encoding and the like, but if you're a gamer, AMD running at a little over half the Intel speed will trash the Intels....................

Zinn2b · Post by **Zinn2b** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:16 pm

Bio-Hazard wrote:
Zinn2b wrote:
Bio-Hazard wrote:I really don'y think Intel will beat out anyone when you start comparing apples to apples. Intel couldn't do it last generation and I don't think they will with their next. You also might remember that AMD also has a new generation CPU coming out shortly. ..................
Well ya I do and here is an apples to apples review . So I say at 4.7 GHz Intel Rules.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/di ... -fx60.html
You might want to read a bit more on what other people are getting out of their FX60 on stock air, one review doesn't make the world............
But it also a known fact that Intesl work better at video encoding and the like, but if you're a gamer, AMD running at a little over half the Intel speed will trash the Intels....................

Acually I have most are getting 2.8 and 2.9 is unstable . what does ghz have to do with it . I don't care if its 6ghz or 5mgz . Yes look at Dothan Clock for Clock with Against AMD better yet Yonah . There hasn't been a yonah review done yet with DDR2 667 0nly 533 . . Also the Amd is flat out of head room . This is only the first revision of the 65n P4 there's another coming in april with more reduced prices.

-mogwai · Post by **-mogwai** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:26 pm

OH NO!! TOO SEXY!!!

Zinn2b · Post by **Zinn2b** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:27 pm

Bio-Hazard wrote:
Zinn2b wrote:
Bio-Hazard wrote:I really don'y think Intel will beat out anyone when you start comparing apples to apples. Intel couldn't do it last generation and I don't think they will with their next. You also might remember that AMD also has a new generation CPU coming out shortly. ..................
Well ya I do and here is an apples to apples review . So I say at 4.7 GHz Intel Rules.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/di ... -fx60.html
You might want to read a bit more on what other people are getting out of their FX60 on stock air, one review doesn't make the world............
But it also a known fact that Intesl work better at video encoding and the like, but if you're a gamer, AMD running at a little over half the Intel speed will trash the Intels....................

I am a gamer and don't try pulling that BS on me . I game at high res with eye candy on . Intel is just as fast as Amd in those circumstances.
Is what you meant was if your looking for head room you lower res . and turn off eyecandy to find which cpu was designed to do real world work and which was designed for gaming . I know AMD is stong but Intel is coming on stong and Conroe will put them over the top.

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 1:22 pm

Zinn2b wrote:
Bio-Hazard wrote:
Zinn2b wrote: Well ya I do and here is an apples to apples review . So I say at 4.7 GHz Intel Rules.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/di ... -fx60.html
You might want to read a bit more on what other people are getting out of their FX60 on stock air, one review doesn't make the world............
But it also a known fact that Intesl work better at video encoding and the like, but if you're a gamer, AMD running at a little over half the Intel speed will trash the Intels....................
I am a gamer and don't try pulling that BS on me . I game at high res with eye candy on . Intel is just as fast as Amd in those circumstances.
Is what you meant was if your looking for head room you lower res . and turn off eyecandy to find which cpu was designed to do real world work and which was designed for gaming . I know AMD is stong but Intel is coming on stong and Conroe will put them over the top.

AMD won't be going 65nm untile next year....there will be NOTHING new from AMD this year....yeah DDR2...but that won't yeild much performance @ the beginning....
Intel will have Conroe...but It ain't gonna be "as good as all that"
It will still use the Intel FSB.....Intell is going to bring out their own version of Hypertransport called "CSI" -> but that won't be for a while.....

I think AMD will win the battle for the next 3mths....Intel might win when Conroe comes out but who knows.....mayby Nate does.....but he ain't gonna tell ;)

LVCapo · Post by **LVCapo** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 4:32 am

I found this to be a pretty interesting read:

The guys over at TG Daily found out that, while Intel is busy bringing its next processor generation, based on the Merom core, up to speed, AMD is adding the final touches to its DDR2-based Socket M2 Athlon 64 platform by preparing 12 M2 processors for the Q2 launch, spanning the Athlon 64, X2, FX and Sempron series of CPUs. Part of the launch will be an Athlon 64 X2 5000+ and an Athlon 64 FX-62 chip.

All Socket M2 processors will be based on a common DDR2 memory controller that is validated for 333 MHz operation (DDR2-667), with only the cache size and clock speed differentiating the individual processors. There will be 2 x 1 MB or 2 x 512 KB L2 cache for the dual cores, 512 KB L2 cache for the single core Athlon 64 models and 256 KB for the Sempron series. While Intel's chipset specifications officially support 4 clock CAS latencies for DDR2-667 memory only, there is some headroom for AMD to optimize the memory interface for CAS 3. This circumstance could become significant, as the performance difference between the current Socket 939 processors and their upcoming Socket M2 counterparts will be rather small, according to sources.

The Socket M2 launch will be flanked by at least four Athlon 64 X2 models, which are based on the 90 nm Windsor core. These processors will be running the clock speeds we are familiar with today. However, AMD will introduce an Athlon 64 X2 5000+ clocked at 2.6 GHz and equipped with 1x 1 MB L2 cache. The single core Athlon 64 family will be slimmed down to just three models integrating the 90 nm Orleans core.

The Athlon 64 4000+ will be running at 2.6 GHz, as it comes with 512 KB L2 cache only (today's 4000+ is a 1 MB part). The 3800+ runs at 2.4 GHz; the Athlon 64 3500+ will be the entry level chip at 2.2 GHz. Both the Athlon 64 and the Athlon 64 X2 will support AMD's virtualization technology known as "Pacifica."

Last but not least, the Sempron family will consist of four members at the time of M2 launch. All Sempron processors are based on the 90 nm Manila core and carry only 256 KB L2, but they do come with AMD's dual channel DDR2-667 interface. The Sempron models 3500+, 3400+, 3200+ and 3000+ will run at 2.2, 2.0, 1.8 and 1.6 GHz, respectively. 3600+ and 3800+ models 2.4 and 2.6 GHz apparently are available already and could be added to the line-up, as soon as Intel speeds up the Celeron family.

[/quote]

killswitch83 · Post by **killswitch83** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 11:42 am

and AMD will STILL pwn Intel because they have an on-die mem controller, amongst other things, lol......doesn't matter if Intel has a smaller package and more cache, they still can't touch AMD's offerings, to an extent......now, if Intel can get their act together and put a mem controller on-die, then there will be some competition there I think......M2 looks promising for the budget builder too, because I've not found a single Sempr0n for s939, only for s754, so putting a budget processor on the same line with the big boys will definitely attract more customers who are looking at starting small and upgrading in the near future, and can use the same board.....that was a good move for AMD

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 12:01 pm

Intel will be moving the memory controller to the cpu......
It will be called "CSI", but won't be until '07
It will be for server chips, so we won't see it in desktop cpus till ~'08?

EETimes wrote:The CSI bus is also expected to appear in 2007 versions of Intel's x86 Xeon server CPUs, probably including the chip code-named Whitefield.

The CSI bus is optimized for low latency when used as a cache coherent processor bus in four-processor systems. However, it can also be used to link up to 16 CPUs for the high-end X86 systems built by OEMs such as IBM, NEC and Unisys. In addition, CSI will be used without cache coherency as a standard way to link north and south bridge chips in a processor core logic set

link

Conroe should be interesting as Intel has shortened the pipeline....a short pipeline is what makes AMD better for gaming etc. (games don't use large instructions!)

AMD have being working with memory companies and others perfecting their new ddr2 memory controller...IF they have it sorted then we should see some performance....but I can't see how more bandwith will help with higher latencies...I suspect with ddr-667, the extra MHz will be to compensate for the higher latency...
What also may happen is AMD will have to bring out a few revisions of their cpu's to gain from DDR2....if that's the case, then AM2 will have no performance benefits for the first few months...

2$

gvblake22 · Post by **gvblake22** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 12:11 pm

mmmm, Windsor

mmmm, Conroe

Both Intel and AMD's next gen processor platforms will be very interesting indeed. I don't anticipate a HUGE performance leap from socket AM2, but I anticipate intel's "Conroe" architechture to have real potential. Either way, it looks like I'll have to migrate to DDR2 pretty soon!

On a side note, does anyone find it rediculous how many "AMD Athlon 64 3500" labeled products there are available?! AMD's naming scheme is getting a little out of control. Its getting hard even for me to tell the difference between the processors, let alone someone just getting into the DIY computer market! It's just too damn confusing to try and hunt and peck for core code names, cache sizes, and clock speeds which can often be misprints in the retail storefront. They need different series or something!

I remember back in the day when the 3200 was a top of the line processor!!!

killswitch83 · Post by **killswitch83** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 12:19 pm

kenc51 wrote:Intel will be moving the memory controller to the cpu......
It will be called "CSI", but won't be until '07
It will be for server chips, so we won't see it in desktop cpus till ~'08?

EETimes wrote:The CSI bus is also expected to appear in 2007 versions of Intel's x86 Xeon server CPUs, probably including the chip code-named Whitefield.

The CSI bus is optimized for low latency when used as a cache coherent processor bus in four-processor systems. However, it can also be used to link up to 16 CPUs for the high-end X86 systems built by OEMs such as IBM, NEC and Unisys. In addition, CSI will be used without cache coherency as a standard way to link north and south bridge chips in a processor core logic set
link

Conroe should be interesting as Intel has shortened the pipeline....a short pipeline is what makes AMD better for gaming etc. (games don't use large instructions!)

AMD have being working with memory companies and others perfecting their new ddr2 memory controller...IF they have it sorted then we should see some performance....but I can't see how more bandwith will help with higher latencies...I suspect with ddr-667, the extra MHz will be to compensate for the higher latency...
What also may happen is AMD will have to bring out a few revisions of their cpu's to gain from DDR2....if that's the case, then AM2 will have no performance benefits for the first few months...

2$

well, then like I said, Intel might have a fighting chance on this one.....perhaps they may even eventually surpass AMD.......if they can get the thermal properties on the desktop just right, I might have to reconsider my allegiance, lol.....

and I second Blake, both look like they have great potential.

of course, for my personal use, since I already have AMD hardware, I'm going with a great AMD chip: the X2 3800+......I have some money coming in from closing on my second mortgage on Friday, and if it's as much as I think it'll be, I'll be grabbing that, the Antec Sonata II, and I'm also considering going ahead and buying a TPII 550W PSU to replace the SmartPower that's in it stock......in which case I'll either be putting it up on Trader or keeping it as a spare (I think I'll I keep it as a spare though, just so I have extra hardware to work with in the future).

Life is just about to be that much better

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 12:21 pm

killswitch83 wrote:Life is just about to be that much better

Well said!
That just about sums it up.... ;)