enthusiast.hardocp.com — AMD's much hyped "4X4" system today brings dual socket Athlon 64 FX processors to the desktop allowing two dual-core AMD processors to be used. This in effect gives us a quad-core system and paves the way for a true octo-core desktop platform next year.
Nov 30, 2006 View in Crawl 4
mullerNov 30, 2006
@ the previous 2 posters:I see your point, but it would have been nice if the review had said that in plain english rather than making it appear as a victory for AMD despite benchmarks that seem to disagree.I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying it wasn't stated very clearly in the article, and that's why people are interpreting it differently.
djcgmcseNov 30, 2006
$500 less is just speculation, i haven't seen any prices yet. If anyone's seen them, please share. From what I've heard you're looking at maybe $1200 at the lowest for 2 FX-74s, and right now the QX6700 is just under $1500.
Closed AccountNov 30, 2006
"Nobody cares that your Windows apps don't scale. Didn't you get the memo? We're all using Linux now."No, the exchange server was down. ;-)
ibby0338Nov 30, 2006
I saw no mention of overclocking. People have been able to get the QX6700s overclocked an additional 1ghz, so I'd be curious to hear what the FX-74 can do.As an enthusiast solution, it sure seems a bit lacking to not even have mentioned it in the article.
caleb4mjNov 30, 2006
I did the same thing. Spent around $500 on a Core 2 e6300 @ 1.8 and a Gigabyte 965G DS3 board. I checked Gigabytes website after the quad launch and found a BIOS update. So when the quad prices drop and I need a performance boost it will cost me almost nothing compared to 939 / AM2 and Quad FX / Opteron. I mean what was the point of the AM2 platform anyway, if they're just going to toss us another Opteron bone. I could have built a 4-CPU Opteron system 2 years ago and might have had an upgrade path to 16-CPUs, assuming AMD releases a quad-core Opteron for the 940-pin socket. But those prices are out of my range. And when I can build a cheap quad core intel system for under $1000 that performs like a top-of-the-line Quad FX or any Opteron system costing up to twice as much AND uses half the power, I gotta invest my money wisely into a cluster of cheap PCs instead of the big expensive iron.. that's the problem I have with AMD's decisions. They're not targetting me as a customer. I want cheap Athlon64s and Semprons in single, dual and quad core, ranging from 1.0 Ghz up to 3.0 Ghz with 128K up to 512K of cache. FX series should be 1+ MB of cache per core, dual/quad core and peaking at 3.2 or higher today, if possible, just to match current Intel designs. Opterons should be socket compatible, IMO. There's no reason to separate the desktop and server markets. It only opens up opportunities for competition to steal the sale.
geronimoNov 30, 2006
For me it's the 2 cpu quad core 5320 screamer.Nothing tops that thing right now. Maybe the 5160 but it's too expensive. I can't wait until Intel gets better interconnects. Right now the linux kernel has had years of opteron NUMA customization, so Intel will have a lot of work to do. Geeshe, AMD, get your act together. I like it when AMD is on top but the bossman wants the best processor.
briangabrielNov 30, 2006
The other 4 is quad SLI.
sanmanDec 1, 2006
I'm waiting for AMD to integrate the ATI GPU/vector-processor with the K8L core. When you see all those charts showing how GPU's kick the crap out of CPUs in math, I wonder if AMD's future strategy won't help it move ahead of Intel once again, despite the latter's lead in manufacturing process technology.
youdigitDec 3, 2006
even if daamit sells these nuke plants they'll be losing money for every chip they sell!!!!! queer how nvidia made the chipsets thuogh is't it now that daamit is makking r600 chipsets hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.