Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by WilHarris, 30 Nov 2006.
its just a stop gap me thinks, just something to compete with kentsfield until their quad core chip is released
Too expensive for Me, they may as well abort this one as It's a dead duck here.
I can't see why they would want to replace 4x4 with a quadcore CPU (other then the obvious cost benefits, but pfft this is AthlonFX, who cares?) - with 4x4 there is two memory controllers so you have twice the bandwidth available rather then having 4 cores all trying to access the same memory bus.
I thought that the 4x4 chip was NOT going to be two cores strapped together?!?!?!? That was why AMD was going to be different from Intel? Maybe that was jsut a rumour...
You really do get the impression that this is just a knee jerk, cobbled together attempt to keep up with Intel. I have always preferred AMD over Intel but recently AMD seemed to have lost the plot a little. I really hope QuadFX is as overdosedelusion said just a stop gap to help AMD catch up in the processor race.
Yeh, you think a quad intel costs a fair wack, then you look at 2 FX's, it is insane!
Who has got them up for sale? Not yet surely?!
The new fx chips will ship in pairs so the price will not be to bad for each chip. Anandtech stated MSRP at $999 a pair for the FX-74. So the cost of the system will be around the same cost as the C2D X6800. Performance wise i think the extra memory bandwidth will help in some areas but I will wait and see the benchmarks to see how it will stacks up
Hmmm I still think AMD are crapping out... Maybe just a little bit... I used to be a massive AMD fanboy... Not Conroe is looking sweeter! Still tho, COME ON AMD!!!
well i used to be an amd fanboy but now that my mobo got vurned i'm replacing my opteron with an e6300. sticking with amd doesn;t come over price per performance ratio
To be honest i've always been an intel fanboy and its not that AMD have lost the plot, they're a damn good company, its just that intel have decided to do some work instead of living off there name. The prescott was a disaster and they're just showing they can do the business when they need to! Plus amd have been busy with the whole ati thing so thats not helped I guess.
That, I did not realise. Thankyou for pointing it out
I've just bought my first ever Intel chip in the 15years I've owned PC's and I have to say that even if the 4x4 was available (and I could afford it), I would still have gone with the Core 2
Another nice editorial can be found on PC Perspective: http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=329&type=expert
Power consumption appears to be ludicrously high for similar performance compared to Intel. This should scare away consumers and business users alike.
useless.... pointless.... weak.... i hope AMD recovers soon.... i would hate to see intel have the monopoly of high end cpus.
Read the Hard article.
Dual core Athlons can't really touch Conroe, but when you put two of them together they can make up alot of ground and come up pretty much even.
The biggest point here is then: AMD's architecture may scale better into the multi core realm? Ie. with the potential to drop in 2xquadcore chips, for a total of 8, the differences may be even more pronounced.
Of course few of us are running mega 3dstudio renders, so the benefits of 8 and n-core are largely abstract at this point.
The article makes a comparisson that the New 4x4 is much like the Hummer vehicles. Big, ugly, fuel innefficient, but powerfull. They really don't make much "sense", and yet they are strangely popular (In North America at least). Maybe AMD 4x4 will be the same?
Show me a majority of apps and games that will benefit totally from Dual-core, before I'll even blink at any of these *extreme* setups though.
Now since this quad fx(FX74) at 3.0GHz can't be overclocked very far(3.1 and crash Tom said. Maybe a better cooling setup would help, I don't know really), I'd get like Tom hardware said the FX70 package as It may overclock to 2.8, 2.9 or maybe 3.0 and It'll save $400, Of course one will need 4 ddr2-800 dimms, But then One can get what they need or think they need. But this will require a hefty psu between 750w and at least 1kw to power this beast.
The thing is by the time AMD get their true quad core out the door, Intel with have there and be in the process of shunting their chip production of 65nm to 45nm.
To be honest the 4x4 should not be compared to the Kentsfield as its not really a like for like situation.
Better comparison would be against Clovertown Xeons as that would be dual core chip on a dual socket mobo, esp since the 4x4 is designed for the Opertrons
Boo on Quad FX! Boo, I tell ya! In the forums at HardOCP where they're discussing the [H]'s preview, their CPU editor mentions that the QuadFX killed one of their 500 watt PSU's he had sitting around to test with. Smoked it. Boo. Boo, AMD, just plain boo.
Separate names with a comma.