bit-tech.net

AMD Athlon 64 FX-60

Comments 1 to 25 of 46

Reply
Boswell 10th January 2006, 06:58 Quote
{i knew it :D..} its not like a killer cpu where its on top for everything but its certainly another step forward (imo) into the lead.
Pookeyhead 10th January 2006, 07:05 Quote
I actually didn't sleep too well thinking about this chip!!! :)

I can't believe you didn't clock it!!! That's what I wanted to know!!

Still... Over £600... not too bad really.. I was expecting over £700 like when the FX57 was launched.

I was dissappointed to see the FEAR results... that's my main game at the moment (hence my absence from the CS:S server). I do plan on buying quake 4 however, and it seems to rock with that.

Do you still have the chip Tim? Can you clock it? Will it do 3GHz? Weird isn't it... once you've had a chip that does 3GHz, you can't seem to drop below that number ever again... kind of a psychological thing.

I'm getting one of these chips.
Hybr1d 10th January 2006, 07:59 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pookeyhead
Still... Over £600... not too bad really...

*learns the art of pro photography*
Highland3r 10th January 2006, 08:04 Quote
600 quids pretty cheap tbh, was expecting the chips to be other the 1k mark...

Resuilts arent hugely surprising, its basically an overclocked 4800 with unlocked multi's... Would be nice if you can give it a quick once over on the performance enhancement side tim, see if you cant squeeze a little more out of the chip.
Out of interest, what sort of temps are you seeing with the chip at stock? Idle/load etc..?
hitman012 10th January 2006, 08:17 Quote
I was also expecting this to be a £1k part, nice to see they've slotted it in near the existing FXs despite the obvious improvement. I guess it's cheap enough for them to produce, though.

I'd also like to know how far you managed to clock this . Did it come with any improvement on the 4800+ cooler?
-EVRE- 10th January 2006, 08:58 Quote
Just curious. The Opteron 170 is a 1mb cash per core 2.0ghz socket 939 chip. I have never seen any word of the socket 939 Opterons in the Bit-Tech news. I am running one now and love it. at $368 I'd say its a better buy than a 3800+ @ $330 usd. Good review :) always good to see AMD squish intel
Mister_Tad 10th January 2006, 09:02 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pookeyhead

I can't believe you didn't clock it!!! That's what I wanted to know!!

Something i noticed a distinct lack of in the presler review as well :|
I'd be happy to pop it under water in the expert if you don't have the time Tim ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by -EVRE-

Just curious. The Opteron 170 is a 1mb cash per core 2.0ghz socket 939 chip. I have never seen any word of the socket 939 Opterons in the Bit-Tech news. I am running one now and love it. at $368 I'd say its a better buy than a 3800+ @ $330 usd. Good review always good to see AMD squish intel

Dual core opterons are pretty much impossible to get hold of in the UK at the moment unfortunately.
apoogod 10th January 2006, 10:05 Quote
What I want to know is, is it worth getting the FX-60 or get the 4800 or 4400?
Hamish 10th January 2006, 10:45 Quote
Quote:

The dual core processors are limited by the speed of our 16-speed LG DVD-ROM drive
why did you not just set dvdshrink to create an .iso instead of burn directly to dvd?

should be a pretty awesome chip if it clocks like previous FXs tho, my x2 is running at 2.6gig but it wont go much over that :(
Neoki 10th January 2006, 10:51 Quote
The 4400+ beats the fx60 in some of the tests. Go for that one instead as you can overclock to around 2.8 on air and is alot cheaper.
Hamish 10th January 2006, 10:58 Quote
what, no it doesnt
the 4400 is identical to the fx60 except its 400mhz slower and isnt unlocked..
mine seems to max out about 2.7gig too...
Nature 10th January 2006, 11:05 Quote
A good read. I'm sure the AM2 model will be a wee bit faster...

But why did you use a 7800GT in your tests?
Shadowed_fury 10th January 2006, 11:05 Quote
Now, thats fast!
Da Dego 10th January 2006, 13:59 Quote
At CES I was discussing with another reviewer who said that with water cooling the chip has topped over 3.4, but that is an engineering sample.

Keep in mind, this has not been confirmed by Tim, who would probably throw something at me (and not the chip, sadly) for the suggestion that he should get to work now pushing max overclock. :) This review already took a bloody long time, and for good reason...lots of details, retests, etc. to make sure that you're getting fair and accurate marks with every chip on the same bios, drivers, etc.

If someone does go out and buy one to OC it, make sure you let us know how it performs!!!
Pookeyhead 10th January 2006, 14:36 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Da Dego
.

If someone does go out and buy one to OC it, make sure you let us know how it performs!!!

As soon as I get home tonight, my FX57 goes on Ebay, then as soon as SCan get stock, I'll have one the next day, so I'll let you know.
specofdust 10th January 2006, 14:39 Quote
Wow, now thats public service!

If a moderately skilled overclocker has managed 3.4 on air I'd imagine over the next few months we can look forward to phase changed 4.0Ghz FX-60's....I'm practising the jaw drop
Marquee 10th January 2006, 15:02 Quote
I personally have been waiting for a refined version of the AMD 64 X2 technology. Might just get into it now. But what I am thinking is that the overclocking must suck hard with these new X2 chips. The privies flagship was 2.8Ghz. Although we are getting now two cores at 2.6Ghz I was kinda hoping for at least 2.8Ghz or aim even higher 3.0Ghz. My other question you guys is it possible to take a low end X2 chip and overclock it to 2.6Ghz. Like the 4400+. Its clocked at 2.2Ghz with 1Mb cache for each core. I really wonder if I can clock that CPU at 2.6Ghz.

Nice CPU though.
Shadowed_fury 10th January 2006, 15:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marquee
I personally have been waiting for a refined version of the AMD 64 X2 technology. Might just get into it now. But what I am thinking is that the overclocking must suck hard with these new X2 chips. The privies flagship was 2.8Ghz. Although we are getting now two cores at 2.6Ghz I was kinda hoping for at least 2.8Ghz or aim even higher 3.0Ghz. My other question you guys is it possible to take a low end X2 chip and overclock it to 2.6Ghz. Like the 4400+. Its clocked at 2.2Ghz with 1Mb cache for each core. I really wonder if I can clock that CPU at 2.6Ghz.

Nice CPU though.

Clock rate is NOT everything. ;)
specofdust 10th January 2006, 15:15 Quote
True, but we can't tweak the architecture of a CPU or add more cache by adding a new HSF :D
leviathan18 10th January 2006, 15:18 Quote
you guys can go over xtremesystems there 2 or 3 guys with FX-60 they dont oc 3.4ghz on air not final ones and they have cold bug and you wont see 4.0ghz unless you have the best silicon and are very lucky....

this cpu can oc quite nice with a single stage
specofdust 10th January 2006, 15:22 Quote
Nah, they'll get 'em further yet. A good overclock, going by their standards, takes weeks or months to get done. I'm personally more curious to see what they can get the things to on phase cooling, even though I'm an air guy, I'd just like to see the limits of the chip.
Da Dego 10th January 2006, 15:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marquee
My other question you guys is it possible to take a low end X2 chip and overclock it to 2.6Ghz. Like the 4400+. Its clocked at 2.2Ghz with 1Mb cache for each core. I really wonder if I can clock that CPU at 2.6Ghz.

Nice CPU though.
Marquee, yes, it is quite possible. The 3800 easily overclocks above the 4800 with good air cooling. 4200 does as well. Don't know about the 4400, don't have that chip handy.
hitman012 10th January 2006, 15:27 Quote
Since it's structually identical to a standard Toledo, their yield should be near as high as it's going to get; we might not see much better silicon in the near future. No doubt there will be a few gems, though ;)

Also be interested to see what the maniacs over at XS get it to do over time :D
moshpit 10th January 2006, 16:15 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marquee
I personally have been waiting for a refined version of the AMD 64 X2 technology. Might just get into it now. But what I am thinking is that the overclocking must suck hard with these new X2 chips. The privies flagship was 2.8Ghz. Although we are getting now two cores at 2.6Ghz I was kinda hoping for at least 2.8Ghz or aim even higher 3.0Ghz. My other question you guys is it possible to take a low end X2 chip and overclock it to 2.6Ghz. Like the 4400+. Its clocked at 2.2Ghz with 1Mb cache for each core. I really wonder if I can clock that CPU at 2.6Ghz.

Nice CPU though.

I commonly run my 4400+ at 2.62Ghz very comfortably. But I intend to retire this chip to my wifes music studio rig so that I can bring in the FX-60 and break into 3Ghz territory now. I'm really excited about the unlocked multiplier on a dual core chip. The very thought makes me all fuzzy feeling inside :P
FIBRE+ 10th January 2006, 17:33 Quote
Nice article, as usual ;)

A bit of overclocking would of been a bonus, just have to wait I guess :)

Way out of my budget, but along with the realease of the AM2 it should help give a nice hefty price drop on the other X2's :D

Off topic:\ Any news on AM2?
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums