Slashdot Mirror
First Looks at Athlon 64 4000+ & FX-55
CrzyP writes "AnandTech.com has benchmarked the new "Athlon 64 4000+ and the FX-55" in various areas including business application performance, audio/video, gaming, and much more in this first look at AMD's newest 64bit chips. Just after AMD's announcement, AnandTech posted this article to help consumers choose between Intel and AMD."
Why should Anand get all the attention?
Feel free to also check http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=Njc1
another review on tom's hardware
h tm l
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041019/index.
Ignorance is the Agent of Fear; Fear Is the Agent of Violence - >1
This is actually the last resort, as the cost of wafer real-estate versus speed increase is low. You rarely do this for raw speed rather for special needs like Servers and the like.
The increase in the speed for a workstation is probably one speed grade at a cost increase of 30% or so.
There is two good articles over on TheInquirer about Intels road map and why they have to go the Increase the cache route for 2005. Worth a read. Part One and Part Two
Help fight continental drift.
This is a major overhaul of the aging nforce3 chipset.. Check it out.
Expect a flurry of new advances by the end of the year.
I am ready to buy a new Linux system and am pulling hair out trying to make the best choice. Due to Linux compatibility issues (and mixed experiences with nforce2), I cannot really consider nforce4 so it will be Via for me. Though Nvidia will likely get the nod for graphics.
The 90nm chips are a mixed bag at the moment.
http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.cfm?articl
http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q4/athlon64-fx5
http://www.bit-tech.net/review/364/
http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=266
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=
http://www.tbreak.com/reviews/article.php?id=331
http://www.amdreview.com/reviews.php?rev=fx-55-40
http://www.techwarelabs.com/reviews/processors/am
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=Njc1
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athl
http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=614
"AnandTech and Tom's Hardware are so AMD-biased"
Given the current political climate there seems to be a lot of ignorance over the difference between "bias" and "fact". Indeed often people confuse a lack of bias with a counter bias.
For instance, if indeed AMD is the superior consumer chip, perhaps offering measurably better performance/value, then it is entirely reasonable that a site would say such, and it isn't a "bias" to pronounce the AMD the superior choice of the current candidates. Similarly if George W. Bush dines on kittens for dinner, and someone reports it, that doesn't mean that they are biased against Bush.
The 4000+ isn't clocked any higher than the 3800+, it's just got a bigger cache. It's basically an FX-53; in fact, that's exactly what it is, sans the name. It would seem AMD is plateauing as well, but perhaps 90nm will get them out of the jam later on.
However, this is a wise move by AMD even if the rating isn't justified (hint: the benchmarks say it's not). Intel will never have a 4GHz CPU, and idiots who don't understand performance will see the 4000+ and want it because it breaks the 4000 barrier. It could backfire, but probably not, because even though 4000+ isn't justified, it's still faster than any of Intel's chips on 90% of applications.
-Dan