Processor Question

2006-12-04 17:03:33

#1

Mitch: 16 more years; +877|6981|South Florida

Please only answer if you can help.

Is a Dual-Core 2.4 GHZ processor (AMD 64 X2 4800+) Mean that it is as fast as a 4.8 GHZ single-core processor?

My problem is, i have a socket 939 Mobo and the highest dual-core amd i can find is the 2.4GHZ X2 4800, so is it faster then something from the FX series, such as the FX-53 (2.4ghz) or FX-55 (2.6ghz)

Please help.

15 more years! 15 more years!

2006-12-04 17:17:05

#2

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|7056|132 and Bush

Dezerteagal5 wrote:
Please only answer if you can help.

Is a Dual-Core 2.4 GHZ processor (AMD 64 X2 4800+) Mean that it is as fast as a 4.8 GHZ single-core processor?

My problem is, i have a socket 939 Mobo and the highest dual-core amd i can find is the 2.4GHZ X2 4800, so is it faster then something from the FX series, such as the FX-53 (2.4ghz) or FX-55 (2.6ghz)

Please help.

No it involves much more than that. Your best bet is to look around and find some benches.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-12-04 17:21:47

#3

Mitch: 16 more years; +877|6981|South Florida

Kmarion wrote:
Dezerteagal5 wrote:
Please only answer if you can help.

Is a Dual-Core 2.4 GHZ processor (AMD 64 X2 4800+) Mean that it is as fast as a 4.8 GHZ single-core processor?

My problem is, i have a socket 939 Mobo and the highest dual-core amd i can find is the 2.4GHZ X2 4800, so is it faster then something from the FX series, such as the FX-53 (2.4ghz) or FX-55 (2.6ghz)

Please help.
No it involves much more than that. Your best bet is to look around and find some benches.

Can you help me find some? And could you explain a little better what you mean by 'Theres much involved'

15 more years! 15 more years!

2006-12-04 17:22:40

#4

majorassult: I <3 ak101; +307|7118|under there hayousaidunderwear

Kmarion wrote:
Dezerteagal5 wrote:
Please only answer if you can help.

Is a Dual-Core 2.4 GHZ processor (AMD 64 X2 4800+) Mean that it is as fast as a 4.8 GHZ single-core processor?

My problem is, i have a socket 939 Mobo and the highest dual-core amd i can find is the 2.4GHZ X2 4800, so is it faster then something from the FX series, such as the FX-53 (2.4ghz) or FX-55 (2.6ghz)

Please help.
No it involves much more than that. Your best bet is to look around and find some benches.

such as the bench kmarion posted earlier (I think this will help you)

https://tampastorm.smugmug.com/photos/114846223-O.jpg

2006-12-04 17:23:33

#5

jcurts: Member; +25|6821|Coventry, UK

No mate, you got it wrong.

Dual core 2.4 ghz = 2 cores running each one at 1.2

2nd question,

The X2 4800 is a Toledo or a Windsor?

If its a Toledo, you have this ones above it:
-X2 +4400 Toledo
-X2 +4600 Windsor
-FX 60 Toledo
-X2 +4800 Windsor
-X2 +5000 Windsor
-FX 62 Windsor

Now, if its a Windsor:
-X2 +5000 Windsor
-FX 62 Windsor

Hope it helps

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html

Last edited by jcurts (2006-12-04 17:24:26)

2006-12-04 17:24:02

#6

Mitch: 16 more years; +877|6981|South Florida

majorassult wrote:
Kmarion wrote:
Dezerteagal5 wrote:
Please only answer if you can help.

Is a Dual-Core 2.4 GHZ processor (AMD 64 X2 4800+) Mean that it is as fast as a 4.8 GHZ single-core processor?

My problem is, i have a socket 939 Mobo and the highest dual-core amd i can find is the 2.4GHZ X2 4800, so is it faster then something from the FX series, such as the FX-53 (2.4ghz) or FX-55 (2.6ghz)

Please help.
No it involves much more than that. Your best bet is to look around and find some benches.
such as the bench kmarion posted earlier (I think this will help you)

http://tampastorm.smugmug.com/photos/114846223-O.jpg

Ok, what does this mean? Do the higher numbers mean faster?

15 more years! 15 more years!

2006-12-04 17:26:21

#7

Mitch: 16 more years; +877|6981|South Florida

jcurts wrote:
No mate, you got it wrong.

Dual core 2.4 ghz = 2 cores running each one at 1.2

2nd question,

The X2 4800 is a Toledo or a Windsor?

If its a Toledo, you have this ones above it:
-X2 +4400 Toledo
-X2 +4600 Windsor
-FX 60 Toledo
-X2 +4800 Windsor
-X2 +5000 Windsor
-FX 62 Windsor

Now, if its a Windsor:
-X2 +5000 Windsor
-FX 62 Windsor

Hope it helps

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html

Thanks man, that is much easier to understand, thank you

So the x2 4800 windsor is one of the best AMD's?

Last edited by Dezerteagal5 (2006-12-04 17:28:10)

15 more years! 15 more years!

2006-12-04 17:27:34

#8

doc. josh: Member; +48|7000

majorassult wrote:
Kmarion wrote:
Dezerteagal5 wrote:
Please only answer if you can help.

Is a Dual-Core 2.4 GHZ processor (AMD 64 X2 4800+) Mean that it is as fast as a 4.8 GHZ single-core processor?

My problem is, i have a socket 939 Mobo and the highest dual-core amd i can find is the 2.4GHZ X2 4800, so is it faster then something from the FX series, such as the FX-53 (2.4ghz) or FX-55 (2.6ghz)

Please help.
No it involves much more than that. Your best bet is to look around and find some benches.
such as the bench kmarion posted earlier (I think this will help you)

http://tampastorm.smugmug.com/photos/114846223-O.jpg

needs to be updated with the new FX-70/72/74's in there

2006-12-04 17:30:01

#9

jcurts: Member; +25|6821|Coventry, UK

This whole processor thing is always changing.

Check the link, revise the different benchmarks.

So, you can evaluate what is the best thing for what you want to do., ej, gaming, editing, coding, rendering, etc etc etc.

In that way you can get an idea of wich ones are good and wich ones are the best to buy.

2006-12-04 17:30:19

#10

ImposedThreat: You Were My Promotion; +24|7120|USA

Dezerteagal5 wrote:
majorassult wrote:
Kmarion wrote:

No it involves much more than that. Your best bet is to look around and find some benches.
such as the bench kmarion posted earlier (I think this will help you)

http://tampastorm.smugmug.com/photos/114846223-O.jpg
Ok, what does this mean? Do the higher numbers mean faster?

No, the lower time is better.

2006-12-04 17:32:06

#11

jcurts: Member; +25|6821|Coventry, UK

It all depends on the graph you are looking at.

2006-12-04 17:47:22

#12

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|7056|132 and Bush

doc. josh wrote:
majorassult wrote:
Kmarion wrote:

No it involves much more than that. Your best bet is to look around and find some benches.
such as the bench kmarion posted earlier (I think this will help you)

http://tampastorm.smugmug.com/photos/114846223-O.jpg
needs to be updated with the new FX-70/72/74's in there

72 is in there.. not the others.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-12-04 18:20:50

#13

majorassult: I <3 ak101; +307|7118|under there hayousaidunderwear

70 is also in there, pretty far to the bottom tho.

2006-12-04 18:25:06

#14

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|7056|132 and Bush

majorassult wrote:
70 is also in there, pretty far to the bottom tho.

Well, shit now that I look the 74 is there also..lol

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-12-04 18:28:37

#15

majorassult: I <3 ak101; +307|7118|under there hayousaidunderwear

Haha I didn't see the 74 either

2006-12-04 23:39:01

#16

beerface702: Member; +65|7148|las vegas

the 4800 was top of the line last aug

then the FX-60 came out on s939, which @stock is the fastest amd chip for that aritecture.

you could overclock the 4800 if you own one to a decent 2.8 or so on air, if you have a good week of the chip, i have a 4400, and sit at 2.7 on air which isnt bad, and will do me fine till mid next year.

now if your talking about the brand new power hungry FX cpu's thats like comparing apples to pumpkins.

diffrent socket, diffrent memory interface, whole diffrent deal

but they are better, just not good enough. im a bit upset with AMD's performance the last few months, they gotta pick up the slack or intel is gonna have them in the dirt till 09

2006-12-05 00:32:28

#17

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|7056|132 and Bush

Who knows maybe they lost focus when they bought ati?

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-12-05 01:19:30

#18

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7172

jcurts wrote:
No mate, you got it wrong.

Dual core 2.4 ghz = 2 cores running each one at 1.2

2nd question,

The X2 4800 is a Toledo or a Windsor?

If its a Toledo, you have this ones above it:
-X2 +4400 Toledo
-X2 +4600 Windsor
-FX 60 Toledo
-X2 +4800 Windsor
-X2 +5000 Windsor
-FX 62 Windsor

Now, if its a Windsor:
-X2 +5000 Windsor
-FX 62 Windsor

Hope it helps

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html

Wrong. Both cores operate at 2.4 ghz. They do not add up to each other, they do different tasks.

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2006-12-05 03:18:44

#19

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,074|7227|PNW

Option 1: Overclock an Opteron 165 ($160).
Option 2: Get an X2 4600+ ($225).
Option 3: I can't justify any price over $250 for a S939 CPU. Get a new system.

BF2S Forums Processor Question

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

majorassult wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

jcurts wrote:

majorassult wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

majorassult wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

doc. josh wrote:

majorassult wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

majorassult wrote:

jcurts wrote:

Board footer