AMD X to tha 2 - Page 3 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > New Systems | Building and Buying
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 08-23-2005, 06:56 PM   #21 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 994
Send a message via AIM to PoisonPorkchop
Default

HOLY CRAP! A 2.8 GHZ AMD? THATS SWEET!!!!
/Creams pants

Anyways, it seems like amd is catching up in terms of shown cpu speeds. I think intels best is like, 3.8 isnt it?
__________________

__________________
System
Antec Super Lanboy
AMD 64 3800 S-939 Newcastle
MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum
eVGA 6600GT
1.5 GB pc 3200
WD 160 GB IDE
Viewsonic 22\" Widescreen 1680x1050
Logitech MX518
Coming Soon: Athlon 64 4000 San Diego/Z-5500/G7/Vista
PoisonPorkchop is offline  
Old 08-23-2005, 07:27 PM   #22 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
PZEROFGH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,553
Send a message via AIM to PZEROFGH
Default

that means the amd 2.8 is like equal to a 4 ghz intel.. WOW...anyways you want to be ahead of the game dont you. so you might as well go with the dual core x2
__________________

__________________
Hmmm?
AIM/Xfire - pzerofgh
PZEROFGH is offline  
Old 08-24-2005, 02:15 AM   #23 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,782
Default

i wanna wait until m2 comes out.
__________________
Core 2 Duo E6400, DFI Infinity 975X/G, 2x 512mb DDR2 667mhz, Albatron 7900gt, WD 200gb SATA, Samsung DVD-RW, Silverstone ST-50EF 500w PSU.
waynejkruse10 is offline  
Old 08-24-2005, 06:44 PM   #24 (permalink)
Newb Techie
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by PZEROFGH
that means the amd 2.8 is like equal to a 4 ghz intel.. WOW...anyways you want to be ahead of the game dont you. so you might as well go with the dual core x2
Better I believe. Isn't the 2.8 one of the 4400 or 4600? In that case their marginally eqivilent to a Intell 4.4 ghz, and the dual core would be running intense multimedia programs betters than a 4.4 ghz single core.

I believe, but don't quote me on it.
RainDownMyBlues is offline  
Old 08-24-2005, 06:55 PM   #25 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
PZEROFGH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,553
Send a message via AIM to PZEROFGH
Default

the x2 4800 is running at 2.4Ghz, the fx-57 is running at 2.8,

wait so the 4800 is equal to a pentium 4 4.8 hence the "4800"
would that work for dual cores...? wouldnt meant the fx-57 is about equal to a p4 4ghz...
__________________
Hmmm?
AIM/Xfire - pzerofgh
PZEROFGH is offline  
Old 08-24-2005, 08:18 PM   #26 (permalink)
Newb Techie
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by PZEROFGH
the x2 4800 is running at 2.4Ghz, the fx-57 is running at 2.8,

wait so the 4800 is equal to a pentium 4 4.8 hence the "4800"
would that work for dual cores...? wouldnt meant the fx-57 is about equal to a p4 4ghz...
Well the dual core processors are pretty much dual processors in one socket, I believe (numbers are hypothetical) a 4000 X2 would be like a dual 2000 system... Ultimately giving you the speed of a 4000 system, just over two processors, you tend to have to use programs that utalize that or be running multiple programs.
RainDownMyBlues is offline  
Old 08-24-2005, 08:20 PM   #27 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
PZEROFGH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,553
Send a message via AIM to PZEROFGH
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by RainDownMyBlues
Well the dual core processors are pretty much dual processors in one socket, I believe (numbers are hypothetical) a 4000 X2 would be like a dual 2000 system... Ultimately giving you the speed of a 4000 system, just over two processors, you tend to have to use programs that utalize that or be running multiple programs.
you just blew that right over my head
__________________
Hmmm?
AIM/Xfire - pzerofgh
PZEROFGH is offline  
Old 08-24-2005, 08:28 PM   #28 (permalink)
Newb Techie
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by PZEROFGH
you just blew that right over my head
Lol You know how Mac G5's are dual processor machines right?

Well, dual core is just like a dual processor machine.

But a 4000 dual core would be like having two 2000 processors running at once, effectively being 4000.
RainDownMyBlues is offline  
Old 08-25-2005, 11:14 AM   #29 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
PZEROFGH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,553
Send a message via AIM to PZEROFGH
Default

i get that, its like having 2 processors but really only having one but running at 2 processor, but physically its only one processor that has the power of 2 processors in one. one of those 2 for 1 deals
__________________
Hmmm?
AIM/Xfire - pzerofgh
PZEROFGH is offline  
Old 08-25-2005, 11:51 AM   #30 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Apokalipse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 14,559
Default

actually, the 4800+ is dual 2.8 cores with 1MB L2 cache each
__________________

__________________
Apokalipse is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.