|
|||||||
| Hardware Discussion & Support Discuss your computer - its components or ANY hardware, past/current/future you want, or ask our forum experts if you have a general problem with your hardware. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools |
Dec 6, 2004, 02:04 PM
|
#1 |
|
Genuine Crazy Canuck
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hamilton, ON Canada
Posts: 208
Rep Power: 0  
|
Athlon64 FX-53 vs. Athlon64 +3800
Pardon my ignorance, but what are the differences between the FX-53 939 CPU and the +3800? Since their both about the same price right now I'd like to know which one is faster and what makes it faster.
Thanks
__________________
AMD 64 3500+ Winnie | MSI Neo4 Platinum | 1 GB Corsair TwinX1024 PC3200 Dual Channel | ATI RADEON x850XT | 200 GB WD SATA150 8 MB Buffer 7200 RPM | Win XP Pro SP2 || |
|
|
|
Dec 6, 2004, 02:07 PM
|
#2 |
|
HardwareHeaven Extreme Member
|
L2 512k cache VS the FX's L2 1mb Cache
possably Duel channel VS single channel I'd have to look up the clock rates, but what socket????
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 6, 2004, 03:32 PM
|
Thread Starter
#3
|
|
Genuine Crazy Canuck
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hamilton, ON Canada
Posts: 208
Rep Power: 0
|
I found some info on both at their website. Both run at 2.4 GHz, excep the FX has 1 MB vs the 512k in the +3800. Not quite sure what else the difference is though.
__________________
AMD 64 3500+ Winnie | MSI Neo4 Platinum | 1 GB Corsair TwinX1024 PC3200 Dual Channel | ATI RADEON x850XT | 200 GB WD SATA150 8 MB Buffer 7200 RPM | Win XP Pro SP2 || |
|
|
|
|
Dec 6, 2004, 03:50 PM
|
#4 |
|
Delete Me
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 14,648
Rep Power: 0  |
there probably aren't many if any other differences
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 6, 2004, 10:33 PM
|
#5 |
|
I Have lovely Breasts
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In the closet...
Posts: 5,395
Rep Power: 64 |
the FX-53 goes faster. not a huge lot faster, but faster none-the-less. Its the memory bandwidth that goes skyhigh when using dual channel.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 6, 2004, 10:34 PM
|
#6 |
|
DriverHeaven Founder
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 32,480
Rep Power: 179 |
the FX53 is the better chip. the 4000+ is basically the FX53.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 6, 2004, 11:28 PM
|
#7 |
|
Caffeine Machine
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hell is empty. All the devils are here.
Posts: 670
Rep Power: 0 |
fx cpus are multiplier unlocked also.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 7, 2004, 12:20 AM
|
#8 |
|
Delete Me
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 14,648
Rep Power: 0 |
^good point
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 7, 2004, 02:52 AM
|
#9 | |
|
Obvious Closet Brony Pony
|
Neon.... both are dual Channel CPU's... they have 2 memory controllers... the difference is only that of the onchip cache.... and the unlocked multipliers...
the price you pay for FX over a 3800 IS rediculous for the small difference ATM
__________________
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 7, 2004, 03:24 AM
|
#10 |
|
confutatis maledictis
|
Judas is correct
__________________
Digitalis 3.3 Athlon 64 3000 // ASUS K8V SE Deluxe // 1024MB PC3200 (2-2-2-10 1T)
ATI All-In-Wonder 9700 Pro // 20" Dell 2005FPW (DVI) M-Audio Revo 7.1 + Philips Acoustic Edge // Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 320/16 Western Digital WD3200KS + 120/8 Seagate 7200.7 NEC ND-3550A 16x DVD±RW + Lite-On 52x24x CD-RW Antec Sonata case // 480W Antec TruePower personal bests || Aq'3: 46796 | 3D'01: 20461 | 3D'03: 6336 | 3D'05: 2677 | PC'04: 4605 | PC'02: 7691,9092,1250 |
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
