Printable View
I found this site http://www.pcpop.com/doc/0/138/138222.shtml
There are few benchmarks, but what wonders me is date of package on FX!
According to pictures it was packed end of January 2006!
One more thing is that gains in sisoft CPU Arthmetic are bigger than from 200MHz gap betwen FX-60 and FX62, so it looks that AM2 is a little tweaked core ;)
Mayby users of AM2 systems may comment this anomaly :confused:
nah, i'd attribute that extra bit of performance to the higher bandwidth ddr2 :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
seems bout right to me ))
the 1m is disappointing - not even sub 30s on stock :(
Numbers aren't worth the upgrade.(from 939)
one thing to keep in mind is that the ram was at 4-5-5.. at 312mhz. those timings CAN'T be good for latency :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by eBoy0
Poor scoore in 3d marks :S even dothan can beat this scoore
:( $1200 is a bit much for that...either something is wrong, or AMD is taking a page out of Intel's play book(they'll still pay for it mantra)
nice find
it sounds like a old fx-62 chip that they had made back then , i am curious why they used 333mhz ddr2 memory on it
the new fx-62 is suppose to be 89watts , lets hope that we will see a improvement on it
it won't be as long as it has been , the 23rd will be here in no time
Makes perfect sense. Think back to X2s. They came out distinctly after San Diego and Venice, and yet the first X2s were like 0513 and 0517.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
Think about FX60, when they came out we were seeing 0548 Opterons, yet the FX60s were 0536. AMD starts producing these things many weeks before they are formally released.
weird thing stock volts for a fx-62 are 1.4v.
also nda expires on the 23rd
no fx-62 stock volt is 1.4v not more not lessQuote:
Originally Posted by Willis
It's still on the 90 nm process, so why should voltages be lower?
If AMD raised stock volts it's their way of saying not enough chips could do 2.8 Ghz, that's no good. I know plenty of good Opties can do 2.8 GHz on 1.31 volts.
I'm curious about how hot 2.8 Ghz with 1.40 volts is going to get on the stock cooler. Trust me even with the FX/Opty heatsink it will get HOT.
stock voltage for amd's dual cores has always been 1.3/1.35v.. until nowQuote:
Originally Posted by krylon
This is wired, if FX-60 2.6GHz 1.35V have 110W TDP, how on earth FX-62 2.8GHz 1.4V can be 89W TDP??
Last revision of AM2 ENG sample processors was spreaded to partners in march if i remember correctly, so i'm curious how production FX-62 can be 0604??
PS. Anyone notice that on second page there is picture of socet M2 !! instead of AM2?? mayby they are using older (cancelled) components??
why is stock volts 1.4v....and the numbers even though they are stock on there with probably no tweaking dont look so hot..
every AM2 board i've seen so far has just M2 written on the socket :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzimark
So what is this?? http://hardwarezone.com/articles/vie...6&id=1893&pg=2
I know that older boards was labeled M2, but then AMD renamed socket for AM2, so every new board should be labeled AM2 on socket.
But if companies buy a lot of M2 labeled sockets I could be wrong ;)
1) Stock Voltage is High
2) Latency is horrible
3) And is it just me or is this number unusually low? http://img2.pcpop.com/ArticleImages/.../000277506.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
It is faster clock for clock than FX-60 and 4800+ S939 part.
Simply divide FX60 scores by 26 and multiply result by 28 :)
Diference is small, around 161MIPS and 191MFLOPS:stick:
guess i didn't look hard enough :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
0513 and 0517 are early, but AFI has a 0512 :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Absolute_0
ADBHE 0512 UPAW 4200+
I want to see a real review :(
-k0nsl
Wait 3 days ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by k0nsl