AMD Athlon64 4200+ TEST First Look

**STEvil** · 03-07-2005, 08:24 PM

nobody has seen a 90nm FX55 yet... just lots of talk when the supply dried up.

**Spion** · 03-07-2005, 09:05 PM

wow... looks to be a very good chip. i know what im getting in my new system at the end of summer

**OC Detective** · 03-07-2005, 10:17 PM

Monarch is no longer showing a listing of any FX55 (not even saying out of stock ETA etc)! Something is about to happen.......lol

**Ackbar** · 03-07-2005, 10:47 PM

Originally Posted by OC Detective

Monarch is no longer showing a listing of any FX55 (not even saying out of stock ETA etc)! Something is about to happen.......lol

Also note that Monarch preemptively lowered the price of 3800+ and 4000+ CPUs... a release is imminent. Although... I'm just not sure what the release will be of yet at this point.

**Ratax** · 03-08-2005, 04:07 AM

Originally Posted by Ackbar

Also note that Monarch preemptively lowered the price of 3800+ and 4000+ CPUs...

Not monarch.... AMD lowered 3800+ and 4000+ prices for a limited time.

**Ackbar** · 03-08-2005, 05:23 AM

Originally Posted by Ratax

Not monarch.... AMD lowered 3800+ and 4000+ prices for a limited time.

How can you be arguing with me when they say they lowered their price on their website? LOL I'm sure they lowered as a response to new prices from AMD, but that doesn't change the fact that they lowered them in the first place which was all that I was saying. Note that Monarch lowering their prices is not mutually exclusive to AMD doing so.

**_Eduard_** · 03-08-2005, 05:32 AM

I hope this will push down the prices of the other FX chips, i mean the FX-51 still is 750 euro here

**HARDCORECLOCKER** · 03-08-2005, 06:25 AM

Originally Posted by _Eduard_

I hope this will push down the prices of the other FX chips, i mean the FX-51 still is 750 euro here

Hm - seems to be a really good shop keeper then.........

**Chris85** · 03-08-2005, 06:27 AM

Originally Posted by _Eduard_

I hope this will push down the prices of the other FX chips, i mean the FX-51 still is 750 euro here

Prolly the prices will stay the same here, cause they are no longer made, so no need to lower the prices (Or to buy them for that case

)

I wonder what chip will appear, if AMD speeds everything up, there might not come an FX-55 .09nm right?

**isp** · 03-08-2005, 07:23 AM

The store prices might not go down that much, but you can be sure guys will probably be selling their FX55s etc to recoup the high costs of being an early adopter of the FX57. Might be best to get one that way. :thumbsup:

**HARDCORECLOCKER** · 03-08-2005, 07:40 AM

Originally Posted by isp

The store prices might not go down that much, but you can be sure guys will probably be selling their FX55s etc to recoup the high costs of being an early adopter of the FX57. Might be best to get one that way. :thumbsup:

You can be sure of that - wait a while till FX-57 will be released and You can buy mine......

**I(illa Bee** · 03-08-2005, 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by ozzimark

why would amd suddenly start locking the downward multi's on their chips? i think it's still unlocked below stock for cool&quiet to work

The only reason the downward multiplyers were unlocked was for "Cool and quite" Right? Everything i have read was in C&Q, is it dosnt work too well, and there no point to use it, as most A64s run pretty cool at full clocks, (stock speed) so why use it? Mabey AMD is going to drop cool and quite, thus not needing any multiplyer expect the stock one.

jsut a shot in the dark...

the 4200+ looks sweet... ohh my 3800+ seems so week... (it was free, AMD RMAed it to me to replace a 3500+ 90nm, i still feel ripped) ohh well...

**ozzimark** · 03-08-2005, 08:28 AM

yeah, i doubt they'd drop that though.. i know i use a form of it. it's nice to be able to have a 28c idle sometimes

(though that temp is most likely off as the bios reports 38c no matter what the clock/voltage/air temp is)

though, i'm beginning to think that the turion will be a much 'better' chip than these high end a64's purely because they'll be a lot cheaper and still overclock like mad.

**~~terrace215~~** · 03-08-2005, 10:24 AM

Originally Posted by I(illa Bee

Everything i have read was in C&Q, is it dosnt work too well, and there no point to use it, as most A64s run pretty cool at full clocks, (stock speed) so why use it? Mabey AMD is going to drop cool and quite, thus not needing any multiplyer expect the stock one.

Everything you have read is wrong, then.

C&Q works very well, and far from dropping it, it is being enhanced. It makes a big difference when idling/running low-stress applications (think: Word).

**I(illa Bee** · 03-08-2005, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by terrace215

Everything you have read is wrong, then.

C&Q works very well, and far from dropping it, it is being enhanced. It makes a big difference when idling/running low-stress applications (think: Word).

Hmm thats cool, i dont use C&Q my self as overclcoking with it is no good, but well have to see, if a fully locked core comess out then i would have to say C&Q probely wont work correctly lol

**saaya** · 03-08-2005, 12:03 PM

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ad.php?t=55393

more fx57 infos! looks like it might come soon but in q2, so amd will release the 4200+ before the fx57! thats the first time they dont do a double release like they did with all former fx chips (55 4000 53 3800 ...)

**~~terrace215~~** · 03-08-2005, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by saaya

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ad.php?t=55393

more fx57 infos! looks like it might come soon but in q2, so amd will release the 4200+ before the fx57! thats the first time they dont do a double release like they did with all former fx chips (55 4000 53 3800 ...)

That will be very odd, to not release them in a pair.

Just read the link... ehhh. Xbit quoting "some sources" which are obviously confused.

More of that vr-zone error spreading around, I think.

There is no way they release a 4400+ in Q2. That would be the FX-57 equivalent, requiring an FX-59 on the market. Makes no sense at all.

Given that error, one doubts the rest of it.

If the pictured part here was an engineering sample, Q2 (April, say) may actually be the likely launch for the 4200+ (and probably also the FX-57 at the same time.)

**thomasxstewart** · 03-08-2005, 04:55 PM

:banana4: WOW, Well I'm sure everybody noticed that amd 64 4200+ was not listed as such, it is listed in post as 2200+. xsx states bios carries on error to display wrong reading, if I read that post correctly. However, when bios gives lower read out than actual unit its because something is very wrong, usually clock rate is set way too low.(as it won;t display number above actual processor model, that & only lower numbers display). Are you sure thats really true test read out & not some "imaginative" forward looking towards amd 64 4200+. Or that what you had is not working correctly, however its frequency is at correct ~reading, so whats explanation, make bios read 4200+ if it is one or maybe you got hucked too. I think you just cann't trust entire test.
Signed:Physician Thomas Stewart Von Drashek M.

D.

**andyhuang0308** · 03-08-2005, 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by thomasxstewart

:banana4: WOW, Well I'm sure everybody noticed that amd 64 4200+ was not listed as such, it is listed in post as 2200+. xsx states bios carries on error to display wrong reading, if I read that post correctly. However, when bios gives lower read out than actual unit its because something is very wrong, usually clock rate is set way too low.(as it won;t display number above actual processor model, that & only lower numbers display). Are you sure thats really true test read out & not some "imaginative" forward looking towards amd 64 4200+. Or that what you had is not working correctly, however its frequency is at correct ~reading, so whats explanation, make bios read 4200+ if it is one or maybe you got hucked too. I think you just cann't trust entire test.
Signed:Physician Thomas Stewart Von Drashek M.

D.

Dear all:
the whole test was done on a sample MB, which Bios version was not even over 1.XX yet, there was no options in bios that he can adjust for OC. The CPU fan used in the test was for P4 3.0EG (Sanyo Denki, 0.44A) . All I know is that the CPU stays at very low temperature during the whole test. I'm just happen to be a person who knows the tester. BTW, he just had it on hand for very short time, that's another reason why no other test done. Please just read the information but don't.... I hope you guys can realise it. Thanks

**Dumo** · 03-08-2005, 05:35 PM

@Andy.....Thanks for the clarification and welcome to XS Thomasxstewart and Andyhuang0308

Now, when is the ETA for this cpu?

**Tim** · 03-08-2005, 09:42 PM

Originally Posted by Dumo

@Andy.....Thanks for the clarification and welcome to XS Thomasxstewart and Andyhuang0308

Now, when is the ETA for this cpu?

Yes I would love to have an ETA

**andyhuang0308** · 03-08-2005, 10:25 PM

In fact, when he 1st time got that CPU on hand, the tester had no idea what he had.... lol it's because of the strange CPU-Z that made him want to ask sxs122 for help.... XD
So an ETA?.... I will have to say, sorry O_Q

**Dumo** · 03-08-2005, 11:14 PM

Well, at least if 1 already out then 1k more on the way

**Rabbi_NZ** · 03-08-2005, 11:41 PM

Originally Posted by VVJ

sxs112, do you know how many physical cores does your Athlon64 have? By the way, you may use Central Brain Identifier tool to get much more specific information on your AMD processor. I’ve just added for you an option to retrieve a maximum case temperature directly from the processor. Probably, you have already known that this feature was implemented in all D0 and higher AMD64 processors and it represents the highest die temperature. Here’s the link http://cbid.amdclub.ru/files/cbid74t.zip

That version says my Mobile 754 has SSE2... is that right?

**zA.Gosu** · 03-09-2005, 12:35 AM

Yeah, a64 has sse2

Thread: AMD Athlon64 4200+ TEST First Look

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Rate This Thread

Display

Bios states unit is 2200+, so its' really not right.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions