FX-57 Info!!

[sandybeach]

Athlon 64 FX-57

Notice the lack of an Athlon 64 FX version of AMD’s dual-core strategy. For the time being, it’s recognized that games are exclusively written for single-threaded operation and as such run better on single-threaded processors at elevated frequencies. Thus, the FX series marches on at 2.6GHz for now. There is one more model projected for a late June release, though. The Athlon 64 FX-57 at 2.8GHz will do battle, presumably, with Intel’s Extreme Edition. It’ll be a revision E chip, at a newly high price of roughly $900, making it harder to criticize Intel’s pricing schedule.

According to documents from AMD, that’ll be the first time an FX model persists, as there are plans to keep the FX-55 in production to meet perceived demand. Both chips target gamers exclusively, pandering to view that AMD is better at listening to the enthusiast community. How long the FX series lasts after the FX-57, however, is anyone’s guess at this point.

my fav line

There is one more model projected for a late June release, though. The Athlon 64 FX-57 at 2.8GHz will do battle, presumably, with Intel’s Extreme Edition. It’ll be a revision E chip, at a newly high price of roughly $900, making it harder to criticize Intel’s pricing schedule.

[perkam]

as there are plans to keep the FX-55 in production to meet perceived demand.

Uhhh...ppl need to stop buying FX-55s

And its $900 too, how can something that expensive, have that much demand ??? And then ppl complain that EEs are expensive omg . Sales ratio is prolly 2 55s to one EE and ppl dont stop buying they basically wont see an FX-57 from what I understand.

Perkam

[HARDCORECLOCKER]

my fav line

Late of June? How do the clocks are ticking there? Was suspected for mid April.......... - damn, really no fun to wait that long

[Major]

All of the FX series have been too rich for my blood, that goes for the EE too.

I'll settle on a San Diego running at 3ghz for $340

[Achilles17]

How is $900 a new high anyway, I remember FX-55's being that much when they were released, and then some. Hell, theyre still like $800-850. And I agree, the cost of the FX/EE series outweigh the benefits. Of course, thats only for us whose wallet isnt overflowing...

[cpulloverclock]

Late of June? How do the clocks are ticking there? Was suspected for mid April.......... - damn, really no fun to wait that long

june, thus july in ur hands

[NeGe0]

Intel EE's used to be $1000...so $900 is still cheaper and you get better performance. So I definitly think it would be worth the $900.

[[XC] leviathan18]

last one was 1200$

[k|ngp|n]

god this smiley kills me.....June simply will not do.

[BLHealthy4life]

Whoa..sure am glad I still have my FX55

Wonder which to get first..R520 or FX57...hmm....

[Geforce4ti4200]

All of the FX series have been too rich for my blood, that goes for the EE too.

I'll settle on a San Diego running at 3ghz for $340

not on air cooling.


http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ad.php?t=60153

He hit 2.72 on air, more volts only gained him another 30MHz lol they dont care for volts! still 2.72 prime stable at 1.4v is not bad, you could probably run 3dmark at 2.8GHz at 1.5v or so and have suicide screenshot at 2.9 or even 3GHz. This is almost as good as a $900 fx55(130nm back then) but faster than 130nm fx55 clock for clock. He even said sell your fx55's before they take a nosedive in price!


"Intel EE's used to be $1000...so $900 is still cheaper and you get better performance. So I definitly think it would be worth the $900."


fx55 outsold the p4ee more like 5 to 1, I just dont see anyone with a p4ee but I know many who own a fx53/55


"Whoa..sure am glad I still have my FX55"


ebay it asap!!!!!!!!

[HARDCORECLOCKER]

Why can't new hardware only one time be released earlier than suspected?

Would be really nice to see that at least once in my life.....

[Perc]

yeah this is bad news for us FX-53 owners! as far as the 900 dollar price tag thats nothing new all the FX chips started off at about 900 bucks anyways. think about the peeps who bought the FX-51's they paid the same 900 that the FX-53 and FX-55 peeps did. what burns my arse is i rember reading an article that said AMD wasnt going to put out the older model FX chips once a newer line of FX chips got released. that was suposed to help the FX chips hold thier value. so much for that uh? time to sell the 53 before its worth about as much as a 2600 barton!!


peace perc,

[Thorry]

Whoa..sure am glad I still have my FX55

Wonder which to get first..R520 or FX57...hmm....

R507

[iboomalot]

Why can't new hardware only one time be released earlier than suspected?

Would be really nice to see that at least once in my life.....

amd X2 seems to be an early release

[mion]

oh wel 900$ it's worth it

I don't think so, but that's me

[Geforce4ti4200]

"time to sell the 53 before its worth about as much as a 2600 barton!!"


I dont think its gonna drop to $100 so soon but sell it NOW and get a 3700+ Venice, itll be faster and cheaper than what fx53s go for currently

[sandybeach]

I dont think its gonna drop to $100 so soon but sell it NOW and get a 3700+ Venice, itll be faster and cheaper than what fx53s go for currently

4,167 posts and these asumptions/predictions still are flying high "LOL"

You really think a 512k cache chip will topple a highend 1meg cache chip??

Have "YOU" personaly ever ran a 939/940 1meg cache chip?? The 512k chips ever at 2.8ghz are slow as hell once you've sat on a fx 1meg chip at the same clocks.

Now a San Diego, will prob. be cheaper and a better clocker for the $$ with some luck, but do not say a 512k chip can run with a 1meg chip its jsut not happening.

512k chips are cheap POS chips brought out for the guys who can't afford quality.

Much as a Toyota is there for the guys that can't afford a Lexas.

[NiCKE^]

4,167 posts and these asumptions/predictions still are flying high "LOL"

You really think a 512k cache chip will topple a highend 1meg cache chip??

Have "YOU" personaly ever ran a 939/940 1meg cache chip?? The 512k chips ever at 2.8ghz are slow as hell once you've sat on a fx 1meg chip at the same clocks.

Now a San Diego, will prob. be cheaper and a better clocker for the $$ with some luck, but do not say a 512k chip can run with a 1meg chip its jsut not happening.

512k chips are cheap POS chips brought out for the guys who can't afford quality.

Much as a Toyota is there for the guys that can't afford a Lexas.

And Lexas (Do you mean Lexus) is there for the peoples who cant afford a Aston Martin DB* :P

[sandybeach]

He said VENICE would be better than fx53 "FASTER" i said SanDegio might, but no way a 512k chip!

EDIT: calm down
-saaya

[Formann]

Intel EE's used to be $1000...so $900 is still cheaper and you get better performance. So I definitly think it would be worth the $900.

Worth it? Not even CLOSE.

But worth it over the EE .. definitely

[perkam]

4,167 posts and these asumptions/predictions still are flying high "LOL"

You really think a 512k cache chip will topple a highend 1meg cache chip??

Have "YOU" personaly ever ran a 939/940 1meg cache chip?? The 512k chips ever at 2.8ghz are slow as hell once you've sat on a fx 1meg chip at the same clocks.

Now a San Diego, will prob. be cheaper and a better clocker for the $$ with some luck, but do not say a 512k chip can run with a 1meg chip its jsut not happening.

PERFECT example of a post the mods would LOVE to see

Criticizing someone who has 4k posts shouldnt be taken too lightly, seeing as how u dont even have 400 posts....not that posts matter here, there are XIPs with less than 100 posts, but the XIPs know their stuff. But if Gf4 has his days of speculative language, he also as much knowledge of overclocking and tweaking as many of the masters here, he just presents it in his own way. As for cache, seen how many times a Winnie clobbers a 2meg Prescott ??? The point of the Sandiego/Venice is that their price/performance is believed to be ideal if the only way u can go FX is if you need to take a second mortgage on the house.

And getting an FX doesnt automatically make u xtreme, u can get them stock with a 6800 Ultra SLI system from Alienware if you're rich enough, but that has never been a requirement here at XS, hence making this comment VERY inappropriate:

512k chips are cheap POS chips brought out for the guys who can't afford quality.

Please do try to read your post twice to confirm if what you're right is contributing to the thread or not, otherwise dont post.

...Getting back on topic, my original point was...not that $900 is expensive, but if AMD sees ongoing demand for them, it will NOT have an incentive to spend money on changing its entire manufacturing process for a 90nm FX for such an exclusive market.

Perkam

[$0m#0n#]

He said VENICE would be better than fx53 "FASTER" i said SanDegio might, but no way a 512k chip, lol

Can you guys read or what?

I wanna c some 3000+

[Chr0n1c]

"time to sell the 53 before its worth about as much as a 2600 barton!!"


I dont think its gonna drop to $100 so soon but sell it NOW and get a 3700+ Venice, itll be faster and cheaper than what fx53s go for currently

Might wanna think that one thru.

[YanBooth]

I wish it would be 90nm, with 2mb's of cache, then it would be really great.
I guess I would go for it anyhow, get the 3500+ Venice in wait for it...

Any thoughts?

Yan