AMD 64 FX -- quesion

Sorry this kinda seems like a newb question...

What's the difference, technically between the athlon 64 and athlon 64 FX.
I know the FX are designed for gaming... but what's different, what makes em better for games?

Nothing, they use the same exact core, only its cherry picked, thus it usually overclocks higher than regular a64s and they have multiplier up to x25.
Other than that its the same as a64 3700+ and 4000+ (other a64s are Venices which have half the cache)

Yes, all San Diegos come off the same assembly line. They're individually tested to determine which ones clock the best; the top dogs are labelled FX-55, and the least performing (But still acceptable) labelled 3700+. Thus, FXs overclock better.
Now whether your getting your money's worth from an FX is a different topic altogether.

Thanks Guys

You guys know if there will be any X2 FX?

IWasHungry said:

Yes, all San Diegos come off the same assembly line. They're individually tested to determine which ones clock the best; the top dogs are labelled FX-55, and the least performing (But still acceptable) labelled 3700+.

Click to expand...

Or -57 .

OkydOky said:

Thanks Guys

You guys know if there will be any X2 FX?

Click to expand...

Nope. X2 stays dual core, FX stays single core.

The general advice of most members on this forum is to get the 3700+. it has VERY close overclocks to what the 4000+ can get, and can get within range of an FX. Look at it like this: you have $1000 budget. An FX-57 is also ~$1000. Now you have a great CPU operating at 2.8GHz, maybe you can hit 3.0 with a cheap cooling solution. However, if you got a 3700 for $272 (wow, those have dropped a ton...I payed exactly that much for my 3500 NC!), you now have $700 to spend on cooling, RAM, PSU, etc, and so you probably can also get that CPU to 2.8-3.0GHz, along with a ton of other really nice components for your rig which you wouldn't have had before, resulting in a better overall system.