which cpu?

see if you can pick up an fx55 90 nm instead , or maybe an fx 53 . The latest Sandies and Venices arent overclocking that great. Check out the venice and sandiego ocing threads over at XS .
 
humm a little expensive there ?

It seems to me that he would have to pay the double amount of money for a FX then for a sandiego and like he said he isnt allowed to spend so much money on his parts.
 
FX is more expensive than normal sandiego cores becoz of the unlocked multi. Lately the sandiegos and venices havent given much yield , some even poorer than a good winchester.

Dual cores dont make ne sense unless he is heavy into multi tasking.

But right now if you wanna have a dual core an intel 955 chipset with an intel 8xx proc and watercooling will be a more viable option. On water , intels usually oc pretty nicely . And costwise are less than AMDs .
 
|3ourne said:
FX is more expensive than normal sandiego cores becoz of the unlocked multi. Lately the sandiegos and venices havent given much yield , some even poorer than a good winchester.

Dual cores dont make ne sense unless he is heavy into multi tasking.

But right now if you wanna have a dual core an intel 955 chipset with an intel 8xx proc and watercooling will be a more viable option. On water , intels usually oc pretty nicely . And costwise are less than AMDs .

Yeah but did you see that he told us that he isnt allowed to spend that much money on a new Processor ?

Otherwise i would say you are right, if you have the money buy a FX (Even though i kinda like the X2 :P ) and you are good.

But ok its your decision Waffles.
 
|3ourne said:
FX is more expensive than normal sandiego cores becoz of the unlocked multi. Lately the sandiegos and venices havent given much yield , some even poorer than a good winchester.

Dual cores dont make ne sense unless he is heavy into multi tasking.

But right now if you wanna have a dual core an intel 955 chipset with an intel 8xx proc and watercooling will be a more viable option. On water , intels usually oc pretty nicely . And costwise are less than AMDs .

i'd have to sell my current computer to get an fx... didn't wanna but i guess i might :(
 
name='Waffles' said:
i'd have to sell my current computer to get an fx... didn't wanna but i guess i might :(

Well I dunno if I would do that if I were you. I don't think it'll be worth it. |3ourne knows a lot but he's always trying to get me to spend my money ;)
 
name='kempez815' said:
Well I dunno if I would do that if I were you. I don't think it'll be worth it. |3ourne knows a lot but he's always trying to get me to spend my money ;)

Not my fault if u buy all the wrong stuff all the time !!!!!

:D

but honestly , getting an FX is only recommended if your an ardent overclocker and have at least water cooling or a single phase. Thats when FX procs truly shine. Otherwise , a 3700+ or a 4000+ works as well. Just pair it with some Geil Ultra X or Gskill GH series BH5 ram and enjoy the high multi with around 250 mhz on ram with 2-2-2-5 timings which is almost if not faster than TCCD at about 300 mhz.

Rule of the thumb is tccd at 300 mhz ~ bh5 at 260-265 mhz . And for gaming lower timings are always faster than higher clock speeds.
 
|3ourne said:
Not my fault if u buy all the wrong stuff all the time !!!!!

:D

but honestly , getting an FX is only recommended if your an ardent overclocker and have at least water cooling or a single phase. Thats when FX procs truly shine. Otherwise , a 3700+ or a 4000+ works as well. Just pair it with some Geil Ultra X or Gskill GH series BH5 ram and enjoy the high multi with around 250 mhz on ram with 2-2-2-5 timings which is almost if not faster than TCCD at about 300 mhz.

Rule of the thumb is tccd at 300 mhz ~ bh5 at 260-265 mhz . And for gaming lower timings are always faster than higher clock speeds.

i have 1 gb of gh so i'm set there :D i guess i'll need a dfi to use it tho
 
Back
Top