New FX-60

[myrgo_31]

I guess the new Socket 939 FX-60 processor is suppost to be released January 10 of next year. It will be a dual-core chip, each at 2.6 Ghz.

[rspassey]

Hehe, this fails without a link...(jk jk)http://www.theinq.com/?article=28083

You give up about 200MHz over a single core, but that small a loss is well worth the added second core.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=27644

Preliminary reports are that it will be a decent overclocker, early samples went to almost 3GHz on air, with little or no tweaking. If you couple it with the new NVidia 7800/512 cards, you will be easily able to break the 15K barrier in 3DMark05.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=27718

[aradon]

Daim, what happened to the FX-59 i heard about? they decide to make it an even number instead :S
Hope this drives the price of the FX-57 down, coz then ill get that instead of the FX-55 MWUAHAHAHAHA *cough*

[rspassey]

Besides the 200MHz difference between the 55 and 57, there is no thing different between the two Sandiego Core. You could easily get a 55 and OC it to stock 57 speeds, and probably bump up the FSB by doing so. I think I will be building a new computer in 1.5 years, gotta wait to see if the FX60 is toped by anything else, it is virutally dual FX55s.... pretty sweet stuff especialy if gaming starts to take more advantage of dual cores..

[David M]

My next computer will be a dual core, but not for another year and only if software manufacturers start writing software for the dual cores. I am waiting for the next generation of AMD's which will use DDR3. The 939 sockets will be replaced by the next gen CPU's

I doubt the dual core will easily reach 15,000 in 3DMark05. Look at my specs with an overclocked FX-57 at 3.1GHz and dual 7800GTX's I can't even break 13,000. There is no advantage to running 3DMark05 with a dual core versus a single core.

I sorta doubt AMD will manufacture an FX-59 (single core, 3.0GHz) because for roughly the same price as a dual core, most everyone is going to choose the dual core. Just a guess.

[enhanced08]

Can't wait for this! I have wanted an FX since the day they came out but when I heard about dual cores I couldn't decide which to go with. Now I know! dual core FX!! O yeah!

[MakeYourslf2012]

can anyone take a stab at the price?

i'm guessing >$1,000 easily.

[rspassey]

Your guess is as good as mine to the cost, the sad thing is, I think the cost is worth it for around 1k or 1.2k.. I mean if you break that down to a day by day price, you are looking at around 3$ per day for a year, and I certainly would get more than 3$ out of a dual core FX per day.... Just my two cents..

[MakeYourslf2012]

That is a good way of looking at it, I could use that arguement next time i upgrade

[myrgo_31]

so im a little lost here:

the FX-53 was renamed the 4000+?... why was this renamed if this is true?

[786ARS]

no, the 53 is like a 4000, but with a completely unlocked multiplier

[David M]

Careful, some of the older FX-53's have 940 pins and some have 939 pins. Most now are 939 They are identical except the 939 does not require registered RAM. The L2 cache size for the 940 is 1MB vs 512 for the 939 and the data bandwidth for the 940 is 12.8 GB/sec vs 14.2 GB/sec for the 939.