AMD Athlon FX57 CPUs. They still good?

Hendrix89 · 24-06-2006 11:05PM #1

Hi, i found a great offer on eBay for an FX57 CPU - 431euro! (Buy it Now price) and im just wondering this proccessor is still up in the top ranks like it used to be? I am a gamer and apart from my current CPU (3700+) my system is very high end so i just wanna be sure i wont be making a mistake buying this CPU. So are FX57's still hip? Should i go for it? Also there is an FX60 on offer for 543eur so if you think it would be worth the extra 100.... Thanks for any advice.

awhir · 24-06-2006 11:25PM

if you dont mind changing mobo for even cheaper you can get a conroe that would wip the ass of the fx57 but you may have to wait 1-2 months.overclock you 3700+ there a good chip.

Cuddlesworth · 25-06-2006 01:32AM

Yeah a bit of research into overclocking and you will get Fx57 speeds out of your current cpu.

Giblet · 25-06-2006 02:54AM

I surpassed Fx-57 speeds with a 3700

Anti · 25-06-2006 05:37AM

Giblet wrote:

I surpassed Fx-57 speeds with a 3700

does the 3700 have the same or more cache? And are boths chips made on the same manu process. ie 90nm or less/more.

As i had a amd m2500+ running silly speeds, but that dosent mean it was better then a newer chip

Hendrix89 · 25-06-2006 08:00AM

awhir wrote:

if you dont mind changing mobo for even cheaper you can get a conroe that would wip the ass of the fx57 but you may have to wait 1-2 months.overclock you 3700+ there a good chip.

Guys OCing is just not an option for me as i just simply dont feel comfortable doing that. Basically i just wanna know your opinions on the Athlon fx57. Will it last me a long time? Also i dont think i want to go Intel, i like AMD too much.

Anti · 25-06-2006 08:35AM

yeah it will do you fine. its still a very fast cpu for gaming, encoding and all other things. But like said above, wait for the conroe. it will decimate everything and all amd will have, And thats comming from me, a AMD fanboy

sock puppet · 25-06-2006 10:04AM

anti wrote:

yeah it will do you fine. its still a very fast cpu for gaming, encoding and all other things. But like said above, wait for the conroe. it will decimate everything and all amd will have, And thats comming from me, a AMD fanboy

Well we'll just have to see how amd's reverse hyperthreading compares to a conroe in single threaded applications.

Anti · 25-06-2006 10:33AM

yeah it will be very interesting, but i have a feeling intel will come up trumps, for the first time in years

DemonOfTheFall · 25-06-2006 10:57AM

Since there isn't going to be any sign of this reverse hyperthreading thing for a long time I don't think that's a good reason to wait really.

Hendrix, If you want this CPU to last you a long time you should probably buy a dual core one.

Anti · 25-06-2006 11:02AM

yeah and ppl said that about 64bit chips, Coz look at the ammount of software that utilises it, same will go for dual core. most likely

Khannie · 25-06-2006 12:34PM

I'm gonna chime in on the dual core front. All the next generation games will use the 2nd core. I love my dual core to bits tbh. Never going back (not that I've much choice).

christophicus · 25-06-2006 01:29PM

anti wrote:

yeah and ppl said that about 64bit chips, Coz look at the ammount of software that utilises it, same will go for dual core. most likely

Well you see the problem there was hat it was only AMD that was widely Implementing 64 bit technology. The market leader (In terms of market share) was Intel which had not realeased 64 bit processors widely, so for software developers it didnt really make much sense to realease 64 bit software because only a small minority of CPUs could accomidate the 64 bit code. Not to mention that a 64 bit windows had not been realeased so people wpuld have to run a different OS,further marginalising the amount of people willing to use 64 bit software.

Whereas now the two companies have become cosser in terms of market share and both of them Are widely using dual core CPUs.

astrofool · 25-06-2006 02:23PM

The other thing about 64bits, was because it takes a new OS to use it, it was always going to be dependent on Vista for take up, no matter what Xp x64 did.

Giblet · 25-06-2006 06:01PM

anti wrote:

does the 3700 have the same or more cache? And are boths chips made on the same manu process. ie 90nm or less/more.

As i had a amd m2500+ running silly speeds, but that dosent mean it was better then a newer chip

In benchmarking...

Anti · 25-06-2006 10:30PM

thg puts the fx57 in a nice lead, i have no boubt a 500+mhz clock would do alot to make up the difference, but would a x2 3800/4200 make more sense to buy ?

Cuddlesworth · 25-06-2006 11:11PM

Id go with a dual core. Might not see a difference now but you will later.

Hendrix89 · 26-06-2006 01:13PM

Alright guys, just to be clear on something. I really want to stick with 939 setup so my question is will my current system be alright for playing all the upcoming high end games for the next year (or a bit over) nice and stable (as they are now) on full eye-candy with no support issues?? Keeping in mind that i will be upgrading my CPU to either an FX57 or 4800+ (939) within the next week or so. The reason im asking this is cause iv been told on other forums, by some ppl, that in the next few months games wont support or wont run proply on 939s anymore... I hope this is not true.

Cuddlesworth · 26-06-2006 01:45PM

If you do buy a high-end socket 939, the next upgrade will require new ram, a new motherboard and a new cpu due to socket 939 being phased out. It will still play games in the next year though, as long as you have a pci-express board.

EWheelChair · 26-06-2006 03:44PM

It's clear that you're buying the chip anyway, it'll be fine.. get it.

AMD Athlon FX57 CPUs. They still good?

Comments