AMD Athlon 64 FX-60

• Average user rating: 3.5 stars out of 16 reviews
• My rating: 0 stars

• 1
• 2
• next

• Sort by: Most helpful Highest rating Lowest rating Most recent

• 8 stars

  Why AMD is better than intel

  by Thefumigator on January 13, 2006

  Pros: two cores, 2MB of caché (1MB for each core), 2,6Ghz each core.

  Cons: Price not up to what AMD lovers are used to.

  Summary: FX60: Estimated performance of each core alone is similar to an Intel P4 3.6 to 4Ghz or even more depending on application. Remember that buying an FX60 you're ...

  Read more

  Summary: FX60: Estimated performance of each core alone is similar to an Intel P4 3.6 to 4Ghz or even more depending on application. Remember that buying an FX60 you're buying two of those cores.
  
  Why I say AMD is better than intel?
  
  Last real good thing Intel invented was hyper threading. Was Prescott a good invention? yea, for some who wanted their computer to act as a heater in winter I would say yes. have you ever "touched" a 3.6Ghz Prescott processor running? Oh god... I don't recommend anyone going h***.
  
  For those who don't know, Hyper threading enables the processor to execute two processes at the same time at the cost of performance hit (let's say in English, the processor divides itself in two but will never be as good as two cores or dual processor). Also you need an operative system compatible with multiprocessor. Well, that's windows 2000, XP, Linux, Windows NT, etc (not windows 3.11/95/98/Me)
  
  What did AMD invented or (innovated) that makes it much better for me? Why AMD is better to me?
  
  1)
  AMD loves the customer. The customer demands and AMD gives (or at least tries). Intel gives and customers have to take it. But in this world, techno heads aren't very common, they just buy a grey box that has an Intel inside sticker on it. Who of those cares anyway? Intel boxes run very well after all, for office and even gaming. And with such huge deals that Intel has with Dell and others, price is also normal to good. Despite that, AMD wins in price performance Ratio. And almost every time by a medium to big margin. A cause Intel prices went down was thanks to AMD. Anyone knows that.
  
  2) Hyper transport, an open technology that interconnects two pieces of electronic.
  OPEN = anyone can implement it. Open, as in Linux when you say open source, means anyone can see how it works. Remember the first PC? Who invented it? IBM and it was an open technology, anyone sine then could start manufacturing an IBM PC compatible. Thatâ??s the difference between PCs and macs.
  If NVIDIA (or ATI) wanted their video cards processor to be connected in between each other they can use hyper transport if they want to. Today, Hyper transport is used for connecting two or more AMD processors together without using a chip in between, connecting AMD processor with Northbridge, or even connecting Southbridge to Northbridge as NVIDIA did with their motherboard chipsets, even those for Intel motherboards. Intel doesn't have any way of interconnecting 2 processors together, that's why an Intel 915 motherboard doesn't work with Intel dual core processor, and made anyone who bought an *BRAND NEW* 915 motherboard to change it. How many years old is the AMD socket A? 5 years? And still doing well... Now, for its technological limit, we have to move from socket A to another one. That reminds me to the first Pentium 4 disaster, the 423 socket that didn't last too long.
  
  3)On Die memory controller. The memory controller resides *inside* the processor core. Each AMD processor controls its own RAM memory. In traditional PCs, the Northbridge controls the RAM memory, and the Northbridge connects that RAM to the processor. AMD multiprocessor is more effective than Intel ones because each processor has its own RAM memory attached. Intel multiprocessor have to rely on the Northbridge. The only bad thing about the on die mem controller thing is that AMD will have to change socket every time the memory technology is changed. Letâ??s say, AMD will release a new socket called M2 in Quarter 2 of 2006. The only difference between M2 and 939 will be that the new socket will support processors for DDR2 memory instead of normal DDR. AMD will surely still sell old socket 939 "as market demands". But if you think that this somehow is like AMD has taken the intel path of making customer change their motherboard every time, I would say that it was a sacrifice made for a life of advantages. Starting by the fact that this technology made the AMD Opteron to surpass Xeon. And don't tell me you didn't know that because we all saw it a few months ago on CNN.
  
  4)64Bit
  When AMD announced and released the 64 bit technology, plus the points 2 and 3, Intel spokesman said that AMD wasn't going the right path. Today all pentiums are 64 bit, and I'm not mentioning the "Itanic" disaster. And of course, Intel owners had to change its motherboard if they wanted to have 64bit. Would be too long to describe 64bit benefits but just keep in mind that a 32 bit machine canâ??t assign more than 4gigs of RAM, and servers need more than that. Also, 64 bit calculations could be necessary for high precision tasks as could be 3D design or science applications. A 32 bit machine can do 64 bit calculations in 9 cycles or so, and a 64 bit machine can do the same job in less time, lets say 3 cycles I think.
  
  5)NXBit,
  No Execute bit, another of the AMD steps, allows a Nxbit enabled operative system (like windows XP SP2) to use it and somewhat have indirect protection in the PC from worms or programs that would want to run without owners knowledge. Well, not the best thing on earth but its good to know that its there.
  
  6) Cool n Quiet.
  AMD Processors Slows down when is not in use, eating less power juice. Actually, any processor will eat less power juice when is not in use, but this time it has a much wider impact with cool n quiet. From 75 watts(full throttle) to 22 watts(idle). Of course you will need a cool and quiet motherboard, and you will have to Install the driver in windows.
  
  Well enough said, go for what you think is the best. I already made my decision.

  Show less

  21 out of 21 users found this user opinion helpful.

• 10 stars

  Intel=great, try the "Itanic" versions.

  by fos_maj947 on January 12, 2006

  Pros: AMD "performs" and "works" better than Intel

  Cons: AMD has begun to charge prices approaching Intel

  Summary: Intel could not make either of their first Italium processors work well, so Intel used AMD's architecture.
  I used Intel Pentium 4's until I began using an entry
  ...

  Read more

  Summary: Intel could not make either of their first Italium processors work well, so Intel used AMD's architecture.
  I used Intel Pentium 4's until I began using an entry level AMD. It just "worked better", and so has every AMD system built by me since.
  Intel is not a bad processor, but AMD performs better on my desktops.

  Show less

  6 out of 7 users found this user opinion helpful.

• 9 stars

  Value+Power=AMD

  by B3NI4MIN0.80 on January 11, 2006

  Pros: Dual Core 64bit - 2mb cache

  Cons: "Pioneer" of what's to come - Socket 939??

  Summary: As an ex Intel user, I am glad that the PC's I work with today use AMD processors. Without AMD, we'd still be running our computers at 166MHz ...

  Read more

  Summary: As an ex Intel user, I am glad that the PC's I work with today use AMD processors. Without AMD, we'd still be running our computers at 166MHz with a 33MHz Front Side Bus. This Athlon 64 has awesome specs... the dual core makes it even better by ending the generation of only one thread, the price is reasonable for that much power.. but it's too early to get one if AMD is planning on converting everything to socket 940. In any case, if there is an emergency where you need a dual core processor immediately I highly recommend AMD, the advanced specs tell the whole story. And don't judge a company by its new logo, judge the company by the products they make and the reputation they have.

  Show less

  2 out of 2 users found this user opinion helpful.

• 9 stars

  We have an Intel Fan Girl

  by agentsanderson on January 11, 2006

  Pros: Well its fast for gaming and everything else

  Cons: Price is too high, not that much difference from 4800 x2

  Summary: Well, here we go again, the first reviewer is obviously an Intel kid. One of those rich kiddos who doesnt inderstand value. The bottom line is that even though the ...

  Read more

  Summary: Well, here we go again, the first reviewer is obviously an Intel kid. One of those rich kiddos who doesnt inderstand value. The bottom line is that even though the FX-60 seems powerfull the price is too expensive. But I have to correct the Intel kis who said AMD is only for gaming. First of all high end gaming is the most taxing thing for a processor. So obviously if Amd always beats Intel in gaming, then of course its going to beat Intel in other programs that require less processer value. Amd offers valuable processors, like the 64 3000, 3200, 3500, and 3800, which are cheaper than their intel counterparts. ANd the funny thing is that a 3500 beats the intel dual core Extreme edition in some programs. The fact is that Amd offers cheaper prcessors that outperform Intels expensive processors. ANd if you are budget consious, then of course you would go with amd (more power for less). And who cares if apple is going to intel. Apple is for rich uptight people who live in some rich suburbs. Since they are the only ones that can afford apples high prices, Apples look great, but the compatability, and lack of programs, as well as having to pay alot for programs, since there arnt alot of alternitives makes apple a piece of junk. Maybe those rich kids can afford it. But if you stay on the other side of life you would rather get a $800 PC, that was pretty powerfull compared to a lower end apple for that price. Plus upgrading is hard on apples. And seriously, I havnt known any person with an apple period. Maybe its couse i dont know any rich kids in the suberbs. lol

  Show less

  5 out of 11 users found this user opinion helpful.

• 7 stars

  good for a while

  by BOBJONES29 on January 11, 2006

  Pros: Fastest dual core out there

  Cons: limited future usage

  Summary: the best out there right now. Check out thg or anandtech reviews. But amd will switch to socket am2 and render 939 obsolete. this chip will also be obsolete in ...

  Read more

  Summary: the best out there right now. Check out thg or anandtech reviews. But amd will switch to socket am2 and render 939 obsolete. this chip will also be obsolete in a couple of months. Just wait.

  Show less

  1 out of 2 users found this user opinion helpful.

• 10 stars

  This chip kills intel

  by Lucky43Live on June 11, 2006

  Pros: No need to overclock, Dual Core = Lots of opportunities

  Cons: Quite expensive (what isn't?)

  Summary: This chip is probably one of the greatest stock AMD processors ever.... In my oppinion it murders every intel processor (I'm not even a fanboy). I really enjoy being ...

  Read more

  Summary: This chip is probably one of the greatest stock AMD processors ever.... In my oppinion it murders every intel processor (I'm not even a fanboy). I really enjoy being able to game on one monitor and still be listening to music, surfing the web, etc. on the other monitor without any interference between gaming.

  Show less

• 8 stars

  Simply better then any Intel right now.

  by Coolknight68 on June 7, 2006

  Pros: Performance, Low Noise, Zero-Troubles

  Cons: Price, Might need Reg. tweak for 3D Gaming

  Summary: I have been working with PCs since they're about. I like Apple's even so I don't own one. I prefer PCs because there is more software. (I ...

  Read more

  Summary: I have been working with PCs since they're about. I like Apple's even so I don't own one. I prefer PCs because there is more software. (I Started with a C64)
  
  These new AMD CPUs are better then anything else right now, take this from someone that has installed 100s of Intel based PCs... $ for $ this AMD CPU delivers, but yes the price seems high at first and could be better.
  
  Last word on stability... the Athlon 64 FX-60s I have been installing immediately turned out to be faster, more stable and less noisy then all the Intel PCs I work on.
  
  Note that you need to tweak the Reg. for OpenGL and DirectX to avoid some snags according to Nvidia (read online stuff on their website.)
  
  If you need a fast new PC right now, be it for whatever (CAD, Games, Server) the FX-60 is a great pick.
  
  Now when Intel will have something, less noisy, faster and better priced... well then I will re-evaluate and buy what's best then!

  Show less

• 4 stars

  Powerful but expensive

  by AuroraAlpha on January 19, 2006

  Pros: Best gaming CPU, faster then comparive intels.

  Cons: Overpriced, cannot run other applications well.

  Summary: This CPU is amazing for gaming, but once you get off FEAR and BF2 you will be disapointed. It does not perforce other applications with the amazing speed you would ...

  Read more

  Summary: This CPU is amazing for gaming, but once you get off FEAR and BF2 you will be disapointed. It does not perforce other applications with the amazing speed you would expect.
  
  Also unless you can afford amazing EXTEMELY low latancy RAM then you will be wasting your money.

  Show less

• 9 stars

  Intel give me more

  by thefox84 on January 14, 2006

  Pros: SPEED AND POWER TO KILL INTEL

  Cons: Initial quirks

  Summary: I've had both. The ghz that Intel straps on its processors are absurd. AMD is the king of gaming chips, they're way better than Intel. If AMD had ...

  Read more

  Summary: I've had both. The ghz that Intel straps on its processors are absurd. AMD is the king of gaming chips, they're way better than Intel. If AMD had a dual 3.46 ghz like Intel, It would blow the socks off Intel. Go AMD(and Nvidia).

  Show less

• 9 stars

  AMD rocks intels socks

  by pyro10805 on January 11, 2006

  Pros: Its AMD baby

  Cons: its price for now

  Summary: like i said on the intel fanboys comment AMD owns intel on almost every aspect of computing even the precious 3.73 EE.
  
  the fx 60 doesnt strain until pushed
  
  ...

  Read more

  Summary: like i said on the intel fanboys comment AMD owns intel on almost every aspect of computing even the precious 3.73 EE.
  
  the fx 60 doesnt strain until pushed as you can see on the website below....when the game is ran low the 60 does not perform but once maxed out it slaughters all.
  
  when it comes to runing programs other than games and encoding music it still performs dam good....almost slaghtering intel in ever aspect.
  
  http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/01/10/amd_athlon_64_fx-60/1.html

  Show less

• 1
• 2
• next

See pricing