Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: AMD Dual Core PRocessor vs AMD FX57 Single Core  (Read 2273 times)


  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2044
AMD Dual Core PRocessor vs AMD FX57 Single Core
« on: September 08, 2005, 02:44:15 AM »

Well, I've gotten my new computer running, so I can get back to photography

Let me say that any of you who use Photoshop and have other programs running too, you should really take a look at the AMD X2 Dual Core series CPU. The 4800 is the AMD flagship Dual Core processor running at 2.4 Ghz. If you all want, I can get tell you what I learned here with citations to test results and reviews.

I'm VERY up on both the FX 57 2.8 Ghz Single Core CPU and the X2 Dually at this point. You see, I bought the 1100 doallar FX57 along with an ASUS A8N Premium SLI MB, which is also the flagship MB as of today.

Now at the same time, my friend bought the same MB and the AMD X2 4800 dual core. So we both had the latest and greatest  desktop CPU's the world has yet seen, and arguably teh best MB too. So we decided to test them ourselves, informally.

I'll leave you with one test we did. My FX57 did a PSCS2 Radial Blur test in 64 secods, the average of 10 runs. The X2 did it in 40 seconds average. I can give you the link to the test file that has been circulating and the forum wher all the results of varying MACS, Intels, and AMDs are posted. It's a standard test file, but we can also make our own.

So that doesn't sound like much, right. I mean 64 vs 40 seconds isn't that great. However, a little algebra shows us that the X2 is 37% faster running 400Mhz slower! Now what I did was to open up Win Amp and begin playing a file to chew up clock cycles from the CPU, which the newest WinAmp does very nicely, pig that it is.

The Single Core FX 57's average score of 149 seconds really shows teh difference between Single and Dual Core CPUs. The X2? performed teh same at about 40 seconds average. The big deal here is that all of you are working with files much larger than my wimpy Sony F828 at 8 MPs.

So every time you spin a file you're having to wait x amount of time. It ads up in a few hours. In fact, if you saved 37% off of every change you made, that would be a significant slice of your day, depending on how many seconds you lose using a single core CPU, or a slower CPU like my old AMD 1200.

How can it do it? The 4800 X2 CPU has two FX 53 K8 Core Chips on it. The FX53 was AMDs first leap in 64 bit archetecture, and had a core clock speed of 2.4 Ghz, whereas the FX 55 is 2.6, and the latest and greatest FX57 is 2.8 Ghz.

This is the best part--even is gaming, the 4800 X2 only drops about 5-10% frame rates per second (FPS) compared to the FX57. However, you can run video editing software at the same time, like as in converting a DVD from MPG to WMV, which tears up CPUs. The FPS never even hippucs on the X2 in game.

Well, I have lots more information I've gleaned in the last couple weeks if anyone wants more information.  Remember too that these processors are 64 bit, not 32 bit.
Pages: [1]   Go Up