FX-55 Question 14 replies

  • 1
  • 2

Please wait...

Shintsu

For the glory of Helghan

50 XP

9th April 2005

0 Uploads

12,926 Posts

0 Threads

#1 12 years ago

Ok, I was surfing Newegg looking for deals and I came across an FX-55 for $170. Now I remember when these little suckers went for $1000 and I was curious to know, would this processor be better than my Pentium 4 3.0 GHz? The only thing I dislike is that it is Socket 939 which is being phased out, and I'd personally prefer a Conroe.




vikke-viking

Cheese cake

50 XP

26th September 2004

0 Uploads

1,270 Posts

0 Threads

#2 12 years ago

Yeah I think it is faster then the P4 3ghz. But whouldent you need a new mobo to then?




Shintsu

For the glory of Helghan

50 XP

9th April 2005

0 Uploads

12,926 Posts

0 Threads

#3 12 years ago

Yeah, but if it's really that much faster I would maybe buy it. Also, which core is better Clawhammer or San Diego?




Rookie VIP Member

128,030 XP

3rd May 2005

0 Uploads

11,953 Posts

0 Threads

#4 12 years ago

San Diego. Clawhammer is an outdated core used on the early S754 Athlons, San Diego is used with the new S939 chips.




Agentlaidlaw

Pie

50 XP

21st February 2005

0 Uploads

3,801 Posts

0 Threads

#5 12 years ago

AMD FX55 will kill your P4. You Intel doesn't even come close in the speed that the FX55 is. FX55 is faster than an Pentium 4 clocked at 3.8ghz.




Shintsu

For the glory of Helghan

50 XP

9th April 2005

0 Uploads

12,926 Posts

0 Threads

#6 12 years ago

...Ok, jeez. Now how good is this FX-55 in comparison to a Conroe? Would it be worth it to get a socket that is becoming outdated becasue it'll remain powerful for a long time or is it better to just buy a Conroe or socket AM2 and stay with the new stuff? EDIT: Could someone show me one of those benchmarks that includes this processor and possibly the Conroe?




Oblivious

I tawt I taw a puddy tat...

50 XP

30th December 2002

0 Uploads

2,806 Posts

0 Threads

#7 12 years ago
Shintsu;3370600...Ok, jeez. Now how good is this FX-55 in comparison to a Conroe? Would it be worth it to get a socket that is becoming outdated becasue it'll remain powerful for a long time or is it better to just buy a Conroe or socket AM2 and stay with the new stuff? EDIT: Could someone show me one of those benchmarks that includes this processor and possibly the Conroe?

Since you're going to have to get a new motherboard for the fx-55 anyways, I'd say get a Conroe. Even the cheaper Conroes (6300/6400) will blow away your old pentium. But bear in mind you'll also have to get some new ddr2 ram to go with a Conroe.

That said, the fx-55 is no slouch. Plus, being an FX chip, it has an unlocked multiplier making it a real nice overclocker (with the right motherboard).

As for the benchmarks, the (~$300) e6600 Conroe was essentially the equivalent to the (~$1000) fx-62 (or better than it), if that tells you anything.




marvinmatthew

Tech is where you'll find me..

50 XP

13th April 2005

0 Uploads

3,627 Posts

0 Threads

#8 12 years ago

I would guess that the base line Conroe (the E6200) would be around 20% faster than the FX-55. And yea, I'd but the Conroe, or atleast the AM2 chip, so you can stay current.




Shintsu

For the glory of Helghan

50 XP

9th April 2005

0 Uploads

12,926 Posts

0 Threads

#9 12 years ago

Ok thanks for the help guys, I'll just save up a bit and try and get an E6600. Oh, and while I'm at it, what is the difference between a T6600 and the E6600?




Bs|Archaon

I would die without GF

50 XP

15th March 2006

0 Uploads

5,910 Posts

0 Threads

#10 12 years ago

The T6600 is a mobile chip designed for laptops that uses a different socket. As far as I'm aware there's no real reason to buy them over the standard Core 2 Duo chips.




  • 1
  • 2