AMD Athlon 64 4000+ & FX-55: A Thorough Investigation
by Anand Lal Shimpi on October 19, 2004 1:04 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Model Numbers Help and Confuse
We've chastised AMD in the past for insisting on a model numbering system instead of just reporting actual clock speeds, but for the first time ever, AMD's model numbering system makes a lot more sense than this drivel that Intel has been using to name their LGA-775 Pentium 4s. We get more complaints today from Intel's model numbering system than we've ever had about any other CPU model numbering system in AnandTech history; that includes attempts from AMD and Cyrix to do the same. While this could be too many users used to referring to CPUs by their clock speeds, it is definitely a present day issue.
Here's a quick recap of what Intel's model numbers mean as we're featuring all LGA-775 chips in this review:
CPU Name - Clock Speed - L2 Cache
Pentium 4 560 - 3.6GHz - 1MB
Pentium 4 550 - 3.4GHz - 1MB
Pentium 4 540 - 3.2GHz - 1MB
Pentium 4 530 - 3.0GHz - 1MB
AMD does have an interesting case for model numbers today; with the release of the Athlon 64 4000+ AMD has a total of five 2.4GHz CPUs in their Athlon 64 line:
CPU Name - Clock Speed - L2 Cache - Memory Interface
Athlon 64 4000+ - 2.4GHz - 1MB - 128-bit
Athlon 64 3800+ - 2.4GHz - 512KB - 128-bit
Athlon 64 3700+ - 2.4GHz - 1MB - 64-bit
Athlon 64 3400+ - 2.4GHz - 512KB - 64-bit
Athlon 64 FX-53 - 2.4GHz - 1MB - 128-bit
This is a prime example of where the model numbering system can actually help, differentiating between the three chips, but we also have to make sure to keep AMD honest in their ratings, which is one area we'll be investigating in this review.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
89 Comments
View All Comments
RaistlinZ - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
I may have missed it, but does anyone know if the Athlon 64 4000+ will be multiplier unlocked like the FX-53 is? That's the only thing I see that would differentiate the two chips.RaistlinZ - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
Illissius - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
Re: the necessity of Prescott. You are missing one very important consideration: Prescott has iAMD64 support. (Although it is currently disabled, no doubt because Intel has intentions of selling you the same processor twice). A simple die shrink of Northwood would not.I half suspect one of the reasons for Prescott's problems could be that AMD's 64-bit extensions don't mesh very well with a Netburst architecure, but they had to shoehorn it in anyways, and had to make a lot of unappealing design decisions in the process. (I've never designed a processor, though, so this is just baseless speculation.) I'd be interested in seeing 64-bit enabled chips on a Pentium M architecture...
CrystalBay - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
Moores law is dead...:(Runamile - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
Awsome read. Great Job. And HOLY COW does Intel get their a$$ handed to them!I would of liked to see some price/performance curves too. That would of summed it up quite nicely.
hertz9753 - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
Athlon 64 3700+ 2.4GHz 1MB 64-bitAthlon 64 3400+ 2.4GHz 512KB 64-bit
Athlon 64 3400+ 2.2GHz 1MB 64-bit
araczynski - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
nice, but luckily i still see no reason to upgrade my 2.4@3.3, at least not for a few measly benchmark FPS.hertz9753 - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
AlphaFox - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
Id like to see some kind of comparison with an OC XP Mobile. I have one runing at 2.46ghz and not really sure how it stacks up here...PrinceGaz - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
An excellent article, well done.About the only thing missing was a bit of overclocking of the FX-55 to see if the introduction of strained silicon considerably increased the headroom. Obviously it has allowed them to ship parts rated at 2.6GHz which they weren't previously able to do, but how much better is the FX-55 compared to a CG-stepping FX-53? Does the use of strained silicon mean the FX-55 is a new stepping?