The Athlon 64 FX-53: AMD's Next Enthusiast Part
by Derek Wilson on March 18, 2004 11:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Final Words
The AMD Athlon 64 FX-53 is a very solid processor. General usage benchmarks put it at or near the top of the heap, games run really well, and it might seem like a breath of fresh air for those who are tired of waiting for their source to compile all day long. The FX-53 also made some pretty significant performance gains in the traditional Intel areas of encoding and rendering. Obviously, when looking for a processor, you want one that will suit the tasks at hand, but the FX-53 has the benefit of being near the top across the board.
So, with a thousand dollar processor budget, what is the best choice? Honestly, the best choice is to wait. It may seem like that's what we've said at the end of every single CPU or graphics review for the past few months, but the giant caution sign will soon be taken down.
Yes, FX-53 is a fast performer. It's just not fast enough to warrant spending all that necessary money on a platform that is guaranteed to be non-upgradeable in a short while. With socket 939, there will be a much wider selection of processors to fill the platform, and there is much more room for future upgradeability. Add PCI Express to that and you've got a platform that could last for a (relatively) long time.
Of course, when socket 939 does hit the streets, we will have to re-evaluate the situation. The FX-53 has potential, but that's not always enough. If we get some good performance gains from using high quality unbuffered RAM with the FX-53, and if we start to see overclocker-friendly boards with plenty of PCI Express slots on them, we might just be talking after a price drop. Right now, both the very high end Intel and AMD parts are priced too high to recommend. The performance gains that we see in our tests just aren't enough to warrant the kinds of price differences currently seen in the marketplace.
So, the final recommendation? If you absolutely need a system now, go with either a Pentium 4 or an Athlon 64 3000+ (Newcastle) depending on your usage model. But just wait if that's at all possible. The end is near, we promise.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
30 Comments
View All Comments
Guspaz - Thursday, March 18, 2004 - link
According to the test setup, they're using "ATI Catalyst 4.10"...That's 7 driver revisions in the future! There is no 4.10, the newest version is 4.3. Perhaps they mean 4.1, but nevertheless they're reporting an impossible driver revision.
msva123 - Thursday, March 18, 2004 - link
Anand, I think it is time to put your programming knowledge to use and begin work on an open source benchmark. The goals could include:1. Making the methodology of a benchmark open to the public, so that there is no question of integrity.
2. Having a frequently updated database of benchmark scores, sorted by application, so that someone could enter in the applications they use most and have a benchmark chart custom generated for their typical usage.
athlon64boy - Thursday, March 18, 2004 - link
I love AMD, I am a big fan.But you know what irritates me. Is when these sites always benchmark the processors, they rarely close with the fact that AMD is a 64-bit capable processor. AMD can whip up on an Intel, even in todays 32 bit software. They fail to mention the 64 bit future.
Someone would be dumb to go out and buy a Pentium 4. When the AThlon 64/FX line hasn't even shown its true potential .... yet.
Cybercat - Thursday, March 18, 2004 - link
GO AMD! :p So I'm a little biased, every hardware company has their fanboys. ;)CrystalBay - Thursday, March 18, 2004 - link
Drool...:)...truApostle - Thursday, March 18, 2004 - link
all your base are belong to us! Kudo's to AMD. It's about time that AMD start whooping ass on the evil~Intel camp. And although prices are high the AMD chip is still cheaper. And who even cares about price at this point. I think the purpose is to see who is extracting the most performance from their silicon. I mean shaZb0t, gimme a break already.pwn4g3
Regs - Thursday, March 18, 2004 - link
Man, when the only difference between a 3.4 EE and a 3.2EE is 3 tenths of a frame a second, you know these architectures and instruction sets reached their limit.Definitely just a bragging rights CPU. This is turning into a pissing contest.
dweigert - Thursday, March 18, 2004 - link
Ok, The Athlon FX brand is going Socket 939... But any Socket 940 board will be able to hold an Opteron 1XX processor with no problem. And guess what? These are NOT going away anytime soon. I think you do a disservice to people who chose the benefits of the platform.mcveigh - Thursday, March 18, 2004 - link
So, with a thousand dollar processor budget, what is the best chioce? Honestly, the best choice is to wait. It may seem like that's what we've said at the end of every single CPU or graphics review for the past few months, but the giant caution sign will soon be taken downWHAT YOU TEASE!!!
whats around the corner?????????????????????
WooDaddy - Thursday, March 18, 2004 - link
DEREK, DEREK, DEREK!!!Speeling errurs are awl ovur the plase!
THIS IS PITIFUL!!! SPELL CHECKER!!!
It was so annoying that I almost didn't pay attention to the results (I like the pretty pictures). You have AT LEAST one spelling error per page! If this were a newpaper, it would even get close to being published. Show us some AT pride in your articles and fix it! I know you can do better.
Try it again....