Which is better..

-Opteron 250 or 825 (correct me if I'm wrong)
-FX-55 and FX 52

To my understanding, with the 825 you can have up to 4 CPU's. With the 250 you can only have 2. Can you have dual and quad systems with the FX series?

Quote: Originally Posted by Nerdz Which is better.. -Opteron 250 or 825 (correct me if I'm wrong) -FX-55 and FX 52 To my understanding, with the 825 you can have up to 4 CPU's. With the 250 you can only have 2. Can you have dual and quad systems with the FX series?

Just take a look here to compare: http://www.pricewatch.com/m/mn.aspx?i=3&f=1

You'll notice that Opteron's are a good deal more expensive at the same speed and aren't available as fast either. Opteron 2xx series supports 2 way processors, and Opteron 8xx supports 2-way and up. With the Opteron 8xx's 4-way's are common and there's some "big-iron" style 8-ways out there (probably run into the millions of $$$). All Opteron processors run on Socket 940 which only supports Registered Memory that is more expensive and slower. Once you get more than 2 processors, AGP and PCI-Express support disappears completely, so you end up with a massively expensive system that has no gaming capabilities. Good for hosting a high traffic website though.

If you really want Dual Athlon64's you can go with with a pair of Opteron 250's, since its possible to find motherboards for this that support AGP. However, I would suggest going with a standard single Athlon64 instead of an FX since they're just overpriced. Be sure to get Socket 939 instead of Socket 940 and for best performance/cost ratio get a 90nm part instead of a 130nm part.

There was some excitement: "To add even more to the pot, all of the nF3-250 versions of the chipset can be used in Multiple Processor designs. If the manufacturer chooses, any of the chipsets can be used theoretically in 1, 2, 4, 8, or even 16 CPU setups." which would make it possible to use AthlonFX's in 2-way but NO products exist as of yet.

well..which one is better for gaming? I was thinking a dual A64 System..

If you wait for the second Quarter, AMD is releasing the FX-57.

It will be a "Dual Core" CPU and use a regular NForce 4 motherboard.

That is what I would use for the "Ultimate" gaming rig

Quote: Originally Posted by Nerdz well..which one is better for gaming? I was thinking a dual A64 System..

For the most part, a 2nd processor won't enhance gaming. What it will do is let you run the server on 1 cpu and the game on a 2nd with hardly any slowdown. If you're playing on someone else's server, the extra CPU is mostly idle.

Quote: Originally Posted by $SOLID$ Necro If you wait for the second Quarter, AMD is releasing the FX-57. It will be a "Dual Core" CPU and use a regular NForce 4 motherboard. That is what I would use for the "Ultimate" gaming rig

This is pure speculation..i have not read anywhere that the FX57 well be dual core .rather single core 90nm with sse3 technology and strained silcon.@ 2.8ghz

Quote: Originally Posted by tha smokah This is pure speculation..i have not read anywhere that the FX57 well be dual core .rather single core 90nm with sse3 technology and strained silcon.@ 2.8ghz

Bite me!

Take a look for your self, I don't BS unlike other people you are normally used to asociating with

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/V..._608%2C00.html

And I'm guessing this is the first Quarter..When does the 1st Qtr End? And when does the 2nd Qrt begin?

Quote: Originally Posted by Nerdz And I'm guessing this is the first Quarter..When does the 1st Qtr End? And when does the 2nd Qrt begin?

There's 12 months in a year, so each quarter is 3 months.

Quote: Originally Posted by $SOLID$ Necro Bite me!

Dude - he's a 9 post hoe, you don't know where he's been. Don't let him close nuff to touch you let alone bite you.

Quote: Originally Posted by YohanSpritz For the most part, a 2nd processor won't enhance gaming.

I wouldn't necessarily say that. Sure, generally programs are only addressed to 1 processor, but I'm not sure if that will hold when the 64 bit OS's and their appropriately programmed games hit. It certainly wasn't true of BeOS, where a single program could gain advantage of all processors in a system. (Alas, poor BeOS...)

Anyway, honestly, when is the last time you had only ONE process running on your computer??? It almost never happens anymore, not in the last 10 years, even with streamlined gaming boots there's still a few background processes. A second processor can handle all that garbage and let you dedicate one processor entirely to a power hungry game....

Run your game on 1 processor, everything else on another... like your backgrounds, your Voice over IP, chat on a second monitor...

It might not be cost-efficient, but it definitely offers decent performance boosts.

Quote: Originally Posted by JCoyote Run your game on 1 processor, everything else on another... like your backgrounds, your Voice over IP, chat on a second monitor...

How would this dual processor deal work?

What decides which process accesses which CPU? Is it user defined or OS assigned?