X2 or FX-57?

[Ket-Chup]

Well, I'm building me a new compy, and I'm torn between the X2 and the FX-57 processor. Now, I know the X2 is more "future-proof" than the FX-57, with the multi-threading and all, but considering it's fairly new and all, I'm thinking it may need some more time to fully show its capability. With the FX-57, I know what I'm getting, I just don't know how long it'll last. I rarely use anything that would need a multi-threaded cpu since I'm mainly a gamer, though I do some photo/video-editing now and then, until we see multi-threaded games. I don't want to buy a new cpu for at least another 2 or 3 years after buying this one, so I want one that'll last for that long.
I guess what I'm really asking is do you think we'll see multi-threaded games the next 2-3 years? I mean, the only game I know of supporting 64bit technology is Far Cry, and the 64 processors has been available for, what, two years? And if it takes two years to fully implement multi-threading into games, I don't see a reason not to buy the FX-57 now and maybe a double-core processor later, when they're cheaper and better.

 

[psyno]

I think we'll start seeing multi-threaded games soon. The reason is that both Microsoft's and Sony's next-gen consoles have been essentially optimized for multi-threaded games. It won't be overnight, not as soon as the XBOX 360 comes out, but developers will learn to program mutli-threaded games if they want the best performance on these consoles. I think that change in paradigm in console gaming will spill over to the PC, especially with so many companies (including VALVe) developing for both console and PC.

However, the FX-57 is a beast. It's not like it can't handle multithreading either, it's just not simultaneous. Multithreaded games will still run on the FX-57, but the threads will share the core and be scheduled by the OS.

 

[Shodan]

An X2 is going to be ultra expensive, to be honest, you don't need it, go with the FX-57.

X2's are used for servers, in twos, fours and sets of eight.

An FX-53 could be as little as $300.

 

[Ket-Chup]

An X2 is going to be ultra expensive, to be honest, you don't need it, go with the FX-57.

So will the FX-57. Here, in Norway, both cost over 1300$:x

 

[Asus]

Go with one of the X2's. They run just as fast as single core CPUs on games but can handle all your programs in the background with less lag. Seriously consider the X2 series unless all you having running is your game. If you are even thinking about the FX57 then you won't be spending more money on an X2.

It's up to you, either will kick ass.

 

[Kazuki_Fuse]

What's better, an FX-53 or a 64-4000+?

 

[Revisedsoul]

here in canada. the fx-57 is going for about 1450

where the 3 x2 are going for
4200+ - 751
4600+ - 1133
4800+ - 1412


see as that. you would prolly be fine with that

also isnt the 57 the last single core for the line. so really why not just go with what will be next anyways

 

[Mujuro]

What's better, an FX-53 or a 64-4000+?

4000+ due to the fact you can get it up to FX-55, or even FX-57 speeds. One thing to make sure though; if you are going for the 4000+, get the San Diego core.

 

[holydeadpenguins]

The x2s are also overclockable. And unreal 3 will be multi-threaded.

 

[duffers20]

I think I would cash in on teh dual core CPU's, I think that alot of stuff in teh future will utilise both cores.