AMD’s new Quad FX platform with its two dual core processors is a “bridge,” of sorts, between current dual core units and their true quad core chips that will be hitting the market late next year. It is also intended as a challenge to Intel’s current dominance in the desktop processor market.
So the question is, does AMD deliver?
Reviews:
Tom’s Hardware: “Unfortunately, considering the effort required to bring this platform into life, the results aren’t terribly impressive in terms of both performance and performance per watt. Why should I buy a pair of processors, an expensive and very special motherboard and a heavy duty 1,000 W power supply when I can get almost the same experience with much cheaper mainstream components and Intel’s quad core processor? Sure, I won’t be able to upgrade an Intel machine to eight cores by the middle of 2007, but AMD’s Quad FX powerhouse will be outdated by that time as well. HyperTransport 3.0, with double the clock speed, is waiting for its spring debut, and although the quad core Agena FX will run in today’s Quad FX systems, it will have to live with standard HT link speeds.”
HardOCP: “AMD’s Quad FX platform is big, bad, expensive, piggish, powerful, and has an extended upgrade path that will allow power users double the desktop power in 2007. You could call the AMD Quad FX the HUMMER H2 of the computer world. The AMD Quad FX platform is going to prove to be an extremely capable machine but there are going to be big costs associated with ownership. If you are wanting to buy a quad-core machine now with no regards to upgrading to an octo-core platform later, you would be remiss to not invest in the Intel QX6700. The QX6700 is cheaper, uses much less power, and will give you slightly better performance.”
ArsTechnica: “Today, AMD officially launched their much-anticipated 4×4 enthusiast platform under the name QuadFX. The results of the rash of QuadFX reviews that just came out are uniformly disappointing; Intel’s quad-core offering, the QX6800, outperforms AMD’s much hotter, more power-hungry offering in almost every benchmark. Right now, QuadFX is a loser from a performance, power consumption, and bang/buck perspective, and there’s pretty much no reason to even consider spending money on this boutique architecture right now”
Product Information:
Click here for specs and other information on the AMD Quad FX Platform.
Price: AMD Athlon 64 FX-70, FX-72 and FX-74 dual-core processors are $599, $799 and $999, respectively.
Bottom Line: The general consensus is this – if you are a major enthusiast who must go quad core now, your best bet is the Intel QX6700 based on overall price and performance. Even if you are into the upgradability of the AMD platform to eight cores, there is still problems to consider: a single Asus motherboard option and high costs associated with the upgrade to name a few.
