On 12/24/10 01:44, Chris Rees wrote:
On 23 December 2010 13:57, Da Rock
<freebsd-questi...@herveybayaustralia.com.au> wrote:
On 12/23/10 23:16, Chris Rees wrote:
On 23 December 2010 11:44, Da Rock
<freebsd-questi...@herveybayaustralia.com.au> wrote:
<snip>
Thanks, but Athlon64 is a 939. Yeah, it may not be worth salvaging, but I
thought the cost might be less... I'm more than likely wrong. Worth
putting
feelers out, though :)
Athlon64s can be 754, 939 or AM2. Perhaps you meant *your* Athlon64 is a
939?
Sorry you're not having much luck.
If I knew the Aussie market I'd help you to pick something comparable,
but that's better left to someone more local for you!
Hope you get some results soon.
Well thats from memory, and it is pretty old now I agree. Might have been a
local thing then. As I remember it only the Athlon and then Semperon's were
754. The 64's and FX's were 939. The later Athlons were AM2, but that was
just after I got this one, and they're the X2's I believe. But again, that
may have been local.
I think you're thinking of Socket 462. This might clear it up a little:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athlon64
Chris
No, but you're right I'll agree. Mustn't have been available via my
sources though- only the 32bit processors were 754 here, 64 had to be a
939. Probably some smartarse' marketing ploy... :)
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
