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 _______________________________________________ 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"
