Athalon 64, X2 or not

I am finally replacing my dinosaur and am leaning towards an AMD Athalon 64 4000+. The salesman told me that if I am not 3-D gaming, that low processor demands actually are faster on a standard 64 than on an x2 Dual Core.

Does that sound right? Lar

 

Sorry, couldn't follow that part but here is the take anyway.

For any multi threaded application, an X2 would be faster than a comparable single core CPU (whether you compare it by speed or bucks for bucks). For single threaded applications (most of the games today), an X2 would not be faster than a single core CPU. However, since most of the applications are multi threaded & WinXP itself is multi threaded, an X2 system gives you a smoother working environment than a single core even if you play games.

You can, for example, keep downloading files and printing reports while playing games on X2 and you won't see much speed difference, but try it on single core CPU & you can really do only one job.

The future is multi core & dual CPU is just the start.

My advice go in for X2 or wait for M2 (due June 06).

 

Wow, that was a great response. Thanks. I just read an interesting article about M2 (socket 940) at:

http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1829/

 

Thanks. Glad you liked it.

 

Hey RSINFO, as long as I have your attention....

The AMD boards still take DDR 400 memory. With 4 slots am I better off with 2 x 1Gb or 4x 512mb? I cannot imagine that I will ever need more than 2 Gb of RAM.

 

yes, current AMDs run on DDR 400 MHz. You can get either 1 GB x 2 or 512 Mb x 4 whichever is cheaper. Its not going to make difference, but make sure that if you install 1 GB modules, they should go into correct slots on motherboard to enable dual channel RAM access.

 

Larry B

Best value in 64 bit dual core AMD processors right now is the Opteron 165 with two 1GB cache's. Very overclockable - do some reading on this puppy - lots of reviews - lots of articles and a great gamer too. Will run at 2.6 GHZ or the equivalent of an FX60. More can be found here
As to memory, you're better off with 2x1Gig vs 4x512. With 2 modules, you can run at T1 timings, but with 4 you'll be stuck with T2. To my knowledge, this currently applies to all boards.

 

But keep in mind that overclocking reduces the lifespan of CPU & the system may not be stable. Do it only as a last resort.

 

Overclocking is not my main concern. Stock performance, heat and stability are.

The Opteron 165, acc to the linked review, is equivalent to an X2 3500+ (1.8GHz) . That is fine but I am shooting a little higher at 4200+. Thanks.

 

Each to their own ...... but it has become a very popular CPU and will run 2.5 GHZ at stock core voltage which is a lot of processor for under $300. Last line of the same review @ 2.6GHZ with a bump in core voltage reads

 

Where in the world can you get an Opteron 165 for $278!?! The lowest I can find is $325.

Is this a case whereby huge demand is actually making the price go up? Like with that Opteron 146 (?) which was a vicious overclocker as well.

Larry, if you're not an avid 3-D gamer, I suggest you go with a dual-core. It seems that in a single, intense task, one of AMD's FX cpus can best any AMD dual-core cpu but that doesn't seem to fit your needs. At some point, everything will go dual-core. But even now (unless you're an extremely demanding gamer), dual-core is the best investment and is more future-proof.

Rockster, since your info is in regard to overclocking not all will appreciate it but I sure do. I'm biding my time on the switch from Socket A to Socket 939 but an incredible overclocker could make me take the jump that much quicker. I have an Asrock Dual Sata-II waiting on my shelf so I can bring my 6800GT (AGP) with me.

Right now, I have a tiny, almost hair-thin piece of wire inserted into my cpu socket bridging two pin holes which allows me to achieve significantly superior performance. So I guess you could include me in the category of people who aren't that concerned about the longevity of my PC parts.

It's interesting to get varied perspectives on overclocking. They can run the gamut from people who won't dare run non-stock to those who've experimented with cooling their cpus with cold, underground water or dry ice or run their PC inside a refridgerator and then run their cpu at unimaginable speeds. No jokes.

Gary

 

No argument - I think $325 is about the best price around these days. Still a heck of a buy in my book.

Gary, appreciate your perspective not just because its similar to mine, but until one has been there - its hard to describe the satisfaction that comes from pushing the envelope, finding that right combination of hardware that permits one to achieve the kind of performance that some of these puppies are capable of.

 

How interchangeable/compatible is the Opteron 165 vs an X2? I mean this in terms of software, hardware, drivers, etc. I am not a tweaker... well I am by nature but cannot afford to fry this hefty investment. I try to live by, if isn't broken, don't fix it, but temptation has gotten the better of me before.

I do need universal compatability, stability and long life above all.

 

Now I've become interested. Without going through the whole article, if an X2 3500+ runs at 1.8Ghz, what frequency would you need on an Opteron to give the equivalent of 4200+?

If the processor is capable of handling increased frequencies, it is a matter of slowly increasing the frequency and watching temperature and stability as you go.

Rockster2U has been an exponent of the AMD mobile 2400+ core. The core was built to be run in laptops...running it in a desktop with the benefits of extra cooling meant that it could be overclocked very successfully.

Matt

 

Frankly don't know. Never had that kind of money to test various configurations

But now frequency matters less (AMD beats Intel hands down at the same frequency) and CPU architecture more.

 

Larry, I think the only concern here would be whether a cpu is compatible with your mainboard or not. If it is, the exact cpu you're using is for all intents and purposes invisible to the software, drivers, etc. I guess I'm touching on the subject of "hardware abstraction" here. As long as all your hardware gets along with itself, then your software will be blissfully ignorant and happy.

The only functional difference that I know of in modern cpus is that certain apps like Photoshop can take advantage of your dual-core cpu and get more done in a certain time. Right now, there aren't that many apps like that that the average user uses (somebody fix that sentence! )

It's been my experience that most Socket 939 boards take a large variety of cpus like FX, X2, Opteron, vanilla Athlon 64, etc. But you HAVE to doublecheck the mainboard specs before you buy a cpu. There are a variety of different "cores" out there like Venice, San Diego, Disneyland .

Yes, in the Socket A arena, I don't think there's a superior overclocker than the XP Mobile. I have an Athlon 2600+ Mobile overclocked to 11x220=2420Mhz. Just to put this in perspective, the standard bus speeed for these cpus is 133.

I wouldn't recommend someone make a cpu-buying decision based on the overclockability of a cpu if they have no overclocking experience. Athlon 64 overclocking is a little more complex than the old and simple Socket A overclocking. Even I don't fully have a grasp on it...yet.

Gary

 

Ran across this article comparing Intel & AMD overclocking http://www.techspot.com/reviews/hardware/pentiumd_vs_athlonx2_overclocking/index.shtml.

 

Larry:

I think Gary has given you some pretty good advice. Key ingredients here are quality of the mainboard, quality of the power supply, quality of memory and cooling capability of the heatsink/fan. This Opteron 165 is supposed to be one heck of a CPU. As to the overclocking, its pretty straightforward in this case and you aren't going to "fry" anything as long as some common sense is used. The article I referenced earlier pretty much confirms this - no increase in core voltage was required to achieve 2500MHz and only a modest increase was required to achieve stabilty at 2600MHz (FX60 performance). My recommendations would include something like an MSI neo motherboard (easiest one to setup) (Abit, Asus, Asrock or DFI also very good) OCZ EL or Corsair XMS memory - get the good stuff and a Zalman heatsink/fan or something equivalent. You're home free with this kind of quality and the pricing is quite reasonable.

Mattman has it almost right, but one of my all time favorite processors is (like Gary) the 2600+ XP Mobile. I'm running two of my personal systems with these at 12x200 at stock voltages and they idle in the high 30's but will head into the mid 40's under load. They run much better and much cooler and much faster than a stock 3200+ and I fully expect they will last at least as long as any 3200+ XP. I'm also running a "stock" 940 FX53 and an OC'ed 939 4000+ SanDiego.

Take your time and do some more reading if you have reservations about what to buy. Chances are real good that any and all of your questions will be answered you will be able to make very well informed decision - don't rush into anything. Glad to hear you are evaluating this further - its definately worth taking a look at regardless of what you wind up doing. Good Luck & enjoy .......

 

Rockster, I'm always complaining about my memory, now you are complaining about it too

 

I just took a look at the Opteron 165 Dual-Core proc for $326, the Opteron 146 Single-Core proc for $256 and the San Diego 3700+(single-core) for $212.

I'm probably going to end up getting the San Diego. The San Diego and the Opteron 146 both run at 2.2Ghz and seem to be able to hit similar speeds when overclocking. Some people are getting 2.75Ghz on the stock cooler, 2.9 on a good cooler and possibly more on water.

I.E. They're hitting FX-57 speeds at half the price.