Last post on this - X2 3800 or Opt165

M

marley1

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 18, 2000
Messages
5,447
Guys -

Im about to oder my system today, and still cant decide between the X2 3800+ or the Opteron 165.

Its a 30 buck difference(newegg), cant go with dave since his opteron 165 are only oem this time.

anyway i feel like the 200mhz speed differnece will not makea damn difference, and the opteron is better cause of the extra 1 mb of cache.

i will not be overclocking, maybe maybe in the future just to fool around but i doubt ever.

all i do is gaming, rar, dvd encoding.

i think the extra cache will be better?

lmk.

thanks
dan
 
the 165 oem is 280 on mwave, for 15 bucks more you can get a 3 year warrantee... you'd still need a HSF, but thats nothing.
 
1.8GHz isn't the fastest CPU for gaming, for that price you might as well get a faster single core, and cache is hype.
 
well i do alot of stuff at the same time, game and burn/extract dvd.

so the dual core is what i want.

the thing about oem is, its 280-290 depending on retailer, and then to get the hsf i wanted(that ninja thing) its about another 50. so i really can just go retail for the same thing.

I'm coming from a A64 2800 and gettin 50fps in games. All these new cpus according to Toms Hardware charts get all above 120.

comeon guys help!

The X2 3800 will save me 30 bucks. I just dont know if downgrading to 1/2 the cache will be a bad idea in the long run.
 
shoman24v said:
1.8GHz isn't the fastest CPU for gaming, for that price you might as well get a faster single core, and cache is hype.
Click to expand...

What are you doing with the lowest end x2 in what looks to be a gaming rig? Hypocritical...

1.8ghz in AMD cpu's is not like 1.8ghz in an Intel cpu. Besides, you can always overclock it 400mhz easily, then you have 2.2ghz, or maybe even 600+ to get you 2.4ghz+.
 
threedd97 said:
What are you doing with the lowest end x2 in what looks to be a gaming rig? Hypocritical...

1.8ghz in AMD cpu's is not like 1.8ghz in an Intel cpu. Besides, you can always overclock it 400mhz easily, then you have 2.2ghz, or maybe even 600+ to get you 2.4ghz+.
Click to expand...
cuz he overclocked his, if you'd taken the time to finish reading past the processor itself ;)

cache is overrated, its not worth the extra money. opty's are hyped for OC'ing, not so much the cache. if you're not going to OC, go for the x2 3800+. those still oc pretty decently, so you'll be able to fool around with it in the future if you want to, but getting an opteron and not oc'ing is a complete waste of an opteron.
 
I got my 175 from dave. Go with the Zalman CNPS9500. Great cooler, very quiet, and it looks cool too. The only bad thing about it was getting the seating bracket to fit. (cut finger on stupid copper fin). Other than that, an outstanding cooler to go with your future 165, and helped get the current stable oc that I am running. Points to ponder
 
It would be a shame not to OC the Opteron since they OC so well. Why not overclock it just a bit and you will still be plenty safe try 200mhz then 400mhz and keep an eye on the temps and don't touch the voltage. Just do 9x240 and throw in a divider if needed. I think the 165's only have 9x multiplier?

If you are dead set on no overclock just go x2 3800 and you will be happy.
 
Honestly, I don't think you will notice the difference at stock speeds.
512k or 200Mhz for Gaming IMO cache helps more, for .rar and DVD encoding MHz helps more. IMO you will have insignificant real world differences.
Check this chart, I know it does not have the opty, but you can compare cache v MHZ
CLIKC HERE
 
If you don't plan to OC at all...then go with the x2, save you a buck.

ANyways, I've seen the 3800s to OC quite well for some folks.
 
personally, I'd go with the opteron... those things are badass.
the extra cache is equal to 200mhz, so it's the same performance ultimately
 
opteron. I got mine in a DFI Ultra-D (still stress testing) at 2.5 at stock volts. If I wanted to stick about 1.6 through her she will do 2.7, but the extra voltage wasn't worth the extra 200mghz.
 
At any rate, how is a 1.8ghz 64bit dual core cpu NOT good for gaming? Come Friday, the FIRST thing I will do is run CSS at 1.8, then get my oc up to a high, stable clock speed and see what difference it makes. I promise it won't put the 1.8 to shame.

My old 2.8c oc'd to 3.9 didn't even make that much of a difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top