Upgrade Opteron 2216 for gaming?

I'm working on a friend's computer that is a HP workstation from around 2006. It is a 2 physical cpu system with 2X Opteron 2216's (only 1 is working at the moment because he's on Windows 7 Home, an upgrade to Professional is coming). I'm selling him a graphics card that will be either Radeon 270X or 280X depending on what makes more sense.

I saw very little difference between the 270X and 280X with just 1 Opteron 2216, and even with the 280X, Farcry 3 was only just playable on low settings, leading me to believe the cpu is really holding the system back (he has 4GB DDR2 PC-5300). I'm concerned that even with the 2nd cpu working it won't make a huge improvement so I'm looking at possible processor upgrades.

This is a Socket F system and the cheapest easy upgrade I found was going from the Opteron 2216's (dual-core 2.4GHz) to a pair of Opteron 2384's (quad-core 2.70Ghz).

I can't find any gaming benchmarks for these processors to know if this is a worthwhile upgrade or not. I don't have a good sense if it would help gaming to a point to release the cpu's from bottle necking the 280X and even the 270X to a lesser degree.

Will it take the 6-core CPUs?

Here are some 2.4Ghz ones for $7.49 each shipped.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/AMD-OPTERON-OS8431WJS6DGN-2-4GHz-6-CORE-SOCKET-F-1207-75-W-L2-6X512KB-2472A-/171339361262?pt=CPUs&hash=item27e49f2bee

What is the exact model of the workstation?

I am thinking that that system is going to be CPU bottlenecked no matter what for gaming, especially since it is running DDR2-667.

Any newer game is going to destroy it.

Edit: Here is a pair of 3.2Ghz Dual cores for $30 shipped:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Set-of-2-AMD-Opteron-2224-SE-3-2GHz-CPU-OSY2224GAA6CX-Socket-F-Dual-Core-2224SE-/131220439233?pt=US_Server_CPUs_Processors&hash=item1e8d5900c1

Were the 2384s listed on the CPU support list for the motherboard or HP's product page? I know HP is one of those OEMs that can be very picky about CPU upgrades. It wouldn't be the first time that the platform supported an upgrade, but the OEM didn't write a new BIOS version to support the newer CPUs.

Far Cry 3 lists an Athlon 64 x2 6000+ as the minimum required on the AMD side. There isn't a lot of information out there, but it looks like those Opterons are slower on an individual basis, though you may gain some performance with the second CPU working, depending on how well-optimized the engine is for multi-threading.

The best comparison I found was here which makes them look like they are architecturally very similar. If that is the case, those Opterons are probably a tad slower than a 6000+ on an individual basis.

cyclone3d said:

Will it take the 6-core CPUs?

Click to expand...

Yes, it does. But then the cpu speed goes down a little more, I wasn't sure if that would hurt it more than the extra cores would help.

cyclone3d said:

What is the exact model of the workstation?

Click to expand...

HP XW9400

cyclone3d said:

I am thinking that that system is going to be CPU bottlenecked no matter what for gaming, especially since it is running DDR2-667.

Click to expand...

I was feeling the same way, but with my limited knowledge with workstations and their cpu's I'm hoping there was something I didn't know.

cyclone3d said:

Edit: Here is a pair of 3.2Ghz Dual cores for $30 shipped:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Set-of-2-AMD-Opteron-2224-SE-3-2GHz-CPU-OSY2224GAA6CX-Socket-F-Dual-Core-2224SE-/131220439233?pt=US_Server_CPUs_Processors&hash=item1e8d5900c1

Click to expand...

I had looked over those at one point in an effort to get the highest GHz possible. I changed to the 2384's because they have 6MB of L3 Cache, whereas the the 2224 SE doesn't have L3 Cache. I'm no processor expert so I'm not sure if my logic was correct.

MrCaffeineX said:

Were the 2384s listed on the CPU support list for the motherboard or HP's product page?

Click to expand...

I just checked and yes, it is on there.

MrCaffeineX said:

Far Cry 3 lists an Athlon 64 x2 6000+ as the minimum required on the AMD side....If that is the case, those Opterons are probably a tad slower than a 6000+ on an individual basis.

Click to expand...

That seems to be the case. The game feels like it is right on the edge of play-ability with framerates in the 20's quite often.

I had found these 2384's on ebay for $11 each. They would bring the computer up to 8 cores, up the cpu speed to 2.7GHz, and add 6MB of L3 cache. I'd prefer to get faster quad-core cpu's but there is only a limited amount I'm going to recommend gets spent on components that will only work in this computer and those were running $30+ each.

Did a bit of looking, and it looks like that machine should work with either the 24xx series or the 83xx series according to this page about upgrading them.

http://www.techsupportforum.com/forums/f15/solved-upgrading-xw9400-mobo-567269-4.html

Here is a pair of 8389s for 38 plus shipping
http://www.ebay.com/itm/PAIR-of-AMD-Opteron-8389-2-9-GHz-Quad-Core-OS8389WHP4DGI-Processor-/271530527024?pt=US_Server_CPUs_Processors&hash=item3f387b0930

That would get it up to 2.9Ghz per core.

I would definitely get the processors with the L3 cache.

The 8389 also has a 2.2Ghz HT instead of the 1Ghz HT of the 2384. To get 2.2Ghz HT on the 23xx series, you need at least a 2387.

its the clock speed. 2.4ghz on a older slower cpu isn't very fast at all.

I'd look for the highest clocked cpu's you can find and replace. Since its a dual socket board, I wouldn't worry if it was quad cores or dual cores.

Best option if the board supports it 4340 or 4238, then older models if board support is a problem 8224 SE, 2224 SE, 1224 SE, 2393 SE

Since you have ddr2 memory, and am3+ option you cannot use because they do not have ddr2 memory controller.

I agree, buy two quick duals with L3 cache. That's a quad-core machine: more than enough for moderate gaming. Most games don't take advantage of more than two cores.

The problem is none of the dual-core chips have any L3 Cache, I have to go up to quad for the L3 Cache.

Also, I just got Windows 7 Ultimate installed on it and found with both Opteron 2216 processors working there was a huge improvement in Farcry 3 with the Radeon 280X. It went from borderline playable on low settings with one cpu working to easily playable on very high settings with both cpu's working. I didn't really see that coming.

When it was just one cpu Farcry 3 was maxing out both cores pegged at 100%, with both cpu's working it was running all 4 cores at around 80%.

I ran the Heaven benchmark with 1 cpu and I'll try it again now that both cpu's are working as well as a few other games and see how things look.

24Gordon said:

The problem is none of the dual-core chips have any L3 Cache, I have to go up to quad for the L3 Cache.

Also, I just got Windows 7 Ultimate installed on it and found with both Opteron 2216 processors working there was a huge improvement in Farcry 3 with the Radeon 280X. It went from borderline playable on low settings with one cpu working to easily playable on very high settings with both cpu's working. I didn't really see that coming.

When it was just one cpu Farcry 3 was maxing out both cores pegged at 100%, with both cpu's working it was running all 4 cores at around 80%.

I ran the Heaven benchmark with 1 cpu and I'll try it again now that both cpu's are working as well as a few other games and see how things look.

Click to expand...

Awesome news! Yeah, heaven bench tries as hard as it can to be GPU-dependant. I know that wen I OC CPUs, the Hearn score goes up by single digits, but OCing the video card awards hundreds of points.

Heaven Bench Settings:

Render: Direct3D11
Mode: 1920x1080 2xAA fullscreen
Preset Custom
Quality High
Tessellation: Moderate

1 cpu & 280X
FPS: 44.3
Score: 1115
Min FPS: 11.3
Max FPS: 77.4

2 cpu's & 280X
FPS: 47.3
Score: 1192
Min FPS: 8.5
Max FPS: 88.9

I also tested Crysis 2 with 1 cpu and 2 cpu's along with the 280X. With 1 cpu it was playable on it's lowest setting (high). With 2 cpu's it is playable on the next setting (very high) and has a smoother framerate.

Games are feeling a bit better for sure. Farcry 3 was a huge difference, Crysis a nice improvement. Heaven Benchmark showed slight improvement.

2384's and 2387's and 8389's are all based on the same arch as Phenom 2, The hex core's (8425 etc) were used as the basis for the Thuban 10xx 6 core's.

The 4340's and 4238's suggested earlier will not work - they run on the c32 socket - not socket F

based on your improved performance, it would seem to me those 2224's for 30 bucks linked in the second post would turn that into a decent little rig. Assuming they are compatible.


The ddr2 ram thing isn't that big a deal, I did some testing with ddr2 versus ddr3, granted not with opterons, but the difference wasn't that huge. It would probably be a decent idea to see if you could get it up to 8 gig of ram, not sure what the costs would be to find ddr2 in the quantity needed though.

Nathan_P said:

2384's and 2387's and 8389's are all based on the same arch as Phenom 2, The hex core's (8425 etc) were used as the basis for the Thuban 10xx 6 core's.

Click to expand...

Great info, I'll look up some Phenom 2 benchmarks to try to get an idea of how the Opterons would run games.

stealthy123 said:

based on your improved performance, it would seem to me those 2224's for 30 bucks linked in the second post would turn that into a decent little rig. Assuming they are compatible.

Click to expand...

2224's are compatible and would bump up to 3.2GHz, but there would not be any L3 Cache. Would it be better to spend $40 to get 2x 8389's (2.9GHz + 6MB L3 Cache) that cyclone3d suggested? That's the way I'm leaning at the moment because of the L3 Cache.

stealthy123 said:

The ddr2 ram thing isn't that big a deal, I did some testing with ddr2 versus ddr3, granted not with opterons, but the difference wasn't that huge. It would probably be a decent idea to see if you could get it up to 8 gig of ram, not sure what the costs would be to find ddr2 in the quantity needed though.

Click to expand...

When he asked me to first look at his computer I was horrified to find only 1GB of RAM in it. I bought a 4GB X 1GB kit on ebay for $6.50, so I can get another set of those. I was afraid to get all 8GB at once because I haven't had to deal with ECC Registered RAM before and wasn't sure how picky this motherboard would be.

This was his League of Legends (on low settings) computer. 1GB of RAM, Geforce 8600GT (this broke and is main reason I looked at his computer), and only one of the two cpu's working. He thought it was old (it is old) and not worth upgrading. It was such a sad state to see this computer in.

The L3 doesn't seem to matter as much as you would think, the difference in clock speed would most likely more than make up for it. Either choice is good one, imo.

Article about l3 on phenoms, should apply:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/athlon-l3-cache,2416.html

i run a dual Opteron 8439SE as my home system.

What motherboard is it in your system exactly? If it supports the newer dual plane Opterons then you can probably update the BIOS and run the Opteron 8439SE (2.8 GHz "Istanbul" core/6xK10 cores each).

My system was formerly running dual Opteron 2212 (dual core). Upgrading to dual Opteron 8439SE was just a matter up updating the BIOS and swapping the chips in for a 5x performance increase.

This system is far faster than the i7-4770 i use every day for work (really 4770 is doggone slow in comparison).

Cinebench 11.5 run for you:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuAoC4fBPNY

As far as gaming goes... just get a reasonably good card (say a GTX 760) and you should be good.

edit: i think those boards use an OEM version of the Tyan 2915... to my best knowledge there were two versions of that board... and hopefully yours is the later version (2915E i believe its called). If it supports dual plane power then you can run either the 2439SE or 8439SE. 8439SE seem to be more plentiful... the only difference between the 2439SE and 8439SE is that the 8xxx version has additional HT links allowing it to be used in an 8 way system. It will work fine in a dual Opteron board however (just like it does in mine - just make sure "HT assist" is off in the BIOS). If you will be using the existing heat sinks you'll want to stress the system and see how hot things get... if hotter than around 53C at full bore... update the heat sink/fan (i use a dynatron F558).

btw, the Tyan motherboards are generally not overclockable... but with ECC and this being server grade hardware... it is just rock solid reliable. Anyways, with 12 cores humming along you won't feel much need to overclock

Never overlook these old workstation rigs they can surprise you

I'm running a old Dell dual CPU workstation with 16GB of ECC DDR2 and a AMD 7870.

8 cores at 3GHz still WPrimes at around 7 seconds and games run nice and smooth.

The amazing thing is this stuff is battleship build quality, rock solid reliable and cheap, real cheap. The T5400 main unit cost me just $130! Good quality IT kit still has its uses.

Generally with these older CPU's going for better speed is going to be more worth while then looking for more cores, although more cores won't hurt. Also these things loved L2 cache.

Let us know if you decide to upgrade them.

Like 99% of games can't take advantage of more than 4 cores and many can't even take advantage of more than 2. I don't know much about opteron based systems but he should really consider upgrading to at least an i3 2100. Spending time and money upgrading that system just seems like a waste.

ssnyder28 said:

Like 99% of games can't take advantage of more than 4 cores and many can't even take advantage of more than 2. I don't know much about opteron based systems but he should really consider upgrading to at least an i3 2100. Spending time and money upgrading that system just seems like a waste.

Click to expand...

Trust me I'd take an old $3000 multi CPU workstation with lots of cores and top quality build and components over a $500 off the shelf i3 box every time.

Properly setup these old classy boxes can still rock...and cost peanuts. Plus they are far more fun and interesting to play around with.

It's like owning an old Rolls Royce rather than a new Hyundai. No one looks twice at the Hyundai. Much of a muchness.

daglesj said:

Trust me I'd take an old $3000 multi CPU workstation with lots of cores and top quality build and components over a $500 off the shelf i3 box every time.

Properly setup these old classy boxes can still rock...and cost peanuts. Plus they are far more fun and interesting to play around with.

It's like owning an old Rolls Royce rather than a new Hyundai. No one looks twice at the Hyundai. Much of a muchness.

Click to expand...

They may rock but the op is already experiencing a cpu bottleneck with a single cpu on his dual cpu board. Adding another cpu won't alleviate that.

Anyone paying $500 for an i3 box is paying way too much. Since he already has a gpu the rest of the system components can be purchased under $250 even less if he doesn't need a psu, hard drive, or case. If he is going to use a 280x he may as well have a system that won't bottleneck it so much.

Also if more cores is your thing opt for a 1366 hex core xeon setup, it would demolish a dual 2216 config for gaming (and likely most of everything else.) Even a Phenom II setup would be a improvement over that configuration. Does your friend plan to do anything other than game on this system?