should i bother?

R

robbay686

Weaksauce
2FA
Joined
Jul 16, 2006
Messages
100
Alright ladies I got a question for you guys, I would appreciate any help that you provide.

I've seen that the dual core (X2) processor upgrade is rather inexpensive. I've seen it on TigerDirect for 69 cad.

http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3001041&sku=CP2-A64-3800

Now my current set up is this:

AMD Athlon 64 - 3700 - 1024K L2 Cache (Socket 939) [90nm San Diego]
DFI LANPARTY UT NF4 Ultra-D (socket 939)
Corsair 2Gb XMS3200 Xtreme Pro C2 Series (4 x 512Mb) [TWINX1024-3200C2PRO]
250GB Western Digital
ATI Radeon X800XL - Radeon X800XL VPU w/256Mb GDDR3 & PCI Express x16 TVO
Enermax EG565P-VE FMA 535W ATX 12V Power Supply

Now I am wondering is it is worth the 80 bucks to upgrade from my current processor to the dual core. Would I notice a significant difference in every day computing and also playing both HL and HL2 games? I've been out of the loop since I got this rig nearly 2 years ago. I have no idea on what any manufacturer is planning on releasing any time soon or in the near future.. hence my post.


Many Thanks.
 
hey thx for the response

do you mean that it's faster then the Toledo?
they seem almost identical? what's the difference?

plus i'm from Toronto and newegg doesn't ship up here. 114 seems like a great price but doesn't do me much good :(
 
In a word...... NO, you would not notice a significant difference. Save your money. Currently, I have 2 socket 939 rigs. My gamer is an AMD 64 3800+ single core clocked to 2.62Ghz and my daily machine is an AMD 64 4200+ dual core at 2.2Ghz ( stock speed ). Both have 2 gigs of ram. My gamer out benches the dual core in almost every test I've thrown at it. With the same videocard in both rigs, the single core benchmarked about 350 points higher in 3dmark '05, than the dual core. Actually, I'm kinda disappointed in the dual core's performance because it cost alot more than the single core. YMMV.

The dual core does seem to multi-task better than the single core. Meaning, if you are doing alot of stuff at the same time, you won't take the same hit as a single core. For a bigger boost in "day to day" stuff, you might want a cpu over 2.4Ghz ( either single or dual core ). Unfortunately, you're probably not going to find a socket 939 OVER 2.4Ghz for $80. For a boost in gaming, you might want to upgrade your videocard. I went from an ATI X850XT to an ATI X1900XTX and nearly doubled my perfomance. My 3dmark '05 went from 6,220 to 10,910. Once again, we're way over spending $80.
 
thanks wave!

see thats the thing, I'd like to be able to have more things running in the background when playing a game like counterstrike.
i like to run 'my programs' in the background while playing, and it's not like i really lag, however sometimes I can sense the strain on the system.

i do understand what you meant by saying that a daily machine over the 2.4Ghz dual core or not would be much better however that involves spending upwards of 300 which i'm not really looking to do as of right now. and for the amount of gaming that i do, i'm fine with the performance of my x800xl.

hmm, now I'm not really sure what to do now..
what would be your suggestion?
 
I'd like to be able to have more things running in the background when playing a game like counterstrike.
Click to expand...

thats the definition of usefulness for a dual core. Set your games CPU affinity to one processor and your other major applications to the other one and you shouldn't even know or "feel" they are running unless they are huge memory hogs. Well perhaps that is a bit over the top, but if for $80 you can get 2 that run as fast as your one, not a bad upgrade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top