• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Single or Dual-Core?

A

Ander5

n00b
Joined
Feb 20, 2006
Messages
36
I am going to be putting and AMD machine together over the next month or two. Here is what I am planning on getting:

Chassis: Thermaltake Armor Jr. (Silver)
PS: OCZ PowerStream 520W
Primary HD: WD Raptor X 150GB SATA
Secondary HD: WD Caviar SE16 320GB SATA
Memory: Corsair XMS 2GB (512MBx4)
Mobo: Asus A8N-SLi Premium nForce4
Video Card: XMX GeForce 7900 GT (256mb)
Optical Drive: NEC 16x DVD +/- RW Combo Drive

This rig will be primarily for gaming (most played: WoW, BF2, UT2004, WarCraft III), and I am unsure of what processor to get. I am looking at the AMD Athlon 64 4000+ (San Diego) currently for a single-core option, or the AMD Athlon 64 3800+ X2 (Manchester) for a dual-core option.

What would you guys recommend? I have recieved mixed reviews and varying benchmarks on the web, so I am unsure of what would be best. Thanks in advance! :D
 
I vote for dual core as well however for gaming single cores still work fairly well. But dual core will take advantage of any games that use multithreading.( More and more games will start to use this feature. )

Rumor has it there is some major AMD price cuts coming in about a month however. ;)
 
Other than taking advantage of games with multiple threads, what else does dual core have over single core? The single core's clock speed is slightly higher, and it can be OC'd like mad from what I've heard.
 
A misconception that many people have over dual-core and dual-cpu is that it ONLY helps programs written with multithreading in mind. While it does increase the speed of those apps. However many people run more than one app at a time. So when two apps need cpu time with dual-core they do not have to fight over the single resource which makes things a bit slower.

Gaming example.
Playing WoW many people have TeamSpeak running at the same time.
 
Alright. I have heard that the San Deigo core is superior to the other cores. Is there any truth to this statement?
 
Ander5 said:
Other than taking advantage of games with multiple threads, what else does dual core have over single core? The single core's clock speed is slightly higher, and it can be OC'd like mad from what I've heard.
Click to expand...
Like mentioned above, the multicore chips will run multithreaded apps faster, and run multiple single threaded apps faster as well.

Alright. I have heard that the San Deigo core is superior to the other cores. Is there any truth to this statement?
Click to expand...
The San Diego core is better than the Vienice core because it has twice as much L2 Cache. (those are both single core chips)

The dual cores are the same way. The Manchester cores have 512KB of L2 cache per core and the Toledo cores have 1MB of L2 cache per core. Other than the amount of L2 cache the cores are nearly identical.
 
If I had the option, I would:
A. Wait until this pricing becomes a reality on 7/24 so you can either save money or get an even quicker proc for the same money
B. Most definitely go dual core.

The overall experience on a dual core machine is amazing. Windows balances applications between the two cores and allows for a slow-down free experience no matter what you're running. I just think that in terms of the system's overall performance, dual core is the way to go.

As for your general setup, I have one major change. Instead of 939, why not pick up an AM2 system instead? DDR prices will only be going up from now on as production slows, and DDR2 is getting cheaper. You'll also have compatibility with quad core processors next year, as well as the 65nm K8Ls. AM2 will essentially be no more expensive, but in the long run will be easier and less expensive to upgrade.
 
Other than being the new thing, what does DDR2 have over DDR? I have used DDR forever, and I have had no problems with it.

With the AM2 boards, are there SLi boards out for it yet? I am not planning on SLi right at this moment but it would be nice to have the option to do so in the future. Or, is there an AM2 board that is comparable to the 939 Asus board that I have picked out now?
 
Ander5 said:
Other than being the new thing, what does DDR2 have over DDR? I have used DDR forever, and I have had no problems with it.

With the AM2 boards, are there SLi boards out for it yet? I am not planning on SLi right at this moment but it would be nice to have the option to do so in the future. Or, is there an AM2 board that is comparable to the 939 Asus board that I have picked out now?
Click to expand...

DDR2 offers much more memory bandwidth, but ATM it doesn't translate into any real performance increases because of the design of A64 processors. As of right now, AM2 offers no performance boost over 939; just the upgrade path to the new processors (939 will be EOL, and AM2 is replacing it). The main difference in memory is that DDR will be far more expensive in the near future as memory manufacturers stop producing it and switch over to DDR2 production.

As for motherboards, here is a list of a few SLI AM2 motherboards. Here is the ASUS equivalent of the motherboard you have selected.
 
Back to cores, I was looking at the AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+, and it has a Windsor (2x512kb L2 Cache) core. Any thoughts on that?

If the prices hold true for 7/24, I will probably go AM2 and if the above processor is good I will go with that (it is speculated to be $240, almost $60 cheaper than the AMD Athlon 64 4000+ that I am looking at now). I will have to do shopping around for DDR2 memory, since I have no knowledge of what manufacturers are good, and specifications that I should be looking for.

Any help would be appreciated, and thanks for all the help so far! :D :D
 
As for the core for the AM2 processor, they'll perform the same as their 939 counterparts. As for memory selection, start a thread in the memory section to get the best suggestions. You'll want to make sure that whatever you buy is pc6400/DDR800 to get the most performance out of your system.
 
I was hoping that AMD would slash prices on the 4400+ because it has 2x1mb L2 Cache. How much of a difference will I see between the two?
 
on most applications not much. Maybe a 3 - 5% increase in performance.
 
quadnad said:
As for the core for the AM2 processor, they'll perform the same as their 939 counterparts. As for memory selection, start a thread in the memory section to get the best suggestions. You'll want to make sure that whatever you buy is pc6400/DDR800 to get the most performance out of your system.
Click to expand...

You seem to be well-learned in the processor world: If I am primarily going to be using this rig for gaming, how much of a difference will I see between a 2x1mb cache and a 2x512kb cache? I was reading on DailyTech (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2858) that cache is not as important on AMD as Intel, and that for gaming cache doesn't really matter either.
 
Hence my above post . . . for gaming you would be lucky to see a 3% increase in performance.
 
metallicafan said:
on most applications not much. Maybe a 3 - 5% increase in performance.
Click to expand...

I think that settles it then: I will wait until the end of july to get the Athlon 64 X2 4200+ socket AM2 along with the Asus SLi Deluxe that is AM2 compatable. I will go to the memory forum to see what the best DDR2 I can get for this application (within my budget, of course ;) )

Thanks again for all of your help!
 
Ander5 said:
I think that settles it then: I will wait until the end of july to get the Athlon 64 X2 4200+ socket AM2 along with the Asus SLi Deluxe that is AM2 compatable. I will go to the memory forum to see what the best DDR2 I can get for this application (within my budget, of course ;) )

Thanks again for all of your help!
Click to expand...

Sorry, I went off to grab some lunch :D But yes, there is a very minimal difference between the cache sizes, something that you can basically overlook entirely. That'll be an excellent setup, and good luck with the build!
 
Much to my sadness it looks like AMD will not be producing anymore X2 chips with 1MB cache. So the 4000+, 4400+, and 4800+ will be dropped from the line up. I have not been able to find any of these chips in AM2 format in stock. So I am guessing the AM2 variety are already gone.

Check out the front page article on Hard|OCP about it. Also another thread here talks about it.
 
m1abram said:
Much to my sadness it looks like AMD will not be producing anymore X2 chips with 1MB cache. So the 4000+, 4400+, and 4800+ will be dropped from the line up. I have not been able to find any of these chips in AM2 format in stock. So I am guessing the AM2 variety are already gone.

Check out the front page article on Hard|OCP about it. Also another thread here talks about it.
Click to expand...

According to the fine folks on this forum, DailyTech, and co-workers (also enthusiasts) the 1mb L2 cache will not boost performance in gaming significantly.


metallicafan said:
...for gaming you would be lucky to see a 3% increase in performance.
Click to expand...

These reasons have made me make the switch from single-core skt 939 processor to the dual-core skt am2 processor. I also saved about $50 in price. THe motherboard and processor were cheaper ($10, $51 respectively), wheras the ram was slightly more expensive ($270 vs $248). I do believe that overall this rig is going to rock, and guess what? It will cost me less than $1500 :D
 
So with the 4200+ @ $250 on July 24, I am thinking of doing this as well as I am kind of an AMD !!!!!!. However, if the July 23rd $300 E6600 truly outperforms the FX-62, I see no other choice to jump ship, even though I don't want an Intel proc. It would be almost throwing money down the drain not too.

I'm stuck and the only thing I can do is wait n see...

BTW, I am NOT rying to turn this into any kind of Intel vs. AMD thread. I'm just stating the predicament I'm in. :)
 
eastvillager said:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=983781
Click to expand...

That thread is entirely overblown. 99% of the issues I've heard/seen are solved either by setting an affinity or installing the little patch. Personally, through FEAR, BF2, Source, and many other titles, on three seperate 3800x2s I've built, I have seen no issues. WoW was the only issue I heard of from a friend, and that was fixed by setting the affinity. Also, it's worthwhile noting that most of the issues aren't present in newer titles, or are fixed in later patches.

I'm still a firm believer that if you can swing the cost (especially by next month), a dual core processor will give you a better overall experience.
 
quadnad said:
If I had the option, I would:
A. Wait until this pricing becomes a reality on 7/24 so you can either save money or get an even quicker proc for the same money
B. Most definitely go dual core.

...........
Click to expand...

It's been a while since I have checked up on prices, though I had heard they were going down. I'm planning on upgrading mobo/cpu in the next few months and if that pricing really does hit, I will positively wet myself. I'm even excited just thinking about wetting myself.
 
Darknyt said:
It's been a while since I have checked up on prices, though I had heard they were going down. I'm planning on upgrading mobo/cpu in the next few months and if that pricing really does hit, I will positively wet myself. I'm even excited just thinking about wetting myself.
Click to expand...

whoa. and here i was thinking you were excited about the pricing. well, sounds like a pair of pull-ups is what you'll need come the 24th.

i'm incredibly excited about this pricing though...
 
To the OP:
Let me beat this dead horse some more - dual core now. If I was in a mind to upgrade that's what I'd do.
Ok - horse is still dead but I feel much better now... :D
 
Well, I have two (for a school project) and the results were almost seamless. Even though the dual core was $10 more expensive and I had to do some fixes to make some games work it's an investment for the future.

Or you can be like me and just buy both dual core and single core and swamp them out. :D
 
divxman said:
I noticed you have a 7900, before you decide to go dual core make sure you read up on posts about people who may have had problems with that vid card and dual core processors. Check these two posts out for reference.

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=983781
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1066519
Click to expand...

The first link is rather old and I believe most of those problems have been fixed via software updates and drivers. Not yet having Dual Core I am not personally sure.

The second link I am not sure what it has to do with dual core? One person talks about dead 7900, but that is from the companies that factory OC them and they are all good about handling those issues.
 
m1abram said:
The first link is rather old and I believe most of those problems have been fixed via software updates and drivers. Not yet having Dual Core I am not personally sure.

The second link I am not sure what it has to do with dual core? One person talks about dead 7900, but that is from the companies that factory OC them and they are all good about handling those issues.
Click to expand...

Acutally the first link is still ongoing, and most of the people who have this problem are not fixed. And the second thread is one that I started myself, and it has everything to do with dual core, Im currently running a Pentium D 930 Dual Core 3.0 w/ 2GB DDR2 Ram, and a GeForce 7600 GT OC, and all games I play freeze up every 10-15min into them. This problem is an issue with Nvidia cards and dual core processors. I have tried every software update and old / new drivers and even Beta Nvidia drivers, I have also formatted numerous amounts of times. Not one of these solutions them has fixed the problem for me. At this point I am being forced to return the Nvidia card and buy an ATI.
 
divxman said:
Acutally the first link is still ongoing, and most of the people who have this problem are not fixed. And the second thread is one that I started myself, and it has everything to do with dual core, Im currently running a Pentium D 930 Dual Core 3.0 w/ 2GB DDR2 Ram, and a GeForce 7600 GT OC, and all games I play freeze up every 10-15min into them. This problem is an issue with Nvidia cards and dual core processors. I have tried every software update and old / new drivers and even Beta Nvidia drivers, I have also formatted numerous amounts of times. Not one of these solutions them has fixed the problem for me. At this point I am being forced to return the Nvidia card and buy an ATI.
Click to expand...
is it nvidia and Intel dual core specific? .. on my Opteron 170 @ 2.6ghz and 7900gtx .. I can't even remember the last time my comp locked up on anything , let alone a game (F.E.A.R. , BF2, CS:S, NFSMW , Far Cry ..are a few of the games I play)

just wondering is all
:confused:

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top