• 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.

Which processor should I get?

F

flashodad

n00b
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
11
I'm considering upgrading my S939 A64 3200+. I have an Epox EP-9NPA+Ultra, which claims to support A64, A64 FX, and all X2 S939 processors. I haven't kept up on processors in the last year and feel overwhelmed with all of the information out there. I don't plan to overclock. I do play video games, but that's about the only CPU intensive activity I've got going. Which processor should I buy to get the most bang for my buck?

Additionally, money is an issue and I need to spend wisely. Thanks!
 
Athlon X2 3800+ or 4200+ if you're a multitasker. Athlon 64 3800+ or 4000+ if your more into games. FX series is what AMD calls their high end Athlon 64 (FX 53, FX 55, FX 57) and X2;s (FX-60, FX-62) and are usually way overpriced for the performance gain you get.

an X2 is nothing more than two Athlon 64 stuck together in one package.
 
Actually, the P4's that were dual core were just two cores stuck together. AMD chips on the other hand, were a better-implemented design, and were not just "two chips stuck together."
 
Go for an X2 3800+ if you're on a budget or are overclocking
Go for an X2 4400+ if you want better stock speeds/arn't overclocking
Go for an Opteron 165 if you're a heavy overclocker and can spare the extra ~30$ These things are known to reach 2.7+ on stock voltage :eek:

No matter which you pick, a small 200-400mhz overclock is definitely easy, without any trouble at all. I'd recommend the Opteron or the 3800 X2, and clock it to 220 x 10. Just my opinion :).

Dont go single core, not anymore, it's just a bad decision right now
 
belmicah said:
Actually, the P4's that were dual core were just two cores stuck together. AMD chips on the other hand, were a better-implemented design, and were not just "two chips stuck together."
Click to expand...

I was oversimplifying things. I was justi meaning that the X2 isn't an entirely different chip like say an Ahtlon XP is. But that it was just 2 A64 (plus necessary logic to coordinate the cores and what not) stuck in the same package.
 
ok, thanks for clearing that up. The Core 2 Duo chips have a much, much better design than the Pentium D's. With the Pentium D's, they pretty much went "Oh, shit, AMD is beating us, hurry up and glue these cores together and lets just overadvertise our shitty product!"Now, AMD is scrambling to keep up with the better design of the Core 2 Duo
 
Based on this thread and reading a few other threads debating the X2 4400+ 110w v 89w and manchester v toledo, I decided to order a X2 4400+ 89w toledo core.

Thanks for all of your help!
 
I love my X2 3800 to death. I'm RAM limited on overclocking, but I've seen that chip hit 2.5 GHz with a 2C temp increase with the stock cooler. Not the fastest thing on the market, but it's the fastest for 150 bucks.

*edit* Didn't see that you already ordered.
 
I'd say wait next year for the AMD quadcore that will likely beat the new Intels. Heheheh, the more evil the better. :D Plus, it would take advantage of DDR 3 ram right^

Anyway, I like the 3800+ single core in terms of performance and price. It really went down in price. You can use something like pricegrabber to find out where they're least expensive.

In two years maybe I'll have a quadcore, DDR3 RAM, HD DVD-R and Windows Vista.
 
Robstar said:
Dunno why'd you take 110w over 89w. Isn't it a no brainer ? :)
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if I'm just misreading the question, but I did get the 89w, as it seemed to be the no-brainer choice (runs cooler and overclocks well, according to the threads I read here).

coolpurplefan said:
I'd say wait next year for the AMD quadcore that will likely beat the new Intels. Heheheh, the more evil the better. :D Plus, it would take advantage of DDR 3 ram right^
Click to expand...

I'm kind of a middle of the line type of guy. I don't have a huge budget for computer expenditures, so getting a mid-range A64 3200+ 18 months ago followed by an A64 X2 4400+ that both fit into the same mobo this year is about where I draw the line. If they release the quadcores next year, then maybe I can upgrade my entire computer in another 18-24 months, but for now, this is what I've got. :)

Thanks again to everyone for all of their help.
 
X2 4400 is a waste. The extra cache does hardly anything for AMD chips. Thats why they are being phased out. Go for a 4200 or 4600.
 
Stupac said:
X2 4400 is a waste. The extra cache does hardly anything for AMD chips. Thats why they are being phased out. Go for a 4200 or 4600.
Click to expand...

No. they were phased out because AMD feels there brand was too diluted and offered customers too many choices. They stopped producing 1MB chips to thin out the product line and to differientiate more between the FX (and highend X2) lineup and the mainstream X2 line.
 
yeah, and the s939 4000+ is $140 at monarchcomputer.com
does that make any sense^

Hehehe, I briefly thought about it until I saw some benchmarks where the Intel E6600 was about 2x as fast as the 4000+ in some recent games. Sheesh, twice as fast. That's a little embarrasing.
 
coolpurplefan said:
yeah, and the s939 4000+ is $140 at monarchcomputer.com
does that make any sense^

Hehehe, I briefly thought about it until I saw some benchmarks where the Intel E6600 was about 2x as fast as the 4000+ in some recent games. Sheesh, twice as fast. That's a little embarrasing.
Click to expand...

Twice as fast at insanely low resolutions?
 
I just thought of something. You could get a socket AM2 to upgrade to quad core next year. Sheesh, that was a moment of sheer brilliance. :)
 
he could also get a socket 775 and upgrade to quad core next month. so what.

He already has a motherboard and ram. If he went AM2 then he'd also not only replace the motherboard, but also RAM. Not to mention that AMD's quad core's best performance is going to be seen on AM2+, not AM2.
 
I'm a fan of the 64 X2 4000+ for the sole reason that it has 1mb x2 L2 cache instead of 512.

ADA4000CSbox
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top