Which processor to get?

L

lemmy

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 23, 2004
Messages
460
i was thinking of getting one of these 4 processors and which one is worth it
3200 Venice
3800 X2 manch 512kb
4200 X2 manch 512kb
4400 X2 toledo 1mb

I have a water cooling system, i know the 3200 is a money saver but i'm leaning towards dual core
I have a water cooling system set up and i plan to overlock a little bit nothing too much, but also have fast speeds for gaming
 
is opteron 165 a 939 socket? cuz i have a dfi lan party nf4 ultra 939 with a 939 water block
 
he was thinking of those processors...he never said anything about his choices being limited to only those. Read his damn post.

We're out to reccommend the best in his range. I was in the same boat and im going with the opty.
 
it's a 100 bux cheaper but does it run as fast as the 4400 x2? and if the opteron 165 is OC'd can it exceed the 4400 x2?
 
yes, they will oc better than the x2 processors. The reason for this is that the memory controllers are higher quality. Look @ this thread to see what people are getting on their 165s. If you have water cooling, then youlll likely get higher. http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1025809

The only thing is you need a good mobo for the 165 because the multi is only 9x. Also, it is 1.8ghz but who cares if you can oc most of the time to 2.6ghz+ (especially with water). You can also get the opteron 170 which is @ 2ghz and has a 10x multi which will overclock more than the 170. Im not sure by how much though.
 
Okay say i get the opteron 165 and i OC to the 4400 x2 hz speeds, what would be the difference between the processors other than the name?
 
lemmy said:
Okay say i get the opteron 165 and i OC to the 4400 x2 hz speeds, what would be the difference between the processors other than the name?
Click to expand...
the thought of knowing that the opterons are basically hand picked x2s to work in the server environment. The reliability of a server processor is worth it :D

Comon, you know you want to oc much more thanthat !
 
cool thanks guys i really appreciate your advice, you guys saved me $ and gave me better performance, wish there was a reputation point system so i can give you guys rep points
 
Hrmm i have a question is it okay to place a opteron 165 on a dfi lanparty nf4 ultra mobo?
 
bymyhand said:
Well with the 4400+ you get twice the L1 cache. 128K instead of 64k. That makes the 4400 worth it for me. Also it seems the 4400 is capable of 2700 with just air cooling where as the 165 needs water cooling to get that high. I would say the 4400 IMO.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103588

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103546
Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about? Thats a typo.


http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/91/cpuz26nb.jpg

http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/2124/omgcache2ce.jpg

Looks the same to me. :p

And my 165 has hit 2.7, no problem, with pretty decent temps. Many others have done the same.

OP:

Best bang for the buck would be to go with the 3800+ X2, unless you find another $60 deal on a 165 like Monarch ran.
 
Ahh I see now. They both have 128K L1 cache then. Still wouldn’t you be able to hit a higher clock speed if you overclocked with the 4400 then the 165? Since you will be starting a higher clock speed initially.
 
bymyhand said:
Ahh I see now. They both have 128K L1 cache then. Still wouldn’t you be able to hit a higher clock speed if you overclocked with the 4400 then the 165? Since you will be starting a higher clock speed initially.
Click to expand...
like i said, the opties have a better memory controller which allows them to oc better. Search it.
 
the opteron 165 is great, and ocs very well and of course saves you cash. oc well past 2.6ghz perhaps past or up to fx60...
however from your list i would go with the 4400/1mb, as it is midrange will easily oc past a 4800 and is dual core so a bit more futureproof.
esp. with many games from this year (e.g. ut2007) which will be dual core games, and built from the ground up to support multi threading, so be prepared to see a real difference.
2 cents
f
 
jcll2002 said:
get the opty you can oc the shit out of it especially with water.
Click to expand...


That's not entirely true- I bought an Opteron 170 being told by numerous people I could OC. After 3 days of extensive trying and testing one of my cores (core 1) is not stable at even 100mhz over stock speeds, Core 0 is great- but core 1 is crap. Not all Opterons OC great, some are even horrible (like mine)... Just a warning
 
well, thats the case with all processors. Youre never guarenteed an overclock. If you want to get to 2.6 guarenteed, then get the fx60
 
I also vote for the Opteron 165. The latest batch, the UPMW series, are performing excellently, and you shouldn't be disappointed. :)
 
I love my 3800+ and it hits 2.7 ghz with ease.

less cache used to mean better clocking so I am still one of the few that still follows that guideline when I buy procs.

i dont know if I miss the cache or not since I havent had more than 512 ever
 
All i want to do is warn- dont get ur hopes up, get a proc that you'll be happy with even if it doesnt OC
 
I bought the opteron 170 but i just found out my dfi nf4 ultra mobo can do 280-300 fsb, so should i cancel my order and get the 165?

I also noticed that the L1 Cache for opterons is only 64k and the and the L1 Cache for x2 4400 is 128k is there a noticeable difference?
 
lemmy said:
I bought the opteron 170 but i just found out my dfi nf4 ultra mobo can do 280-300 fsb, so should i cancel my order and get the 165?

I also noticed that the L1 Cache for opterons is only 64k and the and the L1 Cache for x2 4400 is 128k is there a noticeable difference?
Click to expand...


Whoa whoa whoa back up. Just because your FSB can go xxx doesn't mean crap. My Ultra-D goes up to a 310 rock solid stable FSB. But guess what by Opteron 170 doesn't give a crap :mad: It doesn't matter whether my the FSB is 300 X 7 or 8, or if it is 215 X 10 multiplier, if one of your cores isn't stable- forget about it! My core 0 is stable up to 2600+, but guess what? My core 1 fails Prime 95 in less than a second at anything above 50mhz its stock speed rating. It sucks, but it was a lesson well learned! Overclocking should be looked at as icing on the cake! Just because you've got a delicious cake doesn't mean the icing is gonna be good. So the lesson? Buy a very good cake (CPU), buy a cake that if you didn't get any icing (OCing) you'd still eat it (be happy with it)... But beware, if you buy a stale yellow cake and expect to get gourmet french vanilla icing on it, you might not get either and be stuck with an inedible cake. I'm not complaining about my Opteron 170, but hell if I had done it over again I would have cut 150 off of the Ram, 100 off of the PSU, added it to the 415 cost of getting an Opteron 170 and gotten a 4600+.
 
vertigofm said:
Whoa whoa whoa back up. Just because your FSB can go xxx doesn't mean crap. My Ultra-D goes up to a 310 rock solid stable FSB. But guess what by Opteron 170 doesn't give a crap :mad: It doesn't matter whether my the FSB is 300 X 7 or 8, or if it is 215 X 10 multiplier, if one of your cores isn't stable- forget about it! My core 0 is stable up to 2600+, but guess what? My core 1 fails Prime 95 in less than a second at anything above 50mhz its stock speed rating. It sucks, but it was a lesson well learned! Overclocking should be looked at as icing on the cake! Just because you've got a delicious cake doesn't mean the icing is gonna be good. So the lesson? Buy a very good cake (CPU), buy a cake that if you didn't get any icing (OCing) you'd still eat it (be happy with it)... But beware, if you buy a stale yellow cake and expect to get gourmet french vanilla icing on it, you might not get either and be stuck with an inedible cake. I'm not complaining about my Opteron 170, but hell if I had done it over again I would have cut 150 off of the Ram, 100 off of the PSU, added it to the 415 cost of getting an Opteron 170 and gotten a 4600+.
Click to expand...
good post. Yeah, thats the onlyl reason why im worried about purchasing the 165
 
vertigofm said:
Whoa whoa whoa back up. Just because your FSB can go xxx doesn't mean crap. My Ultra-D goes up to a 310 rock solid stable FSB. But guess what by Opteron 170 doesn't give a crap :mad: It doesn't matter whether my the FSB is 300 X 7 or 8, or if it is 215 X 10 multiplier, if one of your cores isn't stable- forget about it! My core 0 is stable up to 2600+, but guess what? My core 1 fails Prime 95 in less than a second at anything above 50mhz its stock speed rating. It sucks, but it was a lesson well learned! Overclocking should be looked at as icing on the cake! Just because you've got a delicious cake doesn't mean the icing is gonna be good. So the lesson? Buy a very good cake (CPU), buy a cake that if you didn't get any icing (OCing) you'd still eat it (be happy with it)... But beware, if you buy a stale yellow cake and expect to get gourmet french vanilla icing on it, you might not get either and be stuck with an inedible cake. I'm not complaining about my Opteron 170, but hell if I had done it over again I would have cut 150 off of the Ram, 100 off of the PSU, added it to the 415 cost of getting an Opteron 170 and gotten a 4600+.
Click to expand...
So waht u are saying is that the Opteron170 could be more stable than the 165, and that i should either buy a 165 or a x2 4400
What is really bugging me though is that the opteron 170 i bought is only 50 dollars less than the x2 4400, and i'm wondering if 50 dollars is worth it :/
Here are my prices
opteron 165 =320 Dollars
Opteron 170=394 dollars
X2 4400=450 dollars
 
lemmy said:
So waht u are saying is that the Opteron170 could be more stable than the 165, and that i should either buy a 165 or a x2 4400
What is really bugging me though is that the opteron 170 i bought is only 50 dollars less than the x2 4400, and i'm wondering if 50 dollars is worth it :/
Here are my prices
opteron 165 =320 Dollars
Opteron 170=394 dollars
X2 4400=450 dollars
Click to expand...

Refer to first reply
:p
 
You're not gonna go wrong with any of those. As great as these forums are for advice and support, we do get neurotically caught up in hitting numbers that have little real world significance. My 170 seems destined to stay solid at 2.55 and not much more, unless I'm willing to run it at 1.6+. That's a 5-10% difference from the top figures (let's not consider those uber-clockers who somehow push 3.0ghz; remarkable but not likely). So most of the "good" numbers are 2.6-2.8 on the whole line of X2's and 939 opterons. Now I can drive myself nuts trying to gain that 10%, using every combination I can handle, but in the end that 5-10% winds up being a much smaller margin of performance than synthetics are going to indicate. When I stop fooling around with trying to match someone else's performance and just get to work, I realize how freakin' fast these things are at any speed.

So flip a coin, draw from a hat, toss the I Ching; whatever. You really can't go wrong whether you spend that extra $100 or not...
 
lemmy said:
So waht u are saying is that the Opteron170 could be more stable than the 165, and that i should either buy a 165 or a x2 4400
What is really bugging me though is that the opteron 170 i bought is only 50 dollars less than the x2 4400, and i'm wondering if 50 dollars is worth it :/
Here are my prices
opteron 165 =320 Dollars
Opteron 170=394 dollars
X2 4400=450 dollars
Click to expand...


What I am saying is that its a toin coss- it depends on how much do you want to risk? Sure you could take a chance- get the Opteron 165, but it could OC like crap and then you'll be stuck with a 1.8ghz processor? Are u willing to take that chance? If you buy, say the 4200- yeah you'll be spending more money, but you're also insuring yourself because in case that CPU gets a crappy OC, you'll still have 2.2ghz dual core which is better than 1.8
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top