AMD upgrade to which dual core processor

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

I use an AMD Athlon 64 3800+ processor on a ABIT AV8 motherboard, using
a VIA K8T800 Pro chipset. I believe when I got the system the documents
indicated that the 3800+ was the highest speed processor the
motherboard would accept at 2.4GHz. I want to up-grade to a dual core
processor.

My question is:
1. Is the 3800+ the same as the 3800+ x2 with a dual core but operating
at 2GHz

2. Should I be looking at the 4800+ x2 operating at 2.4GHz

3. Are the AMD model numbers indicating increased speed from the dual
core or are they indicating single processor operation

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Check the CPU compatibility list from Abit:

http://www.abit-usa.com/products/mb/amd-athlon64-c.php

It claims that the AV8 supports *all* socket 939 CPUs, if BIOS 21 or later
is installed. (The latest is 24.) That would include the FX57, which is a
2.8 GHz CPU. (If you want to upgrade your CPU, upgrade the BIOS first.)

That's in line with what I expect for my Asus A8V board (same chipset),
although I still use a year-old 3500+ "Newcastle" CPU.

1) I'm not really competent to discuss processor architectures, but the
3800+ exists in at least two forms: the original "Newcastle" 130 nm version,
and the current "Venice" 90 nm version. They both run at 2.4 GHz, and have
512 kB of L2 cache, but use silicon which I assume is entirely different.
The Venice CPU is also supposed to support SSE3 instructions, whatever that
means. (Something to do with streaming data for multimedia, I imagine.) The
3800+ X2 has two 2.0 GHz cores, with 512 kB of L2 cache for each. For
single-threaded applications, its performance may be more like a 3200+ (2.0
GHz A64) than a 3800+ single-core.

2) If you can afford the 4800+ X2, you should be able to use it. (A 4400+ X2
would be a better deal: it has the same 1 MB L2 cache as the 4800+, but it's
clocked at 2.2 GHz.)

3) The performance rating derives from the dual core, but it's not directly
comparable to a single core CPU with the same rating. In some tasks a 3800+
will be faster than a 3800+ X2, but for multithreaded applications, the X2
may be significantly faster.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2484

(It's a site for gamers, but many of the benchmarks they run aren't gaming
ones.)

HTH.


Address scrambled. Replace nkbob with bobkn.

"www.interfacebus.com" <ldavis8@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1123956412.286272.128770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I use an AMD Athlon 64 3800+ processor on a ABIT AV8 motherboard, using
> a VIA K8T800 Pro chipset. I believe when I got the system the documents
> indicated that the 3800+ was the highest speed processor the
> motherboard would accept at 2.4GHz. I want to up-grade to a dual core
> processor.
>
> My question is:
> 1. Is the 3800+ the same as the 3800+ x2 with a dual core but operating
> at 2GHz
>
> 2. Should I be looking at the 4800+ x2 operating at 2.4GHz
>
> 3. Are the AMD model numbers indicating increased speed from the dual
> core or are they indicating single processor operation
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

www.interfacebus.com wrote:
> I use an AMD Athlon 64 3800+ processor on a ABIT AV8 motherboard, using
> a VIA K8T800 Pro chipset. I believe when I got the system the documents
> indicated that the 3800+ was the highest speed processor the
> motherboard would accept at 2.4GHz. I want to up-grade to a dual core
> processor.
>
> My question is:
> 1. Is the 3800+ the same as the 3800+ x2 with a dual core but operating
> at 2GHz
>
> 2. Should I be looking at the 4800+ x2 operating at 2.4GHz

I have tried a 4800+ in that motherboard in conjunction with the
latest BIOS. It would not POST. I put a 4400+ in instead and
it worked just fine - and saved the computer owner quite a few
bucks. He is presumably quite happy with his upgraded CPU
(previous CPU was a 3200+) because he has now had two weeks to
complain to me otherwise but hasn't said anything.

Meanwhile, that same 4800+ chip is working quite well with an
Asus A8N-SLI motherboard. Can't remember if it is the regular,
deluxe, or premium version of that board.


>
> 3. Are the AMD model numbers indicating increased speed from the dual
> core or are they indicating single processor operation
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Bitstring <1123956412.286272.128770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, from
the wonderful person www.interfacebus.com <ldavis8@cfl.rr.com> said
>I use an AMD Athlon 64 3800+ processor on a ABIT AV8 motherboard, using
>a VIA K8T800 Pro chipset. I believe when I got the system the documents
>indicated that the 3800+ was the highest speed processor the
>motherboard would accept at 2.4GHz. I want to up-grade to a dual core
>processor.
>
>My question is:
>1. Is the 3800+ the same as the 3800+ x2 with a dual core but operating
>at 2GHz

No it is NOT the same and a motherboard that takes one will NOT
necessarily take the x2, even if it does take it, it may need a BIOS
update. I'm not familiar with the AV8, so I don't know whether it
will/won't (but Abit, and their website, and the usenet group for ABIT
motherboards, all should).

>2. Should I be looking at the 4800+ x2 operating at 2.4GHz

How rich do you feel? That's more than 2x the price of the 4200x2, and
probably 3x or more the price of the 3800x2 .. Ok, so you get a 25%
performance increase, big deal. I'll probably go with the 4200x2 or
4400x2 unless prices change radically anytime soon.

>3. Are the AMD model numbers indicating increased speed from the dual
>core or are they indicating single processor operation

They bear absolutely little relationship to anything these days.
Marketing hypes. For single threaded applications a 3800 will beat a
3800x2 (just look at the clock speeds, cache, etc.). For anything that
can use two threads (including just running two apps at once) the 3800x2
will win by a country mile (2Gz, *2 >> 2.4Ghz).

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

I'll stay with the 4600+ X2 dual core which also runs at 2400MHz, and
also has 512KB of Cache ~ avoiding the 4800+ X2.
The 4600+ X2 is $702, while the 4800+ X2 is $892. The 4400 only runs at
2000MHz

So I'll start watching the price drop of the 4600 X2.

Thanks for the feed-back

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Bitstring <1124001579.297357.283900@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, from
the wonderful person www.interfacebus.com <ldavis8@cfl.rr.com> said
>I'll stay with the 4600+ X2 dual core which also runs at 2400MHz, and
>also has 512KB of Cache ~ avoiding the 4800+ X2.
>The 4600+ X2 is $702, while the 4800+ X2 is $892. The 4400 only runs at
>2000MHz

I think you'll find the 4200x2 and 4400x2 run at 2.2Ghz
The 4600x2 and 4800x2 run at 2.4Ghz

It's the 3800x2 that runs at 2Ghz. Of course, my memory may be lying to
me ..

>So I'll start watching the price drop of the 4600 X2.
>
>Thanks for the feed-back
>

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.