Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Which processor? For a confused dood - Opt 165 or X2 3800

Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 7, 2006 3:36:35 AM

Ok,

so its been a while since I last built a system....At work I use different systems all the time, P4's with HT, Xeon, etc but these systems are all built for work, and I need to build a multipurpose rig (gaming, photoshop, ms office, watching/burning dvd's)...

so here it is...

Im considering either

AMD X2 3800 or
Intel D 930 or
Intel 651 at 3.4 Ghz which consumes alot less power the the 660 or
ATHLON64 3500+

Im torn between the dual core and sigle core and between AMD and Intel...im just looking for a push in a particular direction....

do you guys think that its worth getting a dual core or just go with the single core? All these processors are around my price range of 275 to 315 so price is not a BIG factor
January 7, 2006 3:53:23 AM

Go for the AMD!!! better performance per watt in terms of heat. Intel's run hot ( reason the have to bump up the MHZ to compete with AMD!

And go dual core ( you will muti-task better and game ) but instead of the X2 go with a opteron 939, 165/170/175/180 = dual core

I currently run a opteron 165 OC to 2.6 on air and its stable. and I'm out benchmarking a stock X2 4800 with it.

Not that I'm tring to get you to OC you stuff, just that it something you could do if you needed a extra performance boost down the road without investing more $$$ into another cpu.
While others say you don't need a dual core cpu, I beleave that manufactures of hardware and software are makeing the move to muti-threaded products to better improve performance and features so in a sense you would have a good computer for aleast 2 to 3 yrs before you would feel the need to update again...but its just my opinion :D 
I'm sure some of the older posters will put their 2 cents in as well and hope they do because they know their SH$%!

good luck :!:
January 7, 2006 6:35:49 AM

Quote:
Go for the AMD!!! better performance per watt in terms of heat. Intel's run hot ( reason the have to bump up the MHZ to compete with AMD!

And go dual core ( you will muti-task better and game ) but instead of the X2 go with a opteron 939, 165/170/175/180 = dual core

I currently run a opteron 165 OC to 2.6 on air and its stable. and I'm out benchmarking a stock X2 4800 with it.

Not that I'm tring to get you to OC you stuff, just that it something you could do if you needed a extra performance boost down the road without investing more $$$ into another cpu.
While others say you don't need a dual core cpu, I beleave that manufactures of hardware and software are makeing the move to muti-threaded products to better improve performance and features so in a sense you would have a good computer for aleast 2 to 3 yrs before you would feel the need to update again...but its just my opinion :D 
I'm sure some of the older posters will put their 2 cents in as well and hope they do because they know their SH$%!

good luck :!:

I want to do the samething as ruben00. People say go with the opreton, and i'm thinking of going to go with Opreton 170 or x2 4400. I do plan to OC but not right away. But I also hear OCing is not good, people had bad experience with OCing and what not. So i'm kinda worried. What Kind of mobo you suggest as well? I want to have sata 2, ata /100 for my older HD that I currently have. Among other goodies. OH and i've been reading that there going to discountinue the Opertons.
Related resources
January 7, 2006 7:52:52 AM

Go with the AMD its way ahead of anything Intel can even think of. As for a multitasking PC the AMD dual cores as the best you can get!! And yes it is worth getting a dual core, I would love to get one but i don't have the cash!!
January 7, 2006 11:25:02 PM

Ok first off the 939 opteron's will be around for awhile, posted a link from xbitlabs.com about just that subject! ( 939 OPTEY"S LIVE ON!!! )

Has far has setup. I give you some choices

Any Mobo with nvidia nforce chipset ( SLI, ultra..recommend SLI)mobo

Abit, Asus, Gigabyte, DFI, MSI are all good mobos and prices very..recommend Asus! but pick what fits your budget and research the features for each mobo that interests you!

CPU! pick your AMD posion :tongue: AMD64 3000 thru FX-57 single core.
Opteron 144-150 single core Opertron 165-180 dual core and or X2 3800-4800 dual core....I would suggest you pick 1 or 2 from each and research how they stack up then decide NOTE: all are socket 939 :!: ...I recommend the opty 165!

Reason I have choosen the opty 165 is a few bones more than X2 3800 with a larger L2 cache,and it will OC easy to 2.6 stable on air whichs out benches a stock X2 4800 for less $$$ :twisted: Ive even read that it could reach the 3.0 with vapor cooling ( just remember to have some good ram when you bump up the bus speed, ddr 4200 from OCZ is a good choice!)

Newegg.com has a good site with lots of reviews and products there, just be for warned that the reviews posted there are mostly hype and some have good opinions but never the less GOOGLE it and look for indepth review concerning the hardware you are intending to buy but would like more info on...etc

good luck 8)
January 9, 2006 3:40:20 AM

so dual core is the choice, but in almost all the charts i saw on THG the Intel D 930 beats the 3800, except for heat and power consumption....

but i've never even seen a review on the opteron proc's...oh, and im not very good at, or even would think of OC anything...I want a powerfull system without the need to OC
January 9, 2006 3:48:14 AM

You have to take the THG benchmarking with a grain of sand. They only use Intel approved benches. Check other sites first.
BTW, unless you go extreme cooling with Intel (at least a water sysem), once the dust builds up a little in the case, the cpu will run with one core throttled all the time.
January 9, 2006 4:58:48 AM

endyen said

You have to take the THG benchmarking with a grain of sand. They only use Intel approved benches. Check other sites first.

Well looks like Intell has been gettin the shaft, because AMD has been stompin them at there own "Benches" for awhile now :lol: 
January 9, 2006 5:10:17 AM

If you're not goin to OC the PC then maybe go for the 4400+, its a very good CPU, when you don't OC it!
January 9, 2006 7:54:12 AM

The intel 900 series runs too hot. You will have to add 50 bucks for a good cooler. The 900 series is a stop gap measure. The real deal comes out after May. I wouldnt bother with them. The A64 3500 and 3.4 ghz P4 are better values for the money all around (from games to encoding video) but driver improvements may change that in the future. Since price is not an issue, I would get a 3800 even if you dont multi-task. There no real difference between the opteron and X2 line unless you plan to overclock. But if you add in the cost of the opteron and the more expensive RAM, you might as well have gone with a more expensive X2 in the first place. I wouldnt overclock at all until your CPU and the platform it is built around ha become a little dated. But for poops and giggles, there is a common belief in the overclocker community that opterons and "under spec'd" at the factory to ensure reliability where as athlons are packaged at the highest possible clock speed they can get out of a chip at the factory. So the logic is you pay a premium for an opteron to ensure some overclocking. With an athlon 64 you never know if you can get 100Mhz or 500Mhz out of the chip.
January 9, 2006 4:34:31 PM

To be honest here, AMD is the better performer at the moment for the price. As far as stabilty and ease of installation i couldn't tell you that. But from the recent benchmarks i've seen AMD has been kicking intels tail. Not to say i favor one over the other just thats what appears to be the case. Why spend a 1000 dollars on a chip when you can get another for half the price and its faster. They both also do the samething.

The processor you picked, AMD x2 3800 is more than sufficient for your purpose.

Quote:
Ok,

so its been a while since I last built a system....At work I use different systems all the time, P4's with HT, Xeon, etc but these systems are all built for work, and I need to build a multipurpose rig (gaming, photoshop, ms office, watching/burning dvd's)...

so here it is...

Im considering either

AMD X2 3800 or
Intel D 930 or
Intel 651 at 3.4 Ghz which consumes alot less power the the 660 or
ATHLON64 3500+

Im torn between the dual core and sigle core and between AMD and Intel...im just looking for a push in a particular direction....

do you guys think that its worth getting a dual core or just go with the single core? All these processors are around my price range of 275 to 315 so price is not a BIG factor
January 11, 2006 9:27:02 PM

xxsk8er101xx and DuxSyagrius thank you. And thanks to everyone else who posted here...

I do understand about the stopgap measure...They do it all the time...thats why I was neither too impressed nor happy with the 9 series, so thats why i needed a little convincing, and me being an intel dude since who knows when, i was skeptical to switch...

I was looking to get the P4 651 <-(notice the number, its not a mistake) because it was less power hungry etc, but I think i will now go with the AMD because I know Dual core is the way of the future and I dont want to get caught with my cores down aroudn my ankles :D 

thanks all....oh and btw, any good mobo recommendations? SATA IDE, PCIx, GIG Lan?
January 12, 2006 5:34:04 AM

Do you have an AGP card now? Is it decent enough to keep for now? If so, asrock has a mobo with AGP (full speed) and PCI-e. Its a good board. The FSB can go up to 300Mhz but that is not indicative of what the true overclock will be. If you plan on doing the PCI-e only thing, then its all up to you. everyone says DFI so I would stick with that. The board will probobly set you back at least 150. I personally am going for the Biostar TForce 6100. It has a special bios that has built in overclocking settings (10,20,30% etc). It has good reviews and costs 75 bucks.

SATA is good cuz they have some really good HDD for SATA only. Western digital has a 250GB HDD that is desiagned for 24/7 usage. Quiet and costs 105 bucks. I think seagate sucks. But there is not a real difference between SATA 3.0 and IDE. Wait if you can.

All I can say about gigabit lan is that it is faster than 100mpbs LAN. I cant say if it is worth it. I have been using firewire based networks between my rigs for 5 years now. Its fast as hell and basically free. But you are tethered to a 6 ft cable. I use firewire and 100mbps side by side. I dont think the gigabit is worth the cash. The funny thing is that when it comes to transfer of large file, fire performs VERY well compared to gigabit LAN.

PCI-e is the future and there are many things on the horizon that AGP will not have access to. I think now is the time to wait and not buy. With the 7800GT at 280-300 bucks prices cant really go down any further you know what I mean? But that doesnt mean there wont be other sweet spot cards. I cant see the 7600 GT (when it comes out) performing close to the 7800GT. So I dont thikn they can price it at 249 like Nvidia used to price upper mid range cards. i think 199 is where it will stay. And that is a good deal. But the generation after this one will be waaaaay better and most likely cheaper. I think the X1000 series is the same as the GeForce FX series. It just doesnt cut it. I think ATI will pull the plug on it and have a follow up product that will know our socks off. Just like the Geforce 6000 series did after the FX series.
January 12, 2006 1:23:53 PM

One problem...

I dont want to OC, for now, if at all....I never like OC my stuff, Dont ask, I dont know why...I think it was a bad, expensive experience that I choose to block out right now....

anyway....what about asus or gigabit?
January 12, 2006 1:38:01 PM

Smart guy. My take on Gigabyte..... Lets just say this: I lost 2 gigabyte mobos and my buddy lost his all within the space of one month (Socket A mobos BTW). No overclocking involved. They just crapped out. I really like Asus. But I think lately there are other companies that are making better stuff. I dont know what to tell you bruddah. Since you dont wan to overclock, then I dont think you need a $200 mobo. You dont even need some extravagant BIOS. I guess since you arent into OC'ing any DFI or Asus will do I guess.
January 12, 2006 2:20:23 PM

MSI is also a good make and there prices are usually very good.
January 12, 2006 2:22:46 PM

AMD all the way!

The onboard DDR SDRAM controller and 2GHz HT bus cannot be beat.

Get an Opteron 1xx if you can.

Semper Fi carry on
January 12, 2006 4:05:13 PM

ddr 4200


NEWBIE HERE


However isn't 4200 DDR 2, and isn't the opteron not compatible with DDR2?

So then
Kingston ValueRAM 1GB 184-Pin DDR SDRAM Unbuffered DDR 400 (PC 3200) System Memory - Retail
Model#:
KVR400X64C3A/1G

Item#:
N82E16820141307

Price:
$82.99

Wouldn't be considered good for the system?
January 15, 2006 12:32:33 AM

Hey,

getting the opteron 165 is cheaper then then x2 3800, but the 3800 is 2ghz and the opti 165 is 1.8...now i heard somebody mentioning something about the ram that the opterons use is different and more expensive, but the motherboards are the same, so whats up?

a side note, i dont plan to OC so i want my system for gaming (BF2, AA) to run with cranked up settings and smoothly
January 15, 2006 1:57:47 AM

So what about the ram, do i need different ram? and since the opti 165 is clocked at 1.8 ghz, how does it benchmark against the x2 3800 (2.0)?
January 15, 2006 2:19:23 AM

The socket 939 1xx series Opterons use regular 184pin unbuffered DDR SDRAM.

The socket 940 2xx and 8xx series Opterons use registered ECC 184pin DDR SDRAM.

Stick to the socket 939 1xx Opterons and you'll be fine because they use regular DDR.
January 15, 2006 2:24:47 AM

cool thank you

now im almost comming to a conclusion here....

Opt 165 cheaper then x2 3800, but opti is 1.8 and x2 3800 is clocked at 2.0

so how do they compare? THG doesnt have opti's in their proc chart....

and also, please keep in mind that this system is not only a gaming machine, but also a photoshop rig

should i just scrap the whole thing and go single core? maybe a 3700?
January 15, 2006 2:50:03 AM

I dont want to OC, I want fast for gaming and Photoshop (not at the same time) out of the box
January 15, 2006 6:58:52 AM

Are the opterons multiplier unlocked? I was just wondering. Lets just say 275mhz is a good round about number that we can safely say is what most performance RAM can safely achieve. I mean, i think thats a good realistic number. Assuming athlons are good overclockers (most say they are) that would mean a 2.47 max speed for the opteron (9x multiplier) and a 2.75 for the X2 (10x multiplier). Of course we all know that 2.7 is dangerous no matter what anyone says, but are there any over clcokers out there that would agree with me that the X2 would achieve 2.4 ghz with a lower voltage? One chip needs 600 mhz to reach 2.4ghz and another needs 400. One might get away with overclocking and not need to overvolt the CPU. I think that one is the best chip despite saving a few bucks on the other. What do ya'll think? The other issue is the increased L2 cache. One chip disspiates 110W and the other 89 watts. Does the opteron come with a different HS/fan? Its safe to assume that a chip that disspiates 110 watts needs a Pentium class cooler. That means the opteron could be a little more expensive than one would anticipate. Just my thoughts. I am really interested in the Opteron vice the 3800 although it really wouldnt help me with video encoding though. I dont care.
January 15, 2006 12:11:24 PM

That really changes the dynamics of what it is that I want to do. It really does. So they are unlocked both up and down? That sounds almost too good to be true. Is there any compatibility issues between opterons (939 of course) and X2s when it comes to mobos? Does this mean if the mobo is X2 compatible it will take an opteron with no need for a bios update? I have seen your posts and I can tell you know your shit. What do you think about heat dissipation difference between the 165 and the X2 3800? What kind of heat will 110W be in comparison to 89W? Do you think I would need to buy an aftermarket cooler should I choose to OC to 2.4ghz?
January 15, 2006 4:11:24 PM

yes the opteron will work in your system 100%

( I asked the same question and got the same answer above when I asked :lol:  )

currently have a opty 165 in my old lady's pc oc to 2.6 on air, because I just updated (whole new system) with 170 was going to go with the 180 but decided against it saved the cash and went with a liquid cooling solution.
Going to wait a while and let the arctic siliver reach its 200hr mark before I start to OC it, planning to go to the 3.0 if i can. But it will be a slow process!
January 15, 2006 5:11:58 PM

Quote:
By stock Opty 165 is slower, but once overclocked it can go higher than X2 3800+ in most cases.


I too have researched this. The key difference between the X2 3800+, 4000+, and I believe one of the 4200+ models and the optys is that all the optys have 2x1mb L2 cache. The X2s I listed have 2x512kb L2 caches. Although the opty 165 is 200MHz slower, its got the 2x1mb cache instead of 2x512kb.
January 15, 2006 5:19:33 PM

so which one would you guys go with? opti 165 or x2 3800.....

i dont want to OC, but I want super good performance when gaming....I also thought about just getting a single core for now, and waiting for dual cores software and games to become more popular so then i can upgrade my cpu again
January 15, 2006 5:26:44 PM

If you want to go dual core, which I'd recommend because they're mature enough now to have most of the technologies that'll hold you over for a while. I'd go Opteron 165 because you always can OC in the future, even if you don't now, and because of the bigger cache. If you want pure gaming, go single core, as much as I hate to say that, but if you want to have great gaming and the ability to do something else at the same time, I'd go dual core. Besides, I'm sure a lot more stuff will be written for dual core in the future and you won't have to upgrade when they do.

Essentially, go opty 165 if you want dual, go single if you want pure gaming.
January 16, 2006 6:48:36 PM

opty 165 it is then, ty
January 16, 2006 10:15:58 PM

:twisted: [/b]
Quote:
opty 165 it is then, ty


You can't increase the multiplier bud. Only downward not upward. They are locked upwards. Ruben just get a opty 170 or 175.
!