Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

X2 4200+ vs X2 4400+

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 25, 2006 7:22:21 PM

I'm putting together a new system for mostly doing heavy graphic design work (I usually have 3 or more Adobe apps open at a time, plus iTunes, etc.).

Is there any real performance gain between the Athlon 64 X2 4400+ vs. the 4200+? Rather, is the performance gain worth the extra $100?

The benchmarks look like there's not that much, but I'm hoping you guys would have some real-world experience.

Much thanks,
Kyle

More about : 4200 4400

February 25, 2006 7:34:31 PM

Generally speaking they are based upon two different cores. The first is a manchester core and you want to stay away from them for your needs. The second is toledo core and thats your sweet spot (its actually 2x San Deigo cores but w/e). You want the 1MB L2 cache per core.

Now If you can overclock, or are even willing to learn... stay FAR away from both of these chips and Ill tell you why.

Manchester cores (2x Venice)

X2 3800+ 2.0 GHZ clockspeed 300$
X2 4200+ 2.2 GHZ clockspeed 360$
X2 4600+ 2.4 GHZ clockspeed 547$

Toledo core (2x San Degio)

X2 4000+
X2 4400+ 2.2GHZ clockspeed 458$
X2 4800+ 2.4GHZ clockspeed 630$

Now newegg.com didnt have info on the 4000+ but Im sure atleast that its a 2.0ghz clockspeed and not sure on the price. You see for a difference of about 400mhz you almost double the chip cost and many users have been able to OC a good 500mhz on the 3800+ on stock cooling.

Now what I suggest is the 939 opteron 165. Its the same as a toledo except its factory clocked at 1.8ghz but can reach 2.6-2.7 easily on the cooler they give you with it. Priced at about 340$ you cant beat it (unless you ordered it a month ago and save 20-40$ on it).


The cache will be important in your area, and go with atleast 2GB of good ram.
February 25, 2006 8:05:07 PM

The 4400+ is a better buy with 1MB Cache I currently have one and plan to use my system for annimation and 3D Modeling. With that said thr X2 4400+
will fit you well for the things you are doing.
Related resources
February 25, 2006 9:16:20 PM

Well if you can get a opteron 165 or 170. I have a 165 max oc on air with the stock 4heatpipe cooler of 2.8ghz with 1.45volts(fx-62 speed). As for your mobo I like DFI LandParty Ultra D for non sli/crossfire setups. They hit 300mhz fsb/htt better than anyother board.
February 25, 2006 9:27:47 PM

I haven't even considered the opteron series... It's quite a bit cheaper than the 4400+. What are the advantages? Bang-for-buck? I've never OCed before, so I'm hesitant. You know... 1.8GHz up to 2.8 sounds too good to be true. Like I said, though, I've never overclocked before. Am I missing out?

Thoughts?
February 25, 2006 9:48:43 PM

i have a 170 and it easily reached 2.6, stock voltage on the stock heatsink they give you......the opteron series runs on a lower voltage and is higher quality silicon and overclocks higher
February 25, 2006 11:24:33 PM

Quote:
I haven't even considered the opteron series... It's quite a bit cheaper than the 4400+. What are the advantages? Bang-for-buck? I've never OCed before, so I'm hesitant. You know... 1.8GHz up to 2.8 sounds too good to be true. Like I said, though, I've never overclocked before. Am I missing out?

Thoughts?


haha 2.8 on air is good but there are people with watercooling running 3.2ghz.
February 25, 2006 11:26:48 PM

Wow, 400MHz, that's like...400MHz! Insane dude...totally worth posting about. Thanks.

BTW: There is no 4000+ X2, although Sandra thinks there is...stupid Sandra.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
!