Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel 805(2.66)DualCore VS Athlon64 3000 S939

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 28, 2006 6:40:56 PM

Hi guys,

What would you choose among this proc?
What are the pros and cons...
which is faster?
March 28, 2006 7:17:53 PM

is it just me

or is this comparison pretty dumb?

you're comparing a single core lower end speed CPU to a dual core medium end CPU.

which do you think would perform better?

HOWEVER. what exactly for? for gaming? id' take the 3000 over the intel

if you're doing more multi taskinga nd HTPC type stuff, then the intel
Related resources
March 28, 2006 7:50:57 PM

He is a noob, but a better comparison would be an X2 vs 805.
March 28, 2006 7:59:12 PM

ya. i'd put the 3800 against the 805 and put my money on the 3800.

the dualcore AMD's are just better IMO than the Two Core intels
March 28, 2006 8:05:44 PM

Mpasternak, dont you even read the post before you reply??
Nobody said anything about a 3800 or a dual core AMD.
He asked if he should buy an Intel 805 or an Amd 64 3000.
Geeeesh.
You have to tell us what your using it for if you want a straight answer. Gaming go with the 3000. Multitasking applications go with the dual core Intel.
March 28, 2006 8:10:50 PM

as i said dumbass. GEESH do you EVEN READ PEOPLES POSTS BEFORE RESPONDING?

the comparison is stupid especially without information on WHAT he's doing.

he's comparing apples to oranges as the cliche goes. there is no way of making any logical comparison between the 3000 and the 805 being that they're completely different CPU's

one's a single core. AMD

Ones a Two CPU. INTEL

you don't get much opposite than that.

ones made to be better at one thing. and the other is made to be better at another

I THEN resonded with the 3800 to GP"s reply.

a real comparison would be the 3800 X2 vs the 805. or the 605 (i think) agains the 3000+

you can't compare different types of CPU's especiall yif you have no controll source to go by (the use)
March 28, 2006 8:16:56 PM

Sorry guys i'm just a noob on this... but thanks for the reply...
Yes i'm going to use for gaming... my main point is that why is 3000 is better than 805 when it comes to gaming.... sorry for the noob question...
March 28, 2006 8:25:29 PM

teluse it's ok. everyones gotta learn somewhere.

the 3000 is a single core processor. although it runs at a slower clock speed than the 805's cores. it is more efficient. AMD's cores currently out perform Intels on a clock for clock basis. because of this. we pretty much have to ignore MHZ ratings of CPU's.

a safe estimation though is a 3000+ amd CPU runs close to a 2.9ghz - 3.1ghz Intel CPU.

being the 805 is only 2.66ghz we see that in a Single threaded application, the AMD would be able to outperform it. the problem with games is SO FAR they're all single threaded. meaning that while the game is running, it's ONLY going to run on one core of the 805 effectively only using the two core chip like a single 2.66ghz chip.

based on that. the AMD is the winner for gaming performance

HOWEVER, should multi threaded applications be used like a lot of encoding, multimedia or multitasking situations, the 805 Intel would outperform the AMD giving it the ability to run more at once.

best example i can give.
Runner A gets from point A to Point B in 30 seconds (AMD 3000)
Runner B gets from point A to Point B in 45 Seconds (Intel @ 2.66)

HOWEVER.
the 805 would allow when running multi threaded apps or multitasking
Runner B gets from point A to Point B in 45 Seconds (Intel @ 2.66)
AND
Runner C gets from point A to Point B in 45 Seconds (Intel @ 2.66)
at the same time
March 28, 2006 8:32:14 PM

Well, let's look at it from another angle.

Let's say the games he's playing right are single threaded games which most of them are so, in that case, the AMD3000+ would win as we all know they are more efficient and perform better in gaming because of their architecture.

Now, let's say the games he's playing are multithreaded or, designed for dual core, would the dual core 805 give better performance over the single core AMD? Let's look at this from a design and performance perspective and not just, "AMD is better than Intel."
March 28, 2006 8:33:23 PM

Geez, I must've been writing my last post at the same time you were writing your response :oops: 
March 28, 2006 8:40:47 PM

Probably. lol. i also type fast and i'm bored at work.

I want to add something though when it comes to the CPU designs.

Right now, amd has a big big legg up on Intel. (don't conroe me. untill you buy one i don't count it as a marketable product)

the AMD architecture is superior. if you're considering dual core for your everyday use. i recommend looking at the Amd 3800 over the intel 805.

I know i think it's more expensive. but the AMD dualcore architecture is better right now than the intel's two CPU core.

notice how i don't really call intel's design "DUAL CORE". in sense it's not. what Intel has done is take 2 of the Prescott Pentium 4 chips. and put it on ONE package to fit into one slot. it in effect is TWO CPU's on one package. this itself wouldn't be so bad. but intel for some reason. (design flaw? I don't know) decided that anytime the two CPU cores should want to communicate with eachother they should go through the Front side bus (FSB). intel is still operating the Pentium's on an 800Mhz FSB. this is a very bandwith limiting methhod of doing it. now the FSB must share memory, Northbridge AND CPU bandwith over it.

the AMD CPU's however are built slightly different. AMD has taken the archecture of the Sandiego / Venice chips. and combined two of the processors on ONE Chip itself. being on the same DIE as eachother AMD was able to build interconnects to eachother instead of needing to go to the FSB for inter core communication. the latencies between the two are greatly diminished (however they are still there).

however now comes the Conroe factor that i'm sure everyone is going to scream about.

as i state. I dont know it yet. untill we can buy it in stores and do our own testing on it. I dont consider it in recommenddations to people.

it would seem stupid ti recommend a CPU thats not commercially available now wouldn it
March 28, 2006 8:41:26 PM

You could buy the AMD if you're gonna game.
If you start playing games optimized for multithreading you can later buy an Athlon X2 and because you use socket 939 you won't even need another motherboard.
March 28, 2006 9:14:33 PM

@mpasternak

got it... thanks alot... i'm going to buy one today... and also a 6800gt card.. with 1g memory... now my problem is what mother board should i choose with this one... im checking this ECS nForce4.. i'm in low budget...
:lol:  , so what do u think guys...
March 28, 2006 10:25:04 PM

What's your budget for the mobo?
March 28, 2006 10:59:12 PM

about $100..
March 30, 2006 10:45:40 AM

Hey this is the problem that I am facing at the moment.

I am currently running a:
Socket 478 Pentium 4 Prescott 3.0 GHz with HT

It is running a GeForce 4800 and I want to upgrade that.
I found that I could get a GeForce 7600 GT PCI-e for almost the same price as a GeForce 6800 GS AGP. So I am thinking of switching to PCI-e.

I don't want to dump too much money on the CPU and Mobo at the moment with AM2 and Conroe round the corner.

So I found that I could get either:
Intel 805 + a Mobo (not sure which one) for a total of around 180 USD ( cheapest 775 Mobo around $50USD)

or

Athlon64 3000+ and Mobo for 190 USD (Socket 939 Mobo around 60USD)

In my case, I want to be able to play Oblivion + some newer games but I also do 3D rendering.

So firstly will either of those two possible CPU upgrades be worse than my existing system? (My main worry)

Unless I am gaming I usually have quite a bit of stuff running in the background so would the Athlon64 preform worse than my current CPU due to HyperThreading?

Secondly is it possible to OC the Intel 805 to match the Athlon64 3000+ at gaming?

Thanks
March 30, 2006 11:23:12 AM

the 3000+ 939 is an better buy as you do not need an new motherboard to upgrade it to dual core later on (939 will go all the way to 4000+ , X2 4800+ or FX-60 {its dual core})

allso you do not need any super power PSU (you need an intel 2 core supported PSU it has some extra cables if you wanted 2 core intel)

am2 you need new ram (ddr2) and motherboard 939 is no where dead yet
a b à CPUs
March 30, 2006 11:28:11 AM

"So firstly will either of those two possible CPU upgrades be worse than my existing system? (My main worry)
"

No, especially so in conjunction with your planned 7600GT upgrade...

I'd try to get at least a 3500+ though, if getting a single core cpu and if budgetarily feasible...(The last time I looked, even 4000+ cpus/2.4G/1m cache cpus were down in price to $265 or so?)

(My 3500+ at it's stock 2.2G keeps up with P4/ 3.0 core's OC'd to 3.7/250 FSB in various gaming benchmarks when both systems are equipped with 7800GT cards on PCI-e mainboards..)
March 30, 2006 12:03:40 PM

Nah 3000+ is the most I can afford.

I plan to get a decent dual core Laptop mid next year, the CPU upgrade is just a necessary evil so that I can play newer games and finally retire that outdated GeForce 4.

My Power supply is rated at 500W but I dunno how to find out if its compatible with the 805. Does anyone know where I can find a list of 805 compatible power supplies?

Also I guess the AMD option with socket 939 is attractive because of the clear upgrade line but will socket 939 processors still be on the market is around 2 years time (my current planned timeframe before upgrading again) ?
March 30, 2006 12:33:11 PM

Well, the biggest problem your faced with as far as using the Intel solution is finding a cheap motherboard to run that 805. Most of the current Intel dual core motherboards are very expensive. The AMD solution is probably the better answer for now.
March 30, 2006 1:25:46 PM

Good point though you can always get a cheap Fox Conn or other.
I only get Intel mobo's but only because of their stability. Other much cheaper bords will perform the same if not better though i don't risk using them.
March 30, 2006 8:04:20 PM

i would look around and get the 939 AMD look for a mobo+cpu combo and you should get a cheap deal. i picked up a 3700+ with a ecs motherboard for 219$ us funds at a electronics store called frys. dont know if you have one of those around you but they always have 3 mobo+cpu combos on sale and they change weekly.
March 30, 2006 8:22:11 PM

Pentium D 805.
March 31, 2006 12:08:18 AM

It's dual core and cheaper. It's also suppose to overclock very well for a processor less than 200$.
March 31, 2006 3:03:53 AM

Ok had a browse, the 805 does overclock quite well.

Is a board like the Asus P5LD2 still compatible with DDR400 though or do I have to switch to DDR2.

If I have to switch to DDR2 then I'd rather go the AMD.
March 31, 2006 3:29:57 AM

Quote:
@mpasternak

got it... thanks alot... i'm going to buy one today... and also a 6800gt card.. with 1g memory... now my problem is what mother board should i choose with this one... im checking this ECS nForce4.. i'm in low budget...
:lol:  , so what do u think guys...
No one has answered his mobo question. You can look yourself here: http://www.newegg.com
April 1, 2006 4:50:17 AM

You want an all around computer. Playing games on the 805, you will not see a difference. The hype that AMD is faster is just hype period! Run excel macro and it will truly tell you the difference. Intel will beat it in that department period 10:1 Run a game, it will not even affect you gaming wise. Pentium M is better on battery life. Somewhere in the future, you will need to do videos, Coreduo will do wonders. Buy it from costco and take both for a spin, they have a pretty good return policy. Don't fall for the hype, prove it to yourself. I did and I wouldn't trade my Pentium M coreduo for anything else. Dell is really good with the xps. 10 of my friends are truly happy with their purchase. Like I said earlier in other post's, costco gets a lot of return on Turion AMD64, heat, battery life is short. Runs slow. Most of these guys goes off of these fanboy posts and thats where they get their over inflated facts. Like jumping on the band wagon. Like everyone jumped on the Bulls band wagon, where are they now. If you can wait, the Morem will be a treat. If not, get the coreduo. Buy it from Dell. They are awesome!
April 1, 2006 7:55:57 AM

Quote:
Playing games on the 805, you will not see a difference. The hype that AMD is faster is just hype period!

You wouldn't notice 25% more frames?
The 805, is basicly 2 P4b 2.66 chips nailed together. They use a common fsb. They use that bus for the two 2.66s to talk to each other. Either core would be more bandwidth bound than a normal 2.66b. Bothe together, using the same bandwidth chocked bus, take the honor of being the most memory chocked chip ever made.
You really are an idiot you know. Why don't you do the world a favor, and go play on a highway?
April 1, 2006 10:18:11 AM

All the Mobos that support the 805 seem to use DDR2......
I read that DDR2 and DDR have a different pin count so no backwards compatability..

guess it might be back to the Athlon64 3800+

I did find an Asrock 775 Twins HDTV mobo, anyone know much about that?
http://www.overclock.co.uk/product.php?productid=19080

If it is a viable alternative then I might opt for it.
April 2, 2006 5:40:51 PM

Quote:
Buy it from Dell. They are awesome!


This says enough :roll:

Go AMD, I've been looking at Intel processors all week because I'm looking to build a new system. My last system had an xp2800 and It was great at the time. Every review I have read NOT regarding just benchmarks has AMD in the lead in almost EVERY test. In gaming, it's not even a fight, AMD is so far ahead.
April 2, 2006 5:55:36 PM

wait for the conroe.
April 2, 2006 6:06:58 PM

Why exactly should he wait for Conroe?
April 2, 2006 6:10:13 PM

Rewarding, satisfying and no regrets. Will be the fastest and best chip on the market for a good price.
April 2, 2006 6:38:37 PM

Hopefully that will be so. But I just can't help thinking that, at least initially, the price won't be quite so good. Especially if it is as good as Intel claims. I think they'll milk it for awhile.
April 2, 2006 6:40:50 PM

Not this time. Time to win back the trust. AMD wanted war, they are going to get it.
April 2, 2006 7:16:50 PM

Quote:
Hi guys,

What would you choose among this proc?
What are the pros and cons...
which is faster?


For pure single threaded application, the 3000+ is clearly faster. When dual core compatible game will appears, the 805D will still be underpowered, IMHO. Better solution will be available probably at this time at better price.

Right now, getting the 3000+, a simple Foxconn nforce4 motherboard and the fastest video card you can afford will be the best bet.
April 2, 2006 7:23:27 PM

Quote:
Not this time. Time to win back the trust. AMD wanted war, they are going to get it.


I'm sure AMD's offerings at the time will be competitive with Conroe. AMD has been ahead for over 3 years; I dont see that as AMD WANTING war, I see that as AMD WINNING war.
April 2, 2006 7:39:08 PM

Quote:
Not this time. Time to win back the trust. AMD wanted war, they are going to get it.


are u, like, stupid or something?
April 2, 2006 7:42:06 PM

Quote:
Not this time. Time to win back the trust. AMD wanted war, they are going to get it.


are u, like, stupid or something?

Here comes the fanboy coming to ruin another thread..

Fucking stupid fanboy that don't have a life are becomming boring..
April 2, 2006 8:02:53 PM

If the 3000 is what you can afford go for it and crank it up, BUT, I tried to save some people a few bucks by using a 939 FoxConn MoBo's and I'm sorry I wasted their and my time, just not very good (that's in my experience). I swapped them all out for Asus boards, I'll never do that again.
April 2, 2006 8:20:01 PM

Quote:
If the 3000 is what you can afford go for it and crank it up, BUT, I tried to save some people a few bucks by using a 939 FoxConn MoBo's and I'm sorry I wasted their and my time, just not very good (that's in my experience). I swapped them all out for Asus boards, I'll never do that again.


I've use some Foxconn board for simple non enthusiast system (not nforce4 thou) and they have been OK. I'm not impressed by Asus BIOS thou. Too much BIOS release are needed, in my experiences to have them working correctly.

I don't use Asus board as often as I use to recommend. But it is all personnal experiences.

By the way, I almost forget a nice socket 939 board.. Gigabyte GA-K8NF-9

Simple, fast, reliable and cheap.. Got some installed, even one for myself and it was a pleasure to work with.
April 2, 2006 8:42:42 PM

as i posted in the other thread

the 805 is good for chep ness but you stated it needs ddr 2

an amd 3000+ 939 socket be an better buy coes you can get an X2 4800+ later on if you wanted and its ddr1 any amd mother board should do as thay all support from an sempron 2400+ to an FX-60

you can get an Asrock 939-SATA2 that has Dual AGP and PCI-E so got the best of both and its cheap as well

there is allso an asrock mobo that gives you the option to buy an chip card that give you AM2 support later on when it comes out (you will need to buy ddr2 then but it cost alot at the start for AM2 any way)
April 2, 2006 8:50:31 PM

Sorry to hear you had a bad time with a Foxconn board. They have proved very reliable and stable for us as we have been building a lot with them for the last few years. I agree they don't have enough BIOS features for the enthusiast, but I do think they are good boards for stock speeds. As go our own individual experiences, so goes our opinions. We had not done particularly well with Asus 200-2003, so we use them pretty much only on customer request now. Typically recommend Epox now for the overclockers.
April 2, 2006 8:58:36 PM

we usein the foxcon boards now we had no problems with them

in the past i would Never use an Asus mobo for an K7 chip and never will as asus overclocks the cpu by 1% or somthing like that and it can never set the vcore right (set to 1.7-1.8 or somthing and you cant lower it but it let you higher it)

asus for K8 are rock solid had no problems with them

next mobo will probly be an DFI mobo
April 2, 2006 9:50:05 PM

I was hoping to get the 805 as I multitask quite a bit and my Prescott 3.0 GHz can't handle it very well.

I read somewhere that Pentium Ds require special power supplies as well is that true? If I need a new power supply as well as DDR2 then I am definitely going the AMD.

I do not want to wait as my comp will only be in use till next june/july after that it will just be used as a glorified typewriter for at least a year so even if I waited for conroe by the time mobos come out, more budget ones come out I'll only get a few months use out of it and it'll be outdated when I get back.

I want to be able to play Oblivion but more importantly I want it to be able to handle me using Maya and Photoshop at the same time hence the 805.

Thanks
April 2, 2006 10:07:06 PM

Quote:
I was hoping to get the 805 as I multitask quite a bit and my Prescott 3.0 GHz can't handle it very well.

I read somewhere that Pentium Ds require special power supplies as well is that true? If I need a new power supply as well as DDR2 then I am definitely going the AMD.

I do not want to wait as my comp will only be in use till next june/july after that it will just be used as a glorified typewriter for at least a year so even if I waited for conroe by the time mobos come out, more budget ones come out I'll only get a few months use out of it and it'll be outdated when I get back.

I want to be able to play Oblivion but more importantly I want it to be able to handle me using Maya and Photoshop at the same time hence the 805.

Thanks


You'll need DDR2 for sure, but I don't think you'll need an exceptionnal PSU made especially for them thou..

The 805 with its low MHz and 533FSB is not what I would call a nice chip, unless you want to OC it. It should be called Celeron dual core, IMHO..

If you want to use MAYA or Photoshop, do yourself a favor.. get at least an 3800+ X2 dualcore or at least a 830/930D intel.

By getting a nice system now, you'll be able to push the july update further and get better product/performance for much better price..
April 2, 2006 10:38:52 PM

I was planning to OC the 805 as I read that an OCed 805 is only outperformed by an OCed 3800+ by about 10%.

On the topic of OC, what chipset / mobo would you recommend?
April 2, 2006 10:49:42 PM

Quote:
I was planning to OC the 805 as I read that an OCed 805 is only outperformed by an OCed 3800+ by about 10%.

On the topic of OC, what chipset / mobo would you recommend?


Well, In the socket478 area, I would recommend Intel and Asus motherboard, but I stopped recommending/using Intel with Prescott and not willing to do so until I see (don't talk about conroe.. it is still not available, so I don't care) something that will perform good enough without creating heat problem.

The 8xxd serie is one hot(I mean it thermally, not technologically) CPU and I have problem to advise anything for it..

But since you are looking for a temporary one, get the cheaper one you can find and have all the feature you need
!