I just made the very same decision you are trying to make.
I had the Opty 165, the X2-3800 and the X2-4400 on my list.
I decided on the X2-4400 for the following reasons.
1) I didn't want to play the idiotic Opty game that people are playing....they are available, they are not available, you ordered, but they don't really have them, etc...
2) I wanted gaurenteed performance at the X2-4400 level w/o having to OC.
3) Some people say the Opty's are "the best of the best dual cores", I see no evidence to support this at all. If they did that much testing on the chips and "the best" were branded Opty's, and the "worst" were branded "X2", then that means the ones branded "Opty 165" are in fact X2-4400's that couldn't cut the mustard.....but you won't see too many Opty-fan-boys saying it that way....they just like to look at it by saying "these Opty's are better than X2'...better quality, etc..."....but their argument would also have to be reversed, in that those chips that were not qualified to be Opty' 170s', let's say were branded X2's, but those not good enough to be X2-4400's are what???, Opty 165's.....
Now I don't believe any of this is true...the chips are what they are. Many are getting great results from teh Opty 165...but you never know when you are going to get the chip that won't. I have first hand experience with an Athlon XP 2200+ (a-core) that sucked as an Overclocker.....so I didn't. But it fried within the warranty window, and they replaced it with a 2200+ (B-core), which was supposed to be this fabulous overclocker....IT DIDN'T. I was able to overclock other chips on my mobo easily, but not that 2200 b-core.
I digress...
So the choice is always going to be a personal preference....do you want to be one of those people that think they sound cool by saying they have "an opty"....and then try to OC it.....or do you want gaurenteed performance of the X2-4400 and then try to go from there. I see it as steps up the staircase....but where do you want a landing to be.
With that said, you can't go wrong with either, I think.
My experiene with teh X2-4400, on STOCK - AIR COOLING!, is that I've easily gotten it up to 10x259.....which is near FX levels. That is without raising voltages, etc....just changing the multi- and the frequency.
I've had some issues getting to 10x260 though....it starts windows and BSODs.....I have NOT spent time trying to figure it all out, and I just put myself back to 10x250 - which is where it runs with all my fans on LOW, and it doesn't get even close to warm under full load. Noise for me won out over increaseing performance.
I have no worries that should I want to get involved deeper, that I can get this thing easily as high as others are getting it....2.8/2.9....I see the occasional 3...but that is with some serious cooling.
I have a coolermaster Stacker STC-t01 case, so i've got plenty of room for water, which I'm thinking about going to when I get some time to play around with it....then I'll go after the big overclock.
But for now, very very happy with a the stock HSF and fans on low getting 2.5 w/o having to raise voltages.
The opty will likely do as well........but if it doesn't you are stuck. the X2-4400 WILL run at it designated levels....and that speed difference is important to me....that plateau may not be to you though, in which case I'd get the cheapest and put the money other places like a raptor.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram