AMD 4200 vs. AMD 4400

[MindFlare327]

I am building my own pc. It will mainly be used for gaming. I am trying to decide between the 4200 and 4400. It looks to me that they are the same except for the L2 Cache. The 4200 is 2x512KB and the 4400 is 2x1MB. Is the extra L2 Cache on the 4400 worth the extra $55?

 

[Grimmy]

Tom has a graph to compare performance.

Perhaps that will help you decide off those 2:

Guide Processors: CPU

 

[MindFlare327]

thank you

 

[ElMoIsEviL]

I am building my own pc. It will mainly be used for gaming. I am trying to decide between the 4200 and 4400. It looks to me that they are the same except for the L2 Cache. The 4200 is 2x512KB and the 4400 is 2x1MB. Is the extra L2 Cache on the 4400 worth the extra $55?

Do you currently own a motherboard or will you be buying that as well? What about RAM, power supply etc?

 

[purdueguy]

Based on the following article:

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/373/1/

get the 4200+ and use the 55 bucks saved over the 4400+ to buy a Zalman CNPS 9500 heatsink.

Benchmarks are here:

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/373/2/

 

[MindFlare327]

I will be buying everything this is what I think I'm going to be getting.

Case : Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum/Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case - Retail

Motherboard : ASUS A8N-SLI Premium Socket 939 NVIDIA nForce4 SLI ATX AMD Motherboard

Video Card : ASUS EAX1900XT/2DHTV/512 Radeon X1900XT 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16

Power Supply : Antec TRUEPOWERII TPII-550 ATX12V 550W PSU

Processor : AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ Toledo 2000MHz HT 2 x 1MB L2 Cache Socket 939 Dual Core Processor - Retail

Memory : CORSAIR XMS 2GB (2 x 1GB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM Unbuffered DDR 400 (PC 3200) Dual Channel Kit

Removable Storage : Sabrent 52-in-1 USB 2.0 Internal Flash Memory Reader/Writer

3.5 Floppy Drive : SONY Black 1.44MB 3.5" Internal Floppy Drive Model MPF920 Black - OEM

Hard Drive : Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 320GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - OEM

Keyboard Microsoft Comfort Curve 2000 B2L-00047 Black 104 Normal Keys 9 Function Keys USB Ergonomic Keyboard

CD-RW/DVD-RW : 2 Lite-on SHW-160P6S04 16x8x16xDVD+RW / 16x6x16xDVD-RW / 48x24x48x CD-RW

Thermal Compound : Zalman ZM - STG1 Thermal Compound - Retail

CPU Cooler : ZALMAN CNPS7000B-Cu LED 2 Ball Blue LED Light Cooling Fan - Retail

Operating System : Microsoft Windows XP Pro w/Service Pack 2 OEM

Surge Protector : Opti-UPS ES1000C 8 Outlet 700 Watt

 

[Hawkeye22]

I don't think the cache size makes that much of a difference in today's games/software. For future-proofing, I'd spend the extra money since AMD is discontinuing the 2x1mb cache on their desktop processors.

 

[MindFlare327]

BTW, I don't intend on overclocking anything.....this one is going to have to last me for a few years...LOL

 

[ElMoIsEviL]

I will be buying everything this is what I think I'm going to be getting.

Case : Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum/Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case - Retail

Motherboard : ASUS A8N-SLI Premium Socket 939 NVIDIA nForce4 SLI ATX AMD Motherboard

Video Card : ASUS EAX1900XT/2DHTV/512 Radeon X1900XT 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16

Power Supply : Antec TRUEPOWERII TPII-550 ATX12V 550W PSU

Processor : AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ Toledo 2000MHz HT 2 x 1MB L2 Cache Socket 939 Dual Core Processor - Retail

Memory : CORSAIR XMS 2GB (2 x 1GB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM Unbuffered DDR 400 (PC 3200) Dual Channel Kit

Removable Storage : Sabrent 52-in-1 USB 2.0 Internal Flash Memory Reader/Writer

3.5 Floppy Drive : SONY Black 1.44MB 3.5" Internal Floppy Drive Model MPF920 Black - OEM

Hard Drive : Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 320GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - OEM

Keyboard Microsoft Comfort Curve 2000 B2L-00047 Black 104 Normal Keys 9 Function Keys USB Ergonomic Keyboard

CD-RW/DVD-RW : 2 Lite-on SHW-160P6S04 16x8x16xDVD+RW / 16x6x16xDVD-RW / 48x24x48x CD-RW

Thermal Compound : Zalman ZM - STG1 Thermal Compound - Retail

CPU Cooler : ZALMAN CNPS7000B-Cu LED 2 Ball Blue LED Light Cooling Fan - Retail

Operating System : Microsoft Windows XP Pro w/Service Pack 2 OEM

Surge Protector : Opti-UPS ES1000C 8 Outlet 700 Watt

May I ask who recommended Socket 939 to you? May I also ask why you chose an AMD system with an nVIDIA SLI board when you're buying an ATi Graphics card?

I would have gotten an Intel x975 based board with a Core 2 Duo E6400 @ 2.13Ghz. It supports Crossfire, is in your price range and would last you longer then socket 939 and offer more performance (E6400 often beats an AMD Athlon FX-62 in games).

BTW, I don't intend on overclocking anything.....this one is going to have to last me for a few years...LOL

Then definatly go with the Core 2 Duo setup I just mentioned. For a motherboard you would be best to get the ASUS P5W-DH Deluxe

 

[MindFlare327]

Why isn't that Core 2 Duo E6400 @ 2.13Ghz on the CPU Chart? At least that way I could compare them.

 

[Mayiko]

Becuase it was just released. They havn't updated the charts yet.

 

[oldgreyhead]

Lots of stuff on new conroe's here.

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/Collection-Conroe-Data-Core-Duo-Core-Extreme-ftopict183765.html

 

[MG37221]

BTW, I don't intend on overclocking anything.....this one is going to have to last me for a few years...LOL

In that case, I would have to recommend that you look at either Socket AM2 for AMD or a Conroe. If your heart is set on AMD, get what you're now looking at but in AM2 format, which would include DDR2 versus DDR, and a 4200 or 4600 CPU (AM2 4400's were dropped before many (if any) were made). This way, a future upgrade will be little more than purchasing a faster CPU and swapping it out with your old one.

If your not definite about AMD/Intel, you owe it to yourself to take a careful look at the CoreDuo processors from Intel. Bang for your buck is basically a wash at the speeds you're considering but if you spend a bit more on the Conroe, you will get more performance than any AMD can provide.

Both are excellent processors (AMD/Intel) meaning one isn't better than the other, but the higher priced Intel procs are now the fastest in the world. Do some homework, decide what suits your needs and then go for it. You really can't go wrong either way except since you're starting from scratch, socket 939, at this point, would probably be a mistake.

 

[sailer]

I had the same thoughts when I was building my computer and decided that the extra money for the 4400+ was worth it. As for the present time, there isn't a great deal of difference between the 939 and AM2 systems, but the future upgrades will all be with the AM2, so that would probably make more sense than if you're building from scratch. The only good reason to build a 939 at present would be if you can find the parts sufficiently cheap to make it worthwhile.

I have seen both 4400+ and 4800+ cpus on occasion, so it seems to mainly a matter of hunting them down, though they may be getting scarce.

 

[MindFlare327]

Ok, thanks everyone for all the advice. I will take it all into consideration. I thought I was set, but it looks like I have some more homework to do. LOL

 

[ElMoIsEviL]

BTW, I don't intend on overclocking anything.....this one is going to have to last me for a few years...LOL

If your not definite about AMD/Intel, you owe it to yourself to take a careful look at the CoreDuo processors from Intel. Bang for your buck is basically a wash at the speeds you're considering but if you spend a bit more on the Conroe, you will get more performance than any AMD can provide.

Both are excellent processors (AMD/Intel) meaning one isn't better than the other, but the higher priced Intel procs are now the fastest in the world. Do some homework, decide what suits your needs and then go for it. You really can't go wrong either way except since you're starting from scratch, socket 939, at this point, would probably be a mistake.

I would disagree with that statement. Especially the part where you claim that one isn't better then the other. It's been made clear that Core 2 Duo is better then AMD Athlon64 X2/FX/AM2/939 etc. Even a lowly E6400 more often than not tops an AMD Athlon64 X2 4600+. Not only do Core 2 Duo's offer more performance per Megahertz (more efficient) they also clock higher. This is like getting the best of both world's in a single Processor.

Let me explain, during the Pentium 4 vs. AthlonXP years fans from either camp where locked into an eternal battle. It remained the same with the introduction of the Athlon64. The Pentium 4 (net-burst) and it's subsequent spawns (Pentium 5xx, 6xx, 8xx and D series) all relied on higher clock speeds in order to achieve performance due to there relatively long pipelines thus low IPC (efficiency). On the other hand we had AthlonXP/64 which clocked slower could beat a higher clocked Pentium 4(Net-burst) more often then not.

This has now changed. We have Core 2 Duo's which easily overclock into the 4Ghz range (some hitting 5Ghz), while being more efficient per clock. It is an all around better processor. Whether you're building a Virtualization workstation (Intel VT Technology comes in), Gaming, Encoding etc.. the Core 2 Duo tops the Athlon64 X2.

Core 2 Duo E6400 @ 2.13Ghz tops an Athlon64 X2 4600+ @ 2.4Ghz. Talk about a better processor. On top of that it also runs cooler and drains less power.

It's an overall better processor. It's only limited in games at high resolutions by our current single graphics card power (SLI, Crossfire, Quad SLI really help the Core 2 Duo shine).

Of course don't take my word for it.. check out the benchmarks.
CLICK ME!

 

[sojrner]

Ok, thanks everyone for all the advice. I will take it all into consideration. I thought I was set, but it looks like I have some more homework to do. LOL

Great idea. It is nice to see ppl willing to research out the problem and learn for themselves. Good stuff. May God speed you on your quest.

as far a cache goes; I love my 4200 (oc'd a bit) but if I could do it over again I would have gotten the 4400. You can always increase clock, but never add cache. Always get the most cache you can afford. Later on it may pay off huge. (that goes for the athlons and core2's)

@ other posters:

Nothing wrong w/ an ati board on an Nv mobo... in fact xfire "works" ( ) on many systems. Reality is that I did it b/c I have no plans for a dual card setup, and was unsure of ati mobos at the time and Nv had better performance in other things beyond games. Still like the nforce alot.

Core2 is better for sure, but as athlon prices drop lower amd begins to have the price/performance ratio better. Core2 is not dropping, if anything it is getting worse on that ratio. I agree core2 is better, but the amd chips are not dead.

 

[ElMoIsEviL]

Ok, thanks everyone for all the advice. I will take it all into consideration. I thought I was set, but it looks like I have some more homework to do. LOL

Great idea. It is nice to see ppl willing to research out the problem and learn for themselves. Good stuff. May God speed you on your quest.

as far a cache goes; I love my 4200 (oc'd a bit) but if I could do it over again I would have gotten the 4400. You can always increase clock, but never add cache. Always get the most cache you can afford. Later on it may pay off huge. (that goes for the athlons and core2's)

@ other posters:

Nothing wrong w/ an ati board on an Nv mobo... in fact xfire "works" ( ) on many systems. Reality is that I did it b/c I have no plans for a dual card setup, and was unsure of ati mobos at the time and Nv had better performance in other things beyond games. Still like the nforce alot.

Core2 is better for sure, but as athlon prices drop lower amd begins to have the price/performance ratio better. Core2 is not dropping, if anything it is getting worse on that ratio. I agree core2 is better, but the amd chips are not dead.

Hmmm these Prices were taken on Thursday August 17th 2006 on NewEgg.

Core 2 Duo
E6300: $203USD
E6400: $259USD
E6600: $369USD
E6700: $599USD


Athlon64 X2 AM2
3800+: $149USD
4000+: $379USD (yes still that high)
4200+: $183USD
4600+: $266USD

So what can you deduct from this info? Well, AMD's X2 3800+ is the cheapest. While Intel's Cheapest (the E6300) more often then not surpasses AMD's X2 4600+ in most games and apps.

So... Intel's Price/Performance is much lower then AMD's. As Intel's basic E6300 Core 2 Duo beats AMD's higher end Athlon64 X2 4600+ in terms of performance and price.

 

[zornundo]

3.5 Floppy Drive : SONY Black 1.44MB 3.5" Internal Floppy Drive Model MPF920 Black - OEM

Now that's funny :!:

 

[sojrner]

woa man, was not wanting to make this an argument. I said "as amd's prices drop..." meaning it is not there yet. Not arguing that core2 is not better... Just a word of caution to watch the prices as they are all in flux right now. As demand falls for the amd's, the prices should drop even more to make them more competitive. But if you can find a core2 cheap enough then get it provided you dont have to wait too long for it to be in stock.

 

[MindFlare327]

3.5 Floppy Drive : SONY Black 1.44MB 3.5" Internal Floppy Drive Model MPF920 Black - OEM

Now that's funny :!:

yep, using it to flash the bios is pretty funny. :roll: Besides they are only $8....so why not?

 

[sojrner]

3.5 Floppy Drive : SONY Black 1.44MB 3.5" Internal Floppy Drive Model MPF920 Black - OEM

Now that's funny :!:

yep, using it to flash the bios is pretty funny. :roll:

Not sure he really meant it as an offense. Kinda funny to see it listed as most either do not bother to put it under specs on these forums, or they use an old one laying around the house.

Plus, most mobo makers now have very reliable OS based flash utilities that remove the last need for the floppy drive. Heck, my 3 year old system was built w/o a floppy (asus was one of the first w/ that windows based utility) and of course my current one is w/o that vestigal tail as well.

regardless, pretty sure it was meant showing humor is something unusual on these forums. rock on.

 

[corvetteguy]

God yur such a bias idiot. I even like AMD but don't dismiss intel like you dismiss AMD.

He SAID he wasn't going to overclock, and said he wanted it to last for a while. Now I would say that either a e6300 setup, or a 4200 or maybe even a 4200 EE if he likes power effieciency.

Now it depend what he wants. If he wants uber power get a high end conroe. Thats anything over e6600.If he wants upgradeability, and enough power for the forseeable future get a mid-range AM2. Thats 4200 to 5000. He said it will be used for gaming and therefore he won't need to overclock very high, if at all.

At stock speeds and with those prices YOU listed the 4200 looks like the best deal. You say you are a "performance" fanboy. Maybe that blinds you from knowing value when you see it. If two processors perform almost the same and one is cheaper and more upgradeable, which one would you get?

 

[MindFlare327]

I'm not offended. LOL I figured why not list it? I'm sure most people have them in their system. If they don't, they would just use an old one laying around like you said, but I don't have one laying around, so I have to buy one LOL...I know it's sad....but in researching building, since this is my first, that it's better to have a floppy instead of usind a usb flash drive because those don't always work. Not sure how true it is, but I reckon it's better to have one and not need it than to need it and not have it. I know it's cliche, but it's good advice to live by.


As far as what I'm looking for goes, I'm looking for a sweet setup that I won't have to upgrade again for a few years. I would like it upgradeable, so that I can upgrade it again if I find the money or need to do so. But I would like if I didn't have to. I can't afford the bleeding edge right now so the brand new C2D Extremes are out. I've been looking at E6600, 939 x2 4400+, and AM2 4200+ since I can't find an AM2 4400.

 

[sojrner]

fair enough man, cliche or not. 8)

and what i am talking about is not using a usb key, but running a flash update from within windows. No usb at all. Just dl the bios, update and restart. simple.