What's the difference between these two processors?

What's the difference between these two processors, and which one do you recommend? Bangs for the buck. I read the CPU reading guide but didn't see the Windsor, I guess is a newer one.

I'm trying to choose between these two processors to build me my next system in the next few days. I only play UT2004, and do a lot of DivX and WirRar, and Photoshop. Any input will be appreciated.

AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ Windsor 2000MHz HT Socket AM2 Dual Core Processor Model ADA3800IAA5CU - Retail

64 bit Support: Yes
Hyper-Transport Support: Yes
L1 Cache: 128KB+128KB
L2 Cache: 2 x 512KB
Multi-Core: Dual-Core
Operating Frequency: 2.0GHz
Process Type: 90 nm
Series: Athlon 64 X2
Virtualization Technology Support: Yes
Vista Ready: Yes
# Model #: ADA3800CUBOX

AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ Manchester 2000MHz HT Socket 939 Dual Core Processor Model ADA3800BVBOX - Retail

64 bit Support: Yes
Hyper-Transport Support: Yes
L1 Cache: 128KB+128KB
L2 Cache: 2 x 512KB
Multi-Core: Dual-Core
Operating Frequency: 2.0GHz
Process Type: 90 nm
Series: Athlon 64 X2
Virtualization Technology Support: No
Vista Ready: Yes

Thanks.
10 answers Last reply
More about what difference processors
  1. For what it's worth, the AM2 supports virtualization technology, which the socke t939 does not. Research that to see if it's something you'll want. It's also about the motherboards, as socket 939 is at its end and AM2 will have upgrade possibilities a few years from now (ie native quad core). The AM2 boards use DDR2 and the 939 boards use DDR.


    Another thing is that the AM2 X2's will be able to do a sort of anti-hyperthreading. Whereas Intel's HT for their dying out Netburst fools the software into thinking it's running on a dual core (ie it handles 2 threads in a multithreaded application), AMD's socket AM2 dual cores can fool a single threaded application into thinking it's running on a more powerful single core processor. That should help with games that are not multithreaded, as if an Athlon 64 X2 needs any more help with games.

    I'll probably go with a socket 939 X2 3800+ myself, as I can use the DDR 400 from my Northwood system, which it will be upgrading. If you have extra DDR 400 and don't want to buy new RAM, then a socket 939 processor is the cheap choice.
  2. Quote:
    Another thing is that the AM2 X2's will be able to do a sort of anti-hyperthreading...


    I was under the impression that this had been thoroughly debunked on other threads, but I neither know nor care so someone else will have to post links to correct you if I'm right.

    I would buy (and indeed probably will be buying) the AM2 chip for two reasons: One, with DDR2-800 they are slightly faster than S939, Two, S939 is not going to be supported with new processors or technologies, AM2 has had a little time to mature now and buying S939 is buying non-upgradeable technology.

    My suggestion: AM2
  3. Quote:
    For what it's worth, the AM2 supports virtualization technology, which the socke t939 does not. Research that to see if it's something you'll want. It's also about the motherboards, as socket 939 is at its end and AM2 will have upgrade possibilities a few years from now (ie native quad core). The AM2 boards use DDR2 and the 939 boards use DDR.


    Another thing is that the AM2 X2's will be able to do a sort of anti-hyperthreading. Whereas Intel's HT for their dying out Netburst fools the software into thinking it's running on a dual core (ie it handles 2 threads in a multithreaded application), AMD's socket AM2 dual cores can fool a single threaded application into thinking it's running on a more powerful single core processor. That should help with games that are not multithreaded, as if an Athlon 64 X2 needs any more help with games.

    I'll probably go with a socket 939 X2 3800+ myself, as I can use the DDR 400 from my Northwood system, which it will be upgrading. If you have extra DDR 400 and don't want to buy new RAM, then a socket 939 processor is the cheap choice.


    where'd you get your information? links? and please don't site old inquirer stuff.
  4. You can find articles about anti-ht.

    Again, this is based upon tricks up a companies sleeve to out do the other.

    X-bit labs 06/22/2006:

    AMD to Launch “Anti-Hyper-Threading” Shortly
  5. it would be nice but i doubt it will happen, besides doesn't that make devls just get lazier? instead of making them produce true multi threaded aps they can just make single threaded

    edit, woo 100th post lol
  6. Please update your info Xbitlabs 7/14/2006
    NO REVERSE HYPERTHREADING FOR AM2

    Here is the link from inquirer who spread this fud in the first place:
    REVERSE HYPERTHREADING DOES NOT EXIST

    Here is a link that analyzes how in the first of adversity aka conroe amd fan boi become delusional
    Anatomy of a Fabrication
  7. Thanks, I'm way too lazy to look stuff like that up.
  8. Thanks fellows for your input.

    I think I'll go with the AM2 since I don't have any extra DDR RAM laying around. Later upgradeability is worth the extra $8.00, which is the difference in price between these two processors.
  9. Yeah virtualization + chipset.
    The am2 also has pcix standard.
    Since you said you aren't planning on recycling the ram get the am2 chipset.
  10. N O N E ! Go for the AM2, it promises something for future upgrades.
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Support Cache Processors