Athlon 64 X2's ...... 4600 vs 4400???

[dezert_eagle323]

I'm on my way of upgrading to the athlon 64's and I'm a little confused as to which processor is better . . . the 4600+ (Windsor - 90nm, energy efficient) is at 2.4 Ghz while the 4400+ (Brisbane - 65nm, energy efficient) is at 2.3 Ghz. Which is the better processor? I think i have the general idea that the newer 65nm technology is better than the 90nm, and the 4400+ is a few bucks more expensive than the 4600+ on newegg, but I'm still not quite sure which is truly better between the two. Any shed of light on this would really be appreciated. Thanks.

 

[eregular]

the 65nm amd products haven't matured yet and are actually slower at certain things (more memory latency or something like that?)

go with the windsor!

 

[Newf]

the 65nm amd products haven't matured yet and are actually slower at certain things (more memory latency or something like that?)...

Yup, absolutely right.
The 65nm Brisbane runs cooler though...
Go with the Brisbane!

 

[Newf]

Can you tell that you're really pickin' nits at this point?

 

[clue69less]

Can you tell that you're really pickin' nits at this point?

Agreed. Neither has a rep for OC'ing real high and it's not like 100MHz is a deal breaker.

 

[ajfink]

I'd say go for the Windsor. If you overclock, you'd likely hit higher clocks on stock volts with the 4400+ Brisbane, but at stock the 4600+, besides being 100Mhz faster, also has lower latency (better) L2 cache.

 

[fender22]

The reason that the all Brisbanes are higher than their Windsor Toledo and Manchester counterparts, is because of the higher cache latency. So highering by 100Mhz supposedly makes up for it.. I'd go Windsor.. unless u really want the energy savings which aren't really all that much, Brisbane doesn't run that much cooler anyways..... Goodluck!

 

[epsilon84]

The reason that the all Brisbanes are higher than their Windsor Toledo and Manchester counterparts, is because of the higher cache latency. So highering by 100Mhz supposedly makes up for it.. I'd go Windsor.. unless u really want the energy savings which aren't really all that much, Brisbane doesn't run that much cooler anyways..... Goodluck!

Not only that, but the half multipliers on the Brisbane cores means that on many of the chips (not totally sure if the X2 4400+ suffers from this though, but I think it does) the RAM runs slower than on Windsor, so you end up with a Windsor 4600+ outperforming a Brisbane 4800+ in many benches.

To the OP, it's basically a choice between slightly higher performance or lower power consumption. What is more important to you, a 5 - 10% performance increase or a ~20W reduction in power consumption?

Personally I'd stick with the Windsor core.

 

[dezert_eagle323]

hmmm judging from what I've read so far in here I'm thinking of going with the windsor . . . I have a aspire x-navigator case (imo one of the best air flow cases) and everything runs pretty cool so the brisbane running slightly cooler doesn't really matter to me . . . and yea u guyz are right i too read somewhere else that the brisbane doesn't exactly perform up to par with the windsor at times . . . so the only real concern for me now is should I save that 20W of power (as someone mentioned) by going with the brisbane? . . . because i'm getting a power-hungry sapphire x1950xt 512mb along with a gigabyte m55sli-s4 mobo and wit my current 500W aspire power supply that came with the case I "think" I should have just enough power to go with the windsor and still be safe . . but who knows lol . . computers are unpredictable . . but anyways guyz if u can fill me in on that let me know!!! thx for the help.

 

[epsilon84]

hmmm judging from what I've read so far in here I'm thinking of going with the windsor . . . I have a aspire x-navigator case (imo one of the best air flow cases) and everything runs pretty cool so the brisbane running slightly cooler doesn't really matter to me . . . and yea u guyz are right i too read somewhere else that the brisbane doesn't exactly perform up to par with the windsor at times . . . so the only real concern for me now is should I save that 20W of power (as someone mentioned) by going with the brisbane? . . . because i'm getting a power-hungry sapphire x1950xt 512mb along with a gigabyte m55sli-s4 mobo and wit my current 500W aspire power supply that came with the case I "think" I should have just enough power to go with the windsor and still be safe . . but who knows lol . . computers are unpredictable . . but anyways guyz if u can fill me in on that let me know!!! thx for the help.

A decent 500W PSU would handle such a system just fine, provided you don't have 10 HDDs or something. :lol:

 

[dezert_eagle323]

and as much as i know that there really won't be a huge difference in which one I go with i see now that newegg is giving away rainbow 6 vegas if you get the brisbane . . lol . . I hope that won't be the deciding factor

 

[tekzor]

I recommend the 3600+ brisbane. Its only $65 at newegg and you can buy a nice heatsink and OC it to 3Ghz.

 

[epsilon84]

and as much as i know that there really won't be a huge difference in which one I go with i see now that newegg is giving away rainbow 6 vegas if you get the brisbane . . lol . . I hope that won't be the deciding factor

LOL. Off topic, but I'm an Aussie and Brisbane is an Australian city. Brisbane is often called 'BrisVegas' downunder. Don't ask me why, it's nothing like Vegas. :lol:

 

[tekzor]

and as much as i know that there really won't be a huge difference in which one I go with i see now that newegg is giving away rainbow 6 vegas if you get the brisbane . . lol . . I hope that won't be the deciding factor

LOL. Off topic, but I'm an Aussie and Brisbane is an Australian city. Brisbane is often called 'BrisVegas' downunder. Don't ask me why, it's nothing like Vegas. :lol:

Always time for a unexpected lesson!

 

[StringCheesian]

I'd personally go with the Brisbane core because:

1) Runs cooler.

Does it run cooler than the 65 watt version of Windsor?

 

[dmandell]

I'm curious about this as well. I'm trying to choose between the 4800+ and the 65w version of the 4600+. I understand the two processors are probably pretty close in terms of performance, but if the 4800+ runs cooler of if there's a significant power savings over the 65w 4600+ I'd probably want to go the 4800+ route.

 

[shinigamiX]

:tongue:

 

[Newf]

hmmm judging from what I've read so far in here I'm thinking of going with the windsor . . . I have a aspire x-navigator case (imo one of the best air flow cases) and everything runs pretty cool so the brisbane running slightly cooler doesn't really matter to me . . . and yea u guyz are right i too read somewhere else that the brisbane doesn't exactly perform up to par with the windsor at times . . . so the only real concern for me now is should I save that 20W of power (as someone mentioned) by going with the brisbane? . . . because i'm getting a power-hungry sapphire x1950xt 512mb along with a gigabyte m55sli-s4 mobo and wit my current 500W aspire power supply that came with the case I "think" I should have just enough power to go with the windsor and still be safe . . but who knows lol . . computers are unpredictable . . but anyways guyz if u can fill me in on that let me know!!! thx for the help.

A decent 500W PSU would handle such a system just fine, provided you don't have 10 HDDs or something. :lol:Too bad he does not have a decent psu...

 

[everett]

My brother has had my 4600+ up to 2.7 on stock hsf, although that was with better ram than what I have. I say get the 4600.

 

[m25]

For OC-ing I'd say Brisbane. For stock operation you can go with the Windsor X2 4600+ but at this point where the prices are now, I'd add some $60 and get a X2 5600+; really worth it, it will be a solid performer until you can upgrade to a K10 CPU.

 

[halbhh]

For OC-ing I'd say Brisbane. For stock operation you can go with the Windsor X2 4600+ but at this point where the prices are now, I'd add some $60 and get a X2 5600+; really worth it, it will be a solid performer until you can upgrade to a K10 CPU.

This is good advice.

 

[dezert_eagle323]

uhh thanks to dmandell i got interested in the 4800+ lol . . and since I'm trying not to go over $130 on the cpu i can honestly say that the 4800+ seems like the best way to go for the price (its $129 at mwave.com which even beats newegg) and im pretty sure I'll do some amount of overclocking and so brisbane seems like the best choice (according to yall) for oc'ing . . . sigh that was a relief thanks again guyz!!!



(p.s. I also changed my mind about the sapphire x1950xt 512MB and now plan on getting the more "powerful" PNY 8800GTS 320MB, and so hopefully that will get my system rolling with an "ok" mobo (gigabyte m55sli-s4 . . that along wit 1GB 667 RAM (for starters) . . not bad for $540 total)

 

[dmandell]

I would say your best bet is to drop down to the 4600 (which can be had for $113 at mwave if you buy it as part of a bundle) and spring for an extra gig of RAM. If you only buy one gig now you're going to want another one before too long.

 

[dezert_eagle323]

haha yea ur rite about dat dats been in da back of my mind as well . . i dont know much about comps but seems like now days 2GB's is da standard for gaming

 

[fender22]

2GB is the game standard for nice rigs now days... the 4600+ is pretty good.. I got it upto 2.7 and higher but I brought it back down.. It was steady but idk.. I'll prolly OC it again this weekend.. all this on stock HSF but that could just be a fluke or maybe I have nice circulation. It doesn't really matter all that much which one you buy when they are so close together.. And with Brisbane soon it'll all be changed anyways..