Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Raw gaming performance: upgrading from amd4800+(toledo) - questions

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 1, 2008 2:14:33 PM

Hello..

I am currently running a
2 year old AMD X2 4800+ (toledo) in a 939socket. Yeah - a month after I got this, they switched to AM2 -
8800gts(512)
4gb corsair XMS ram
an X-FI sound card
Vista Ultimate (don't even start )


My base usage model: When running business apps, what I have now works perfectly well. The majority of the games on the market work just fine with my setup. But - some of the newer ones, well - I end up having to tweak the settings downward and frankly, that makes the game less enjoyable for me. ( I want my eyecandy!). All of that to really say, that an upgrade will mainly be justified for gaming. And when I game, I generally have the game + Vent (or teamspeak) up - maybe a website or a spreadsheet of some sort. That's about it.

I'm going to wait for a GPU upgrade until the GT200 architecture is released - so - about the only improvement I could make on the GFX's end is to go SLI. That being said, I've tested a bit and I think that my slowdown is with my CPU - not the GPU.

So .. time to upgrade.

I've been doing my homework and as part of that, I've been reading lots of boards, opinions, guides, etc. Based on all the info out there, I've decided that Intel is simply the way to go right now - so I will be getting an Intel core. And my buddies have been telling me that I need to go quad core and frankly, this is where I start to get confused.

I get that a quad core - used properly - will outperform a dual core and that GHZ isn't the only game in town. However -.... Somegames aren't designed for multi-core usage. And even the ones that are - I've witnessed how a single core with a higher clock rate (all other components being equal) will outperform my dual core - lower ghz processor.

My 4800+(2mb L2cache) is a dual core that runs at 2.4 ghz.
A q6600 (4mb L2cache) is a quad core that runs at 2.4ghz

Is the only effective differance in gaming - the L2 cache?

If gaming is my justification in upgrading, would an e8400/e8500 be better?

A note: Generally, I don't overclock. I've done it - I just prefer not to mess with it.

May 1, 2008 2:29:41 PM

I just went from a 939 socket to the EVGA 750i FTW with a e8400 proc. I quickly OC'd it to 3.6 GHZ and I couldnt be more happy with the results. Granted, I had a X2 4200.

The q6600 may be 2.4ghz stock, but it can also be easily OC'd quite a bit, which will give you a decent increase.

Also, keep in mind that with a newer CPU and mobo, you will be increasing the FSB speed, and going to faster DDR2/3, which will also make a difference.

I recommend the E8400 because of the higher native FSB and OC potential. I will not, however, get into a debate over 2 vs 4 cores. ;) 
a c 105 à CPUs
May 1, 2008 2:37:37 PM

Clock for clock, a current Intel CPU will outperform your old S939 AMD.
What is your budget, and what parts do you want to re-use from the old system (or do you want a second system, leaving the old intact as a backup?)
Related resources
May 1, 2008 2:51:57 PM

I upgraded from my socket 939 recently and went through a few of the same questions. The e8400 looked good, but I often run multiple apps and I noticed that a few of the present games and sims are already benefiting from quad cores, with the high probability that future ones would do so even more, so I went for a quad. That said, if gaming is the main usage, a dual core would be fine for the next year or two, in my opinion.

As jtt283 wrote, clock for clock, the current Intels are better, vastly better, than the old 939.
May 1, 2008 3:14:57 PM

Hmm, what would you sell that 939 X2 for? Please PM me if you would like to sell it!
May 1, 2008 3:37:49 PM

jtt283 is right leave the old system intact as much as possible as a backup. Check out TH charts to see cpu compairisons.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2007/3dma...

TH states that in their test system a q6600 gets 3507 in 3d mark 06 and the 4800+ gets 1802. Not oc'd by the way. The great thing about the Q6600 is that it will oc very well on air with not much effort and none if any harm to the cpu. You could get 3.2ghz+ easily which is why the cpu is so popular. Same proformance as costlier chips for less money. BTW you are going to have to evaluate your whole old system if you want to reuse anything. HD's are better, bigger and cheaper now. Is you ram a good fit, toss the sound card unless you really love it. Since you are thinking about a new intel system you must consider the Q9300 and Q9450 as well. BTW I am kind of an AMD guy but there is no denieing that the Qxxxx Intel chips are very good and oc very well. Do think about SLI.

Question for Sailer - What do you think about this chip? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... Thinking about it instead of the Q9450, will it oc well? It does have 12mb cache. Might be an option for some builders.
May 1, 2008 4:02:31 PM

Looks like i'm in the same boat as most ppl here, i upgraded from an AMD4200 to a E8400, I went with the dual because pretty much the only current game that benefits from Quad cores is Supreme Commander. I'd recommend the E8400 because it's quite powerful enough to run any current game, since pretty much all games that are high spec like Cyrsis are GPU limited, unless you're still stuck on a good, trusty old 939.

P.S. just because all the other kids are doing Quads doesn’t make it a good decision, you've seen the benchies that prove that.
May 1, 2008 4:26:16 PM

I also just recently just switched from a 4000+ (which is basically a single core X2 4800) to an e8400 after waiting long enough to witness the crap that is Phenom.

Worlds apart doesn't seem to cut it, more like universes apart. Usually, just a 600MHz upgrade wouldn't make such a monster of a difference, but the C2D architecture is insane compared to anything on the S939 (or anything AM2 for that matter).

No, I'm no Intel fanboy, I just go with what's best bang for the buck at the time of an upgrade, regardless if it's AMD, ATI, nVidia, Intel, Asus, etc... (although I must say, I've had nothing but Asus boards :p  )

I also OC'ed it to 3.6GHz after getting an aftermarket cooler and for the price/performance, it's unbeatable.
May 1, 2008 4:35:48 PM

GeOMan is correct the E8400 would be a very good choice. GeOMan is also correct that very few games at the moment benefit greatly from 4 cores. Many applications and the OS do however. Where GeOMan misses the point is that the OP asked specifically about the Q6600. OPs thread which gets a response to OPs question. Don't start flaming with remarks like "kids". Remarks like that makes us disreguard any positive contribution that you might make. Q6600 = $219, E8400 = $199 today at the egg. E8400 is default clocked at 3ghz, the Q6600 is default clocked at 2.4ghz. Do you think that might have anything to do with benchmarks conducted at default clocks?
May 1, 2008 4:50:19 PM

Honestly at the risk of getting shot down by some of the guys here that think upgrading from a E6XXX to E6X50 to E8XXX is actually worth it, let me tell you this, your CPU might not be considered top of the line, but it still has a lot of life left in it, if I were you (And this is actually what I'm doing) I'd hold it until nehalem which is coming in less than year and is supposed to be a very nice jump in performance over the Core 2 arch, which is already on it's 2nd year since release.

You will definitely see a very nice performance increase going to a Core 2, but I'd hold it and even OC that S939 CPU if necessary, I'm pretty much on the same boat as you with a stock E6400 (which slightly faster than a X2 5200+) and im holding until nehalem.
May 1, 2008 5:12:41 PM

kirel123 said:
Hello..

I am currently running a
2 year old AMD X2 4800+ (toledo) in a 939socket. Yeah - a month after I got this, they switched to AM2 -
8800gts(512)
4gb corsair XMS ram
an X-FI sound card
Vista Ultimate (don't even start )


My base usage model: When running business apps, what I have now works perfectly well. The majority of the games on the market work just fine with my setup. But - some of the newer ones, well - I end up having to tweak the settings downward and frankly, that makes the game less enjoyable for me. ( I want my eyecandy!). All of that to really say, that an upgrade will mainly be justified for gaming. And when I game, I generally have the game + Vent (or teamspeak) up - maybe a website or a spreadsheet of some sort. That's about it.

I'm going to wait for a GPU upgrade until the GT200 architecture is released - so - about the only improvement I could make on the GFX's end is to go SLI. That being said, I've tested a bit and I think that my slowdown is with my CPU - not the GPU.

So .. time to upgrade.

I've been doing my homework and as part of that, I've been reading lots of boards, opinions, guides, etc. Based on all the info out there, I've decided that Intel is simply the way to go right now - so I will be getting an Intel core. And my buddies have been telling me that I need to go quad core and frankly, this is where I start to get confused.

I get that a quad core - used properly - will outperform a dual core and that GHZ isn't the only game in town. However -.... Somegames aren't designed for multi-core usage. And even the ones that are - I've witnessed how a single core with a higher clock rate (all other components being equal) will outperform my dual core - lower ghz processor.

My 4800+(2mb L2cache) is a dual core that runs at 2.4 ghz.
A q6600 (4mb L2cache) is a quad core that runs at 2.4ghz

Is the only effective differance in gaming - the L2 cache?

If gaming is my justification in upgrading, would an e8400/e8500 be better?

A note: Generally, I don't overclock. I've done it - I just prefer not to mess with it.

May 1, 2008 5:16:30 PM

woops, 2 days ago i sold my a8n32 939,4800+, and 4 gigs of ddr and got 460.00 total, paid 480.00 for 4gigs ddr2 q6600 a zalmann cooler and 750i p5nd,it doesnt overclock past 2.66 yet but sell yer stuff and go for it,was getting 15-25 on high in crysis 1680x1050 now 25-40 some settings on very high
May 1, 2008 7:04:16 PM

Apologies if my remarks are interpreted as flaming. I was merely attempting a little humour. Combining the remarks of the OP that his friends were telling him to buy a quad, and the jargon of public service announcements alerting high school children to the perils of peer pressure, no personal attacks intended.

Possibly I should also have been more explicit in my wording; if gaming is the reason for the upgrade I would recommend the E8400 over the Q6600 as it would provide better performance at less expense, this question is expressly asked by the OP and mentions these two processors.

Regards to all and have a wonderful day.

P.S. Thank you topper743 for pointing out the weakness in my response to this question, that of being to obscure in my humour and not being explicit enough as to which part of the OP%u2019s question I am answering, possibly next time I shall limit myself to quoting extracts from the OP and responding to each section in point form.
!