Older CPU advice

[Titanion]

I currently have four computers set up and running in my family room. I try to keep mine as new as possible, but the other three are from both my old parts and parts given to me when I help other people upgrade and they no longer need something that is better than some part in my lab. I have a wife, two kids, and sometimes friends over, so the lab is constantly getting used. But the parts change when better things come along, but I wonder if it is all worth the powder when the upgrade is very small.

My two questions:

If all other things are equal, including clock speed, what is the difference in performance between a S939 X2 (4200+ overclocked to 2.8GHz) and an AM2 X2 (5,000+) CPU? DDR vs. DDR2, sure, but playing a game, are they very close? The DFI S939 motherboard it 10x better than the AM2 one, so the 5000+ would stay near its stock 2.6 GHz.

If all other things are equal, what is the difference in performance between a very nice AMD Athlon XP Barton 2500+ running at 2.48GHz and a S939 3200+ that can overclock to about the same speed? On the Barton, I have one of the best air cooled thurmalright heatsinks from its day. With the S939, I would have to worry about temps.

I am still talking Windows XP. But it would be nice to know if Vista would change the equation.

 

[Titanion]

And why am I considered a Newbie when I have 1291 posts?

 

[AKM880]

Its the new posting system, now with points and different rankings.

 

[MU_Engineer]

I currently have four computers set up and running in my family room. I try to keep mine as new as possible, but the other three are from both my old parts and parts given to me when I help other people upgrade and they no longer need something that is better than some part in my lab. I have a wife, two kids, and sometimes friends over, so the lab is constantly getting used. But the parts change when better things come along, but I wonder if it is all worth the powder when the upgrade is very small.

My two questions:

If all other things are equal, including clock speed, what is the difference in performance between a S939 X2 (4200+ overclocked to 2.8GHz) and an AM2 X2 (5,000+) CPU? DDR vs. DDR2, sure, but playing a game, are they very close? The DFI S939 motherboard it 10x better than the AM2 one, so the 5000+ would stay near its stock 2.6 GHz.

They are both K8 CPUs and there's not a whole lot of difference between the performance of the DDR-using Socket 939 units and the DDR2-using AM2 units, particularly if you're using DDR-500 or better. I bet you are as you are running no less than a 250 MHz HT clock to get to the 2.8 GHz clock speed on the 4200+. 2.8 GHz is quite an overclock on the old 4200+ and must take some decent volts to achieve. I am surprised it is still running after this long, unless you just recently overclocked it.

If all other things are equal, what is the difference in performance between a very nice AMD Athlon XP Barton 2500+ running at 2.48GHz and a S939 3200+ that can overclock to about the same speed? On the Barton, I have one of the best air cooled thurmalright heatsinks from its day. With the S939, I would have to worry about temps.

I am still talking Windows XP. But it would be nice to know if Vista would change the equation.

The difference in performance between the Barton 2500+ at 2.48 GHz and a 939 3200+ at a similar speed is about 25% on a 32-bit OS and probably 30-35% if you were running a 64-bit OS on the A64 and a 32-bit one on the 32-bit-only 2500+. I have an X2 4200+ and a Barton 3200+ both running at the same clock speed (stock 2.2 GHz :lol: ) so I could test to see the clock-for-clock improvement between a Barton and a 939 A64 in a few apps. I'll get back to you on that one as I am not at either machine at the second.

I'm surprised that you say the 3200+ runs hotter than the 2500+ at the same clock speed. Is your A64 3200+ an old 130 nm Newcastle unit or something? Most 939 3200+es were 90 nm Venice units and they were notably cool-running CPUs, while just about no desktop Athlon XP could ever be called cool. My Barton 3200+ wears an enormous Thermaltake Silent Boost solid copper heatsink modded with a higher-flow 92 mm fan. The Barton's HSF setup dwarfs my 4200+'s PIB stock aluminum unit, but yet the 4200+ runs 5-10 C lower at full load.

 

[Titanion]

My S939 4200+ X2 running at 2.8 GHz has been set at 1.36 Volts and I am at a 255 bus. It has been 3 1/2 years now. I think I was lucky and got one of the good ones that can reach 3GHz, but I have not tried... so happy was I with the 2.8 GHz results at near stock volts. Even now on one of the hottest days of the year, it is idle at 38C.

I am working on getting the AM2 5000+ X2 set up as one of the extra computers in my lab as I write this. It is just not good enough to make me want to make it my primary computer... I am wanting to upgrade for sure, but the AM2 is not it.

In terms of the Barton not running hot--sure, it does--I just have a few of the nicer Thurmalright copper heatsinks around, so my temps are in check... around 50c at full load, and i have never seen it above 54c. And 1.8 Volts gets me to 2.48 GHz without issue.

I do not have any extra after market cooling around to use with the extra S939 3200+, so I would be stuck with a stock AMD heatsink/fan. But a 25% to 35% increase over a Barton core at the same clock speeds and using the same ram has my attention. If I can get that 3200+ running at 2.4, and I know I can, for I overclocked it on the friend's computer it came from, then that might be the end of the Barton era in my world.

I was told that the motherboard was bad that it came out of, but so many people think a bad psu or something else means a bad motherboard. I will have to test that board over the next few days.

 

[Titanion]

The extra S939 motherboard I was given might, indeed, be bad. I guess it is premature to gut out all my old Socket A hardware.