Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is this system poor/average/good/v.good?

Tags:
  • Homebuilt
  • Systems
  • Product
Last response: in Systems
Share
February 2, 2010 9:49:35 AM

Well I'm on a budget and want to migrate to AMD.. So I basically need 4 components to build my new system. Give your opinion and how it will perform.

MOBO: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
CPU: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
RAM: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
HDD: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

My current system is

Pentium D 945
Gigabyte 945-GZM Micro-ATX
XFX 5750 1GB
ePro 2 x 1GB 667 DDR2
a lot of HDDs
LG DVD -+ writer

I will ofcourse take the 5750 from my old build to the new because the old mobo has built-in graphics which would work alright for a media center.

I will be mainly playing games normally on 1080p but of course can go lower if needed.

Just for your info. The current system plays all modern games very well on 1080p, but I need a new system for myself and not borrow the home system.

More about : system poor average good good

February 2, 2010 10:21:22 AM

In my opinion, we are past the tipping point where 4 cores are now better than 2 cores. I think I would probably go with this for a better long term solution:

AMD Athlon II X4 630 Propus 2.8GHz 4 x 512KB L2 Cache Socket AM3 95W Quad-Core Processor - Retail
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
February 2, 2010 10:24:28 AM

Isn't there a 70% possibility to unlock the remaining 2 cores of the 550? I took that into consideration also and it would actually be a lot faster with it's 6mb cache!
Related resources
February 2, 2010 10:42:02 AM

The reason why I don't take unlocking seriously is because the odds are significant that the unlocked cores will have a defect.

4 average cores will be faster than 2 fast cores if the game is multithreaded, which most modern games are.

But then again, if you feel lucky, you can try unlocking, but I think you'll need a more modern board and BIOS.
February 2, 2010 10:54:51 AM

vanekl said:
The reason why I don't take unlocking seriously is because the odds are significant that the unlocked cores will have a defect.

4 average cores will be faster than 2 fast cores if the game is multithreaded, which most modern games are.

But then again, if you feel lucky, you can try unlocking, but I think you'll need a more modern board and BIOS.

so? the x4 630 has no L3 which renders the cpu slower then the same phenom II equivalent.
if he needs a quad, then he should go for the 630 but if he doesn't then he should go for the x2, the bonus is that he can try and unlock the other cores. remember it is all about statistics, they take a number of cpus from each batch, if more then x percent of them have defective cores, then they disable the entire batch's cores depending on the amount of defected cores statistically.

about the 70%, is it way more lower, aim more towards the 40%-30%
February 2, 2010 11:12:47 AM

Even at dual-core, the 550 is a beast. The plus side is, it has 6MBs of L3 where Athlon has none.

For gaming performance: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2009/10/26/amd-at...

The differences are very noticeable, I look at Crysis benchmark because even 1 FPS means a lot in it.

I would basically be using the CPU for gaming, not encoding or anything else. Sometimes watching some movies on it. And if I can actually run the unlocked 4 cores stable, I win big.
a b B Homebuilt system
February 2, 2010 5:36:23 PM

Dont buy a proc on the hope you might be able to unlock the 4th core, youll be pissed and let down if you cant, I got lucky, I unlocked and clocked my 435 triple, its a gamble so if youll be happy with the proc in its original form, if yes then go for it, an unlocked 4th core is a bonus, as Clint would say....

Do you feel lucky punk?

:p 
February 2, 2010 5:50:08 PM

The OP is correct in that the 550 is a beast, even as a dual-core.

And the benchmark he posts is illuminating, if flawed.

There are a few things that should be taken into account when looking at that benchmark.
o The 550 was overclocked more than the 620.
o The 630 is more capable than the 620 (which was used in the benchmark).
o This is just one data point.

The last thing to consider is how future-proof a quad-core is compared to a dual-core.

If you are going to be playing a lot of Crysis, go with the 550. My guess is that games are going to be better tuned to play with quad-cores in the near-future, however.
February 3, 2010 1:39:06 AM

Well the benchmark has 550 stock and 550 OC'd.

I don't play Crysis at all, I dislike it because it's a budget gamer's nightmare. It just shows a gaming benchmark.

So how good is the 630 in gaming compared to the 550? Just thinking of no L3 cache makes me look at it with a raised eyebrow!
February 3, 2010 10:51:27 AM

Oh yea, going with the new build is my OCZ StealthXStream 600W PSU. It's sweeeeeet :D 
!