Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Crossfire: Phenom II or Athlon II?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 16, 2011 11:57:19 AM

Hello,

I'm upgrading my old 939 system. I'll pick an AM3 platform and two 4850 in crossfire; mostly because I already got one for free.

Now I'm wondering wether the Phenom II the Athlon II would best suit my needs.

In a single-GPU setup, a PII X2 550 seems to be the same than an AII X4 620, but the results may be different in Crossfire. Does Crossfire benefit more from L3 cache or more cores ?

Thanks in advance. Sorry if my english isn't that good.
February 16, 2011 1:34:16 PM

Get a Phenom II X2 and unlock it to a X4 for the same price as an Athlon II. Problem solved.
Score
0
February 16, 2011 2:33:29 PM

Because ever PII X2 is guaranteed to unlock to an X3 let alone an X4 and even if it does unlock, it will be 100% stable, right?

Also the stock cooler on the X2 is enough to cool it in dual core more, you open it up to 4 core and you will need a new cooler as well.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

guaranteed 4 functional cores that will be stable. ANd the stock cooler can handle up to 3.5 GHz.

You get what you pay for.
Score
0
Related resources
February 16, 2011 2:35:54 PM

Moutardentube said:
Hello,

I'm upgrading my old 939 system. I'll pick an AM3 platform and two 4850 in crossfire; mostly because I already got one for free.

Now I'm wondering wether the Phenom II the Athlon II would best suit my needs.

In a single-GPU setup, a PII X2 550 seems to be the same than an AII X4 620, but the results may be different in Crossfire. Does Crossfire benefit more from L3 cache or more cores ?

Thanks in advance. Sorry if my english isn't that good.



I'd try to get a DX11 card since the other was free as any 6000 series AMD or 500 Series nVidia will do more than either CPU. The CPUs are around the same price.

I saw one 4850 on newegg which means they will be harder to find and more expensive elsewhere. The 6850 is only $200 and would give that XFire a run for its money.
Score
0
February 16, 2011 2:47:31 PM

Thanks for you answers.
I have very little money to put in this new system (200€=$240), so I don't plan to buy a specific cooler. A second-hand 4850 is roughly $60 (50€) by the way.
Also an important difference is that the Phenom can be BE. I know how to overclock a processor by lowering HT/RAM freqs but the increase I can get depends on the motherboard, right? So while the Phenom X2 is "only" a dual-core CPU, its frequency can be higher than an X3/X4 Athlon.
Score
0
February 16, 2011 3:05:35 PM

I will bet my bottom dollar every Phenom II X2 available today will unlock at least a X3.

AMD uses the same manufacturing process for their X2, X3, and X4 chips.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 16, 2011 4:06:52 PM

depends on whats messed up on the chip... you could have 2 cores with defects... but they are probably few and far between, it'd be a pretty safe bet to assume they'd unlock one of the cores.. i still say buy the rocessor you want becaue it isn't a guaruntee
Score
0
February 18, 2011 12:49:44 PM

I found a Phenom II X4 970 BE for roughly $100, I guess it was the best one for the money.
Anyway thanks for your time.
Score
0
February 19, 2011 9:23:56 AM

Where the hell did you find one that cheap? I hope you didn't ebay an ES or something. Spread the love though if you got a legit retail/ oem version! I'd pick one of these up today if so!
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 19, 2011 10:09:03 AM

When buying any x2 or x3... don't expect it to unlock. They don't disable good cores on purpose all the time since they could make more money to just sell them as fully functional 4 core CPUs. Core unlocking is a marketing ploy by the board manufacturers to sell more boards. AMD does not market any CPU as unlockable.

If you want a 4 core, buy a 4 core. If you are happy with a 2 core, then buy it. If it does unlock and it is stable, then you'll be happy anyways. But if you are not happy with 2 cores to begin with, then buy the 4 core.
Score
0
February 19, 2011 2:43:16 PM

LOL @ X2 not unlocking a core.

When buying any x2... expect it to unlock a core.

No they can't make money selling them as X4s since AMD is competing on price alone. If it didn't back fill the market they wouldn't even have a niche anywhere. At the $200 price point the i5 quad cores are better than anything in AMDs lineup. They can't just sell the Phenom II X4 970 at $180 and expect more retards to buy them; they already make enough chips for idiots who want to pay over $150 for an AMD. Since you use the same manufacturing process for both, sell some X2s to make some profit, even if it's at a lower margin than the X4s.

At Fry's they let you return dual cores; just say they didn't work after you try to unlock them if they don't unlock into a quad. My friend has done this three times.
Score
0
February 19, 2011 2:44:07 PM

1965ohio said:
When buying any x2 or x3... don't expect it to unlock. They don't disable good cores on purpose all the time since they could make more money to just sell them as fully functional 4 core CPUs. Core unlocking is a marketing ploy by the board manufacturers to sell more boards. AMD does not market any CPU as unlockable.

If you want a 4 core, buy a 4 core. If you are happy with a 2 core, then buy it. If it does unlock and it is stable, then you'll be happy anyways. But if you are not happy with 2 cores to begin with, then buy the 4 core.



Feels like I've seen this post before, oh wait....

I would think these days people are informed enough to realize they'll never use 4 cores, let alone 6...

Even myself, who uses virtualization to run 2 additional VM's don't really tap out a dual core cpu. I would get one of these (personally) just because the sweetness factor at a chance of additional cores is too good to pass up at a low price point.

These days, even rocking a Phenom II X2 is plenty well enough at a typical sub $100 price point. When Bulldozer hits anyway, people will be flocking to that, or grabbing up the soon to be cheapened X4 and X6 cores for a Benjamin or so. But if this guy is getting a X4 for about $100 then I wanna know where!!
Score
0
February 19, 2011 4:23:04 PM

get the 620. you will be buying 4 perfectly good cores at least
Score
0
February 19, 2011 6:52:45 PM

Would you recommend the 620 over the phenom II if the user were to be overclocking and using virtualization regularly? Seems the L3 might be a huge help in that regard, as well as when pushing the cores well beyond 3GHz.

(forgive the derail)
Score
0
a c 131 à CPUs
February 19, 2011 8:01:04 PM

uriah1024 said:
Would you recommend the 620 over the phenom II if the user were to be overclocking and using virtualization regularly? Seems the L3 might be a huge help in that regard, as well as when pushing the cores well beyond 3GHz.

(forgive the derail)

I had an Athlon IIx4 620 alongside a single radeon 4850 for a long while until I upgraded to a 1055t.

I only ran a bit of virtualization at the time but I can say for sure even running several VMs, the 1055t and 4GB of memory is normally overkill. The Athlon IIx4 should be more than enough. If there is any limiting factor, it would be the 4GB of memory.
I normally virtualize a windows XP server giving it about 1GB then I'll run maybe a couple windows 7 or server 2008R2 VMs with virtualbox.

As for gaming, for the single 4850, I found stock clock was enough for a lot of games. I overclocked though to 3.2GHz though anyway (had it before at 3.3 but although it passed all the stability tests, it appears that folding@home is a more intense "stability test" than either prime95 or linpack. Had to lower it to 3.2. No voltage increase. I think a lot of the limitation is because of my cheap $80 motherboard though). The L3 cache will help in gaming but on the other hand it doesn't make a huge difference and in select games, having 4 cores will make a huge difference.
Score
0
February 19, 2011 10:00:34 PM

enzo matrix said:
I had an Athlon IIx4 620 alongside a single radeon 4850 for a long while until I upgraded to a 1055t.

I only ran a bit of virtualization at the time but I can say for sure even running several VMs, the 1055t and 4GB of memory is normally overkill. The Athlon IIx4 should be more than enough. If there is any limiting factor, it would be the 4GB of memory.
I normally virtualize a windows XP server giving it about 1GB then I'll run maybe a couple windows 7 or server 2008R2 VMs with virtualbox.

As for gaming, for the single 4850, I found stock clock was enough for a lot of games. I overclocked though to 3.2GHz though anyway (had it before at 3.3 but although it passed all the stability tests, it appears that folding@home is a more intense "stability test" than either prime95 or linpack. Had to lower it to 3.2. No voltage increase. I think a lot of the limitation is because of my cheap $80 motherboard though). The L3 cache will help in gaming but on the other hand it doesn't make a huge difference and in select games, having 4 cores will make a huge difference.



Awesome post, thank you.

I guess my position now is just coming to justifying the spring to. The L3 cache sure seems sexy, but I wouldn't need it often I would think. My intent is just to hold out til Bulldozer comes around, and either spring for that or snag a higher end like the 1100T when the price point jobs a bit.

I knew ram would really be the limiter here, and I may eventually have to shuttle off my 4Gb for something greater, but as of now, not sure. I want to keep what I have and stretch it out for as long as I can. Worst I may play is Crysis, and my old rig runs that fine, so I may just snag a replacement mobo and call it a day. Will have to see how things pan out with the new gen cores I think.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 20, 2011 3:16:29 AM

I don't really know why everyone thinks AMD just purposely disables cores on all their x2/x3 line. It is ridiculous. If they really wanted to kill Intel in price, why not just sell all the 955/965/970's for $100 then? Why would they purposely always sabotage themself? They will make less money if they have to always purposely disable functional cores on a die.

Where people are getting this idea is that sometimes, just sometimes they will run out of x2/3 and will disable a few to fill the price gap. Just listen above to the poster who says they are all unlockable, then he says if you can't unlock it you can take it back to Fry's and tell them it wouldn't unlock. And said he did it 3 times. Think about this statement before you even consider that all of them can unlock.

If AMD just sold 3.4GHz quadcores all day for $99, they could wipe Intel out in all the market except high end.

And hell, many of the Athlon x2's are designed that way. They don't even have ANY cores to unlock since they are a native dual core.

And to the poster who can't see why you need anything over a dual core, you should try it someday... don't just say it sucks cause you can't afford to buy it and try it. Since I got my AMD 965 and a cheap Intel Q8300, I see no reason to go back to dual core. That is a ridiculous statement. If you really are running VMs like me, then you want to have a 4 or 6 core if you really want to use your host OS fully while running your VM.

I used to say the same crap about dual core is enough until I tried quad. If you can truly prove to everyone that dual core is still "good enough" or is the future, then you are off base by 5 years now. It is time to move on and really try it.

So to the original poster, if you really want to get a 4 core, then buy a 4 core. If you are already happy like so many people who responded here, then get a 2 core. But do not expect it to unlock, or do not expect to return it if it doesn't. Maybe Fry's is easy about it, but Newegg and Microcenter will not take back an open CPU unless it really has a problem. Not unlocking is not a problem since AMD does not say it will unlock to anything. Only board makers say that as a tactic to sell more boards.

I bet most of the responders above are probably still trying to tell people XP is better than Windows Vista or Windows 7. If 4 core is useless, how come Intel and AMD are both shifting to 6-12 core designs? Half of the people still think a single core with hyperthreading is the same as a dual core. These posts are all utter nonsense and should be taken with a grain of salt.
Score
0
February 20, 2011 3:53:11 AM

1965ohio said:


And to the poster who can't see why you need anything over a dual core, you should try it someday... don't just say it sucks cause you can't afford to buy it and try it. Since I got my AMD 965 and a cheap Intel Q8300, I see no reason to go back to dual core. That is a ridiculous statement. If you really are running VMs like me, then you want to have a 4 or 6 core if you really want to use your host OS fully while running your VM........

I used to say the same crap about dual core is enough until I tried quad. If you can truly prove to everyone that dual core is still "good enough" or is the future, then you are off base by 5 years now. It is time to move on and really try it.
......

I bet most of the responders above are probably still trying to tell people XP is better than Windows Vista or Windows 7. If 4 core is useless, how come Intel and AMD are both shifting to 6-12 core designs? Half of the people still think a single core with hyperthreading is the same as a dual core. These posts are all utter nonsense and should be taken with a grain of salt.



I'm assuming some of this was directed at me, and as such feel obligated to clarify be that the case. First off, I've got plenty of experience with quad core. I actually own a Q9450. Problem is with that one, the mobo is shot atm, and was looking at a possible shift to AMD for the time being before bulldozer hits. I also use and see the difference between dual and quad in a server virtualized environment on a daily basis. Do the quads help? of course, they reduce load and as such ensure more resources are available should the VM's happen to tap out the dual core (which I've never seen in my environment). Based on that, I knew that just running 2 VM's versus 18 on one machine wasn't going to do much on a dual core. I run VM's on my crappy Centurion core 2 duo laptop. The only bottleneck I that I've had to be concerned about is ram. So, I think I'm within bounds to say that a dual core is sufficient in this case, and in general as well. Most applications don't utilize 4 cores yet. Obviously those that do will receive a benefit, and even some games, but in general I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that dual cores are 5 years ago...

As far as Windows goes, it really depends on the environment. XP is still an outstanding OS, and yes, I would still recommend it's usage, especially over Vista for gaming. Not that Vista is bad, but I wouldn't tell someone to move from XP to Vista for that reason...

4 Cores are not useless, nor has that been stated. The chip makers don't have much else to offer at this point. You get to a vertical soft cap and have to find room to grow elsewhere. A vast majority of people will never tap out a 6 core processor, and certainly not a 12 core. It's a play on ignorance and misunderstanding if you ask me. The idea of "future proofing" your machine is in my opinion, an obsolete and futile attempt. You can certainly cover your bases for about 3 solid years, but there's always something better coming out, something you don't need.

Additionally, to make a prejudgemental comment such as you did at the end, is completely unwarranted and likely not true in the slightest. You would do well to just disagree and leave it at that.

Finally, the comments I had made, and the ones following, were my derailing of the subject. Not everyone thinks that AMD shoots itself in the foot with it's line-up. I would buy a Phenom II X2 just for the lottery fun in the possibility of getting a core or two. I personally can live with 2 cores, but obviously I would want to move on, thus comments mentioned towards bulldozer and price drivings for other offerings. The idea was merely a temporary one, and a personal one as well. And that, you should take with a grain of salt.
Score
0

Best solution

a b à CPUs
February 20, 2011 6:50:48 AM

Well dual core was around 5 years ago, actually 6 if you are starting from Pentium D or so. And even though most review websites state that games don't take advantage of 4 cores should also try testing newer games (or look at 2010 reviews or later reviews). If the game is using 2 cores, and you have 2 cores free... all the better for running the OS and other background tasks without hitting your system performance. There is no true future proof system, but going with older technology is not going to have as much longevity. If someone is using XP still for gaming is fine if you only like DX9 or your video card isn't that great. But if you are building a new system in 2011, why put an OS on it from 2001? If you want more longevity for your system, why go dual core because it is good enough today only? More cores with less heat, getting more done per clock, and more overall efficiency is the future. From now on out threads per clock are more important than just raw clockspeed. It's not Intel and AMD have nothing more to offer. What they are offering is more efficiency on a clock for clock basis compared to previous generations.

The original poster is asking if a dual core CPU will bottleneck his crossfire setup. Right now a dual core can bottleneck a single 9800GTX in some cases (unless it is clocked over 3GHz for Intel or 3.4 for AMD)... and that card is already ages old. If you are going to run 2 decent cards in crossfire or nVidia in SLI or even a single high end GPU, your dual core is already going to be a bottleneck before you start. So another definition for future proof could be if you are considering a high end GPU or 2 high end GPUs in the future, can your system keep up without replacing everything? Starting with a 4 or 6 core already answers yes to that last question.

It is usually not a good idea to buy a budget CPU for a mid to high end gaming rig, just to have to replace it after you want to upgrade your graphics card. So to be ready, might as well have a CPU that is better than your current GPU demands if you are the kind of person that will upgrade things for gaming. Even though he has 2 4850's now, a dual core CPU can still bottleneck it considering my Core 2 Duo e7500 already sucks with my 9800GTX. After I switched to the q8300 at stock speeds, it already keeps up with this ancient GPU and the newer games that do utilize more than 2 cores are already doing better at stock CPU speed.

You are right to say if a 2.5 GHz 4 core is slower than a 2.93 GHz dual core in single threaded games and apps, yet again my q8300 was easily overclocked to 3.0GHz on stock voltage and still completely decimates the Core 2 Duo similarly clocked chip in benchmarks and gaming.

The Phenom the original poster is considering should be great for a single GPU setup and running XP or running a newer OS but not playing taxing games or using heavy modern versions of photoshop. And since it is a black edition, he can overclock it a bit to keep up with the dual GPUs he has. But in the near future when more threads become more important than clockspeed, the quad core will win by default even without the L3 cache of the Phenom if he gets the Athlon x4.

But never buy the AMD dual or tri core CPU just because you imagine it can be unlocked. Most of time it's a no. Why take that chance if you really want a quad core? If you are building a budget rig and don't care if it can be unlocked or not, then unlocking is just a bonus for being thrifty.

So once again, hope these long posts don't bore the original poster to death, but for running a single 4850 and an older OS, then that CPU is very good. For running 2 - 4850's and Windows 7 Ultimate or something, your best bet is to get the quad core now if budget allows. If you get the dual core and are happy, that is great... so if it unlocks to 3 or 4 cores... you will likely be much more happy. But if you get a dual core now and it doesn't suffice for what you are doing, do not expect it to be unlocked. Just think about what you are buying at the moment, not it's unlocking potential but it's current potential.
Share
a b à CPUs
February 20, 2011 7:03:54 AM

uriah1024 said:
Feels like I've seen this post before, oh wait....

I would think these days people are informed enough to realize they'll never use 4 cores, let alone 6...

Even myself, who uses virtualization to run 2 additional VM's don't really tap out a dual core cpu. I would get one of these (personally) just because the sweetness factor at a chance of additional cores is too good to pass up at a low price point.

These days, even rocking a Phenom II X2 is plenty well enough at a typical sub $100 price point. When Bulldozer hits anyway, people will be flocking to that, or grabbing up the soon to be cheapened X4 and X6 cores for a Benjamin or so. But if this guy is getting a X4 for about $100 then I wanna know where!!


And P.S.

My last post was not specifically addressing anyone. But this post is not true in 2010 or 2011. If you truly are running your host OS and VM OSes to their full potential, you must only be running Windows 98 as your guest. I am a beta tester for Microsoft and I need my host and guest OS to be fully functional. My host is Windows 7 Ultimate, and most of the guests I have been testing lately are related to Windows Server 2008 R2 flavors and a few items I can't disclose. It is impossible to truly test any taxing OS in a VM if your host doesn't have enough horsepower. I used to use Core 2 Duo e7500 for most of my testing with 4GB of RAM and it is impossible to run such a taxing guest OS on with what I had. Gaming aside, I started 2 AMD 965 quad core setups with 8GB RAM... one for my Beta Testing purposes, the other for Folding. I can fully test guest OSes now without having to install them on the machine directly. But if you are running XP mode on Windows 7 or many older OSes or light linux OSes in your VMs, no wonder you only need a Core 2 Duo. But for serious testing and software development, it is a total headache to always wipe and reinstall the Beta OSes in dual boot, and even more of a headache to load them into a VM with a dual core chip. I do not want to load the guest OS directly on my computer for driver issues also, I am not into testing drivers. Mostly system features and fixes before they are integrated into future releases of Windows.

And for another one of your posts... people in 2010 and now in 2011 actually see a huge difference in more cores than higher clock speed. The "you will never use all 4 cores" argument is quite dead now.
Score
0
a c 133 à CPUs
February 20, 2011 7:11:35 AM

^+1000
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 20, 2011 7:18:16 AM

To SAAIELLO... when you are folding, which do you use? Your CPU or GPU? I had a nVidia GTX465 in my folding system and couldn't get it to set up right. I had to switch it out for my 9800GTX, but I still use the CPU client. Maybe a driver issue? This is my first time trying to use the GPU to do the work... so I haven't got the bugs quite worked out.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 20, 2011 7:19:05 AM

Nevermind, I will post about the folding issue on that other thread I just saw... forget the last post... LOL :p 
Score
0
February 21, 2011 4:29:01 PM

"Where people are getting this idea is that sometimes, just sometimes they will run out of x2/3 and will disable a few to fill the price gap. Just listen above to the poster who says they are all unlockable, then he says if you can't unlock it you can take it back to Fry's and tell them it wouldn't unlock. And said he did it 3 times. Think about this statement before you even consider that all of them can unlock. "

He builds gaming PCs for a LAN center (or did until it closed) and he only bought Phenom II X2s for every machine. Out of 20 or so machines, only 3 did not unlock into quad cores. Those 3 did unlock into tri-cores. But you keep on thinking that a 4 year old manufacturing process is as error prone as it was 4 years ago...

They don't sell quad cores at $100 because they can make a greater profit selling both quad cores and dual cores. Why sell your chip at a reduced margin when you don't have to? If the chips cost the same, selling some $155 X4s as well as some $100 X2s makes more sense than selling only $100 X4s. Assuming that they can sell a large enough volume to make up for the loss of profit is naive. Plus they also have the Athlon II lineup that they don't want to cannibalize.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 21, 2011 8:15:34 PM

Other than your word of mouth, actually proof is still yet to be shown. Also most retailers with not return or exchange a CPU because it cannot be unlocked. Why don't you try looking online at all the people who bitch that doesn't work. Just about every successful unlock and every horror story can be had all over the web. "My AMD won't unlock to blah blah blah" can be found millions of more times than "My crappy 2 core is now a perfect 4 core".

If AMD really did sell all their 4 cores at $100, Intel would be f**ked.

So out of the kindness of their hearts they are just f**king themself by your logic.

Without some real documentation, you are still without any proof. Either put up or shut up.
Score
0
February 22, 2011 3:30:19 PM

Considering the vast majority of the 784 people that reviewed the Phenom II 555 X2 on newegg said they unlocked it I think you're the one that needs to put up or shut up about the equal number of people not being able to unlock cores 1965ohio.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=19-103-...

I don't know how much they've tested it but since they can go back to changing their review I'll guess that this is a fairly accurate sample.

Again: "Assuming that they can sell a large enough volume to make up for the loss of profit is naive."

But then again you probably can't wrap your retarded brain around that simple concept.

So 1965ohio where is your source that unlocking the X2s will not be successful half the time?

"Core unlocking is a dice throw. Not everyone unlock it without problems and its not as good as 4 perfectly undamaged 4 cores."

Yes; with loaded dies that you'll win on 95% of the time.
Score
0
a c 114 à CPUs
February 22, 2011 6:41:14 PM

I'd take a guess that 7 out of 10 will unlock, but in the interest of making peace you should buy a AMD Phenom II X4 840 Propus 3.2GHz.

And shove your old CPU up the nose of Muammar Gaddafi (Gahhh-daffy?) :D 

Score
0
a c 114 à CPUs
February 23, 2011 1:06:59 PM

Quote:
^ Why do they call the Athlon a Phenom anyways?
it has no L3 cache, hence it is an Athlon


Don't know ... but it's $5 less than a 'similar' 95w Athlon quad


Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 24, 2011 8:32:10 AM

minitron815 said:
Considering the vast majority of the 784 people that reviewed the Phenom II 555 X2 on newegg said they unlocked it I think you're the one that needs to put up or shut up about the equal number of people not being able to unlock cores 1965ohio.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=19-103-...

I don't know how much they've tested it but since they can go back to changing their review I'll guess that this is a fairly accurate sample.

Again: "Assuming that they can sell a large enough volume to make up for the loss of profit is naive."

But then again you probably can't wrap your retarded brain around that simple concept.

So 1965ohio where is your source that unlocking the X2s will not be successful half the time?

"Core unlocking is a dice throw. Not everyone unlock it without problems and its not as good as 4 perfectly undamaged 4 cores."

Yes; with loaded dies that you'll win on 95% of the time.




Okay, I change my mind. The original poster should buy an x2 as you suggested. If Newegg or whoever does not take it back, give him your number/email and you be responsible for it if it doesn't unlock. If you look through all AMD CPUs, you will notice the ratio is more like 50/50, not 95/5...

And many people that do get it unlocked do not have a stable unlocked core because it might be unstable and without stress testing it they will never know. If you have an Athlon that can be unlocked to anything, it is not a Phenom to start with no matter which one you buy because the Athlon core actually does not have any L3 cache.

I've even seen idiots like you tell people their Phenom x4 can be unlocked to an x6. It's impossible because they really have different dies for different CPUs. Some of them purposely have no L3 cache... and the quality control is strict on the higher end models, so any defect no matter how small will be repackaged as a lesser model. Perhaps you can turn an x2 into x3/x4, and maybe it'll be stable. Maybe and guaranteed are 2 different things.

I suggest you look up "maybe, guaranteed, and stable" in a dictionary. Because it is only guaranteed to be what it is labeled as, and maybe it can be more and maybe it will be stable if you are lucky. Maybe, perhaps, could be... just doesn't sound like a good proposition if you really want x4 and it doesn't unlock. So as long as you refund the OP, then he is guaranteed and it is no longer a maybe!

And again to the original poster, if it doesn't work and your supplier won't replace it, and this dummy won't refund you, then you are sh*t out of luck.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 24, 2011 12:17:22 PM

1965ohio said:
Okay, I change my mind. The original poster should buy an x2 as you suggested. If Newegg or whoever does not take it back, give him your number/email and you be responsible for it if it doesn't unlock. If you look through all AMD CPUs, you will notice the ratio is more like 50/50, not 95/5...

And many people that do get it unlocked do not have a stable unlocked core because it might be unstable and without stress testing it they will never know. If you have an Athlon that can be unlocked to anything, it is not a Phenom to start with no matter which one you buy because the Athlon core actually does not have any L3 cache.

I've even seen idiots like you tell people their Phenom x4 can be unlocked to an x6. It's impossible because they really have different dies for different CPUs. Some of them purposely have no L3 cache... and the quality control is strict on the higher end models, so any defect no matter how small will be repackaged as a lesser model. Perhaps you can turn an x2 into x3/x4, and maybe it'll be stable. Maybe and guaranteed are 2 different things.

I suggest you look up "maybe, guaranteed, and stable" in a dictionary. Because it is only guaranteed to be what it is labeled as, and maybe it can be more and maybe it will be stable if you are lucky. Maybe, perhaps, could be... just doesn't sound like a good proposition if you really want x4 and it doesn't unlock. So as long as you refund the OP, then he is guaranteed and it is no longer a maybe!

And again to the original poster, if it doesn't work and your supplier won't replace it, and this dummy won't refund you, then you are sh*t out of luck.



i agree on the buying the numebr of cores you want, i wanted a 4 core so i bought a 4 core.

but there are certain oem phenom II x4 in prebuilt systems you can get that will unlock to a x6 so its not impossible... just unlikely as most people here won't have oem rigs, amd has onyl release these chips for oem use and even then most oem mobos don't have an unlocker in the bios so you'd have to get one of these oem only chips and put it in a mobo that can unlock it... mroe trouble than its worth imo and liekely more money than buying a x6 in the first place... but theoredically possible (i'd also laugh at anybody saying it is possible with this same argument of mroe trouble than its worth), onyl ever heard of one person doign it just to see if possible)
Score
0
February 27, 2011 10:19:34 AM

Well for those who wanted to know where I was able to find an X4 for a hundred dollars, it was simply a second-hand one. Components sold on forums are usually cheaper than those sold on eBay.

Now I got 50-60€ ($65-80) to spend on another cpu for a secondary computer. I can get an X2 550 (3.1GHz) or an X3 720 (2.8GHz). Some think core unlocking is reliable, some don't... on my side I saw a 75% success rate on overclocking forums.

The 550 stepping is 0929BPMW and so far I only saw succesfull unlockings and better o/c potential. I guess I'll pick this one
Score
0
February 28, 2011 2:23:35 AM

Just to add onto this thread before it fades away to time, I have a couple of friends who did jump onto the Phenom II X2 555 to try to get good solid unlockable cpu's. Out of the 9 or so they tried before giving up, only 3 unlocked to 3 and 4 cores, and only one was fully stable during stress test with both the 3rd and 4th core active. So yeah, minitron81 should not make so many empty assurances when other peoples money is involved. It may unlock, and it may not. If it does, it may be stable, or it may not. Its a gamble, not a sure bet.
Score
0
February 28, 2011 3:21:29 AM

Don't go buy my word; google Phenom II X2 unlock and browse through forums. Look at the newegg reviews.

I doubt your friends tried 9 chips. How much time shipping back and forth is that? Nice lie.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 28, 2011 4:30:56 AM

So when you give an example it is the truth... when we give an example it is a lie?

I like your version of reality... everything is how you want.

Giving advice that guarantees something that even has a 1% chance of failure is still bad advice if you know that 1% chance exists. To give good advice you should be informing the OP that there is a possibility that it won't work and there are no guarantees. Not every supplier will refund CPUs for this, most of them won't. So if you cannot guarantee it (and back it up with your wallet), then you should take a step back and evaluate the situation. It is not your money, and there is a chance it won't work.

The end.
Score
0
February 28, 2011 4:38:28 AM

It was an account, not an example. Get a dictionary.

I like your version of reality... you probably think you're intelligent.

He could go to Fry's and buy it then try it and refund it if he's a unlucky 1%; either way we're talking about an AM3 motherboard.

Again; google it and look through the newegg reviews for the accounts of more people.

Edit war!
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 28, 2011 5:10:55 AM

Quote:
either way we're talking about an AM3 motherboard


Oh, my mistake. I thought we were talking about AM3 CPUs being unlockable or not. So now you are taking back your MB if your CPU can't unlock. Haha... :pt1cable: 

Looks like it is time to get this thread closed.
Score
0
February 28, 2011 5:17:34 AM

No I was talking about the fact that your motherboard is independent of the unlocking or Athlon X3-4. I'm sure you actually did get a big laugh out of it sadly enough.
Score
0
February 28, 2011 5:20:40 AM

minitron815 said:
Don't go buy my word; google Phenom II X2 unlock and browse through forums. Look at the newegg reviews.

I doubt your friends tried 9 chips. How much time shipping back and forth is that? Nice lie.


No actually they ordered 4 at once if I remember right, after it started getting around that some of them could be unlocked. Kept the one that unlocked fine, shipped the other 3 back and got 5 more to test, hoping 5 more would increase their odds of finding a couple more with 4 fully stable cores. It ended up that the remainder did not pull it off, so they shipped them back and went with some normal Phenom II X4 cpus for their customers builds. Seriously, are you really that stupid? You think people are going to do one cpu at a time and go though 9 of them shipping them back and forth one at a time? Yeah....
Score
0
February 28, 2011 5:23:04 AM

There's a restocking and shipping fee for each one of those. That strategy you just wrote there is retarded and hard to believe.
Score
0
February 28, 2011 5:29:34 AM

minitron815 said:
There's a restocking and shipping fee for each one of those. That strategy you just wrote there is retarded and hard to believe.


Not very place you order from carries a restocking fee. These guys work for Acxiom part time and do private sales of system builds on the side. They order in bulk, and churn out quite a bit of sales per month.
Score
0
a c 78 à CPUs
February 28, 2011 6:43:51 AM

This topic has been closed by Tecmo34
Score
0
March 6, 2011 7:34:19 PM

Best answer selected by Moutardentube.
Score
0
!