Our test system for this article employs the Asrock 939 Dual SATA 2 motherboard, which is packed with an abundance of upgrade-oriented features. It supports native 8X AGP, PCI Express x16, single- and dual-core Socket 939 processors with dual-channel DDR memory, and even socket AM2 CPUs and DDR2 memory with a daughter board, which we used for testing.
While searching online auction sites, we have seen people spending $200 or more for a Socket 939 Athlon 64 X2 4800+. It’s one of the fastest Socket 939 dual-core CPUs produced, but the device also represents a lot of money considering you can buy an even faster AM2 Athlon X2 for well under $100. Those stuck with Socket 939 will need to search the Web long and hard for a well-priced dual-core for their motherboard, but our AM2 compatible motherboard gives us the convenience of opting for an AM2 CPU with very little trouble and expense.
We chose the following CPUs to examine the effects they have on gaming performance. First is the AMD Athlon 64 4000+. It’s base don the San Diego design, runs at 2.4 GHz, sports 1 MB L2 cache, and is one of the faster single-core desktop CPUs made. The direct comparison dual-core to this device is the AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (2.4 GHz 1 MB cache per core). Next, we chose the AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200 + dual-core, which has a 2.2 GHz Manchester architecture with 512 KB L2 cache per core. The single-core direct comparison would be the A64 3500+, so our A64 4000+ should have an advantage both in clock speed and L2 cache in single-threaded applications. And lastly, the Athlon 64 X2 5600+ AM2 dual-core is a 2.8 GHz Windsor design with 1 MB L2 cache per core. With these three CPUs, we should get a good look at single- versus dual-core in gaming and have a good idea about how CPU clock speeds affect game play.
Tested Hardware
| Motherboard | Asrock 939 Dual SATA 2 Bios vs. P 2.30 |
| | Asrock AM2 CPU Board |
| RAM | 2 GB (2 * 1 GB) dual-channel Adata DDR 400 (3-3-3-8) for Socket 939 |
| | 2 GB (2 *1GB) dual-channel Corsair DDR2 533 (4-4-4-12) for Socket AM2 |
| Video Cards | XFX GeForce 8800 GS 384 MB PCI Express 580MHz core/ 700(1400) MHz memory |
| | HIS Radeon HD 4850 512 MB PCI Express 625 MHz core/ 993 (1986) MHz memory |
| Sound Card | Creative SoundBlaster X-Fi Xtreme Audio |
| Hard Drive | Seagate Barracuda 250GB 7200 RPM 16 MB Cache SATA 3.0 Gb/s |
| Power Supply | Antec EarthWatts 430 W |
| OS | Windows XP Professional 32 bit Service Pack 2 |
| Display Driver | Nvidia ForceWare 174.74 |
| | AMD Catalyst 8.8 |
Benchmarks
| 3DMark05 v. 1.3.0 |
| 3DMark06 v. 1.1.0 |
| F.E.A.R. v.1.08 |
| Far Cry v.1.4 |
| Need For Speed Carbon 1.4 |
| Test Drive Unlimited 1.66A |
| Oblivion 1.2 |
| Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare 1.4 |
| Crysis 1.2 |
violent :
Interactive Buddy
Unwind on your interactive buddy: Do anything you want to him, it will earn you money, and you can buy other stuff to torture him with.
kids :
Bob
Throw bubbles so as to make the ones that appear in the game disappear. For this, use the Right / Left arrow keys to duck or move about, and the...
FIRST POST!!! Nice Article though. I knew my brother would soon be doomed with his P4 2.8c
"AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200 + dual-core, which has a 2.2 GHz Manchester architecture with 512 MB L2 cache per core."
oau! that's a lot of cache
I haven't read the actual article yet, but I bet the simple answer is no!
I've got a backup gaming rig at home that barely cuts it. An x2 1.9ghz (oc'ed to 2.4) with an 8800gtx and 3gb memory. That rig struggles at 1280x1024 in some situations, and it can only be attributed to the cpu really.
2.8GHz Opteron 185 (up from 2.6GHz) with 2x1MB L2 cache is the ultimate s939 CPU....blows these weak benchmarks away.
Who would have thought DDR would have such durability? There's something to be said for CAS2!
Surprisingly, you can actually do fairly well. Of course, it depends on the app...
But your opteron cpu still limits the modern graphics cards.
Two years back I bought my 8800gtx, and realized it wouldn't come to its full potential in my opteron 170 (@ 2.7). A friend with another gtx paired with an e6400 chip (@ 3ghz) scored a full 30% higher in 3dmark than I, and it showed in games. Even in wow where you'd expect a casio calculator would deliver enough graphics power.
In short - ye ddr still work if you've got enthusiast parts, but that can't negate the effect a faster cpu would give. At least at decent resolutions (22" wide)
This is a great article! It will give me something to show when i'm talking to people about a new system or just a GPU/PSU upgrade. Great job by Henningsen.
I'm still using a P4 3.0 @ 3.4 with 1 GB DDR 400 and an nVidia 6800GT...
I'm building a new computer next week.
I can echo the findings in Crysis. It didn't matter what settings I ran with a 3700 Sandy and an X1950 pro, the framerate was almost the same (albeit low 20s because the card is slower). Added an E6600 to the mix and my framerate tripled at lower settings.
It would have been interesting to see how a 3000+ Clawhammer (C0 stepping) would do in Crysis. Single-channel memory, poor overclocking capabilities... FAIL!
2.8GHz Opteron 185 (up from 2.6GHz) with 2x1MB L2 cache is the ultimate s939 CPU....blows these weak benchmarks away.Who would have thought DDR would have such durability? There's something to be said for CAS2!
Thia ia true about the DDR. I recall an article on toms right after the release of the AM2 socket which tested identical dual core processors against their 939 counterparts; the tests showed little to no performance gains.
Great article, their has been some discussion about this in the forums as well.
I currently own a 939 4200+ x2 that's paired with a 7800GT; and this article shows what I thought to be accurate about the AMD64 chips. Their not as fast as some of the C2D's but they still kick ass.
Good job pointing out the single core factor in newer games too. As soon as the crysis demo was released I upgraded my San Diego core to a dual core and noticed the difference in crysis immediately.
This article gives me further confidence in my decision to hold on upgrading my system. I want to hold out for Windows7 D3D11 and more money to build an ape sh** machine
Nice article!!
wow just getting to 3dmark 06 scores and i can see my rig is set pretty well it beats all of tehse with a over all of 9936 and a cpu score of 4982 my cpu is not even much stronger than tehse oferrings amd 64 x2 5000+ black edition oc'ed to a moddest 2.9 ghz (i know many folks running on liquid cooling that are getting this chip up to 3.8 ghz)
i scared to mess with voltages though and my comp for some reason is a little unstable once i get to 3 ghz , i know pusshing mine furhter would require some voltage bumping but again just to scared to try it as i heard it can really damage a proc at times. but any way next year i will likely upgrade teh cpu to a quad core (some balck editon one) after i do a quick bios falsh on my MB , then i'l add another gig of ram , as well as a new vid card ... next year though , for this year my system is pretty well set with it's curent proc , 2 gigs ddr 2 800 ram adn gf 9600 gt
P.S. not sure how it would score in 3d mark 05 as i never had 05 to test it with but given the diference bewtween 05 adn 06 with this article , i'd say my comp would porbably trounce these in 05 as well
"Test Drive Unlimited has very few graphics settings making it hard to get enjoyable performance on a minimum spec system. Options are limited to low/medium/high and a checkbox for HDR lighting. We ran the highest settings, including HDR."
you forgot the antialaising option gah LOL there is aa in TDU
Good article, enjoyed it very much considering i run a AMD Athlon 3500+ venice core and have a XFX 9800GTX. Runs great, but big battles are very choppy and any high demanding game like COD4 and CRYSIS i have to suffer by not being able to max out settings. I almost blamed the GPU but i knew sooner then later i had to upgrade to a newer system then just opting in a newer GPU. I had a 6600GT which did great for the time being but it showed its age this past year. Great article!
I figured my 3600+ brisbane was realy holding me back, even when
OC'd. when I got my 4850. looks like, for the most part it isn't because I like lots of eye candy.
I still plan on upgrading soon
good article , i finaly finished reading it thoroughly , suffice to say with my current ssytem i don't ahve to worry much for teh moment , and i will upgrade my parts next year when thing start to be come more worrisome , again my current specs are
athlon 64 x2 5000+ BE (OC'ed to 2.9 ghz)
2 gigs ddr 2 pc 6400 (800) ram
gf 9600 GT
win xp home
by next year my specs will be
phenom (at elast a 9950 Black edition , not sure what ill overclock it to)
3 gigs ddr 2 pc 800 ram
and graphic card doest exsist yet , as i'm skipping the gf200/ati4800 series cards but it is a gaurantee my price range will be inside of 200-300
im not real worried definitely not going to be repalcing this ssytem for a good bit though.
get 4 gigs memory instead of 3. If you're lucky the quadchannel memory will make its way into a future amd cpu and 3gb is pointles with hte current pricing on ddr2 anyway. Get 2x2gb and upgrade with 2x2gb more if you want. 2009 you may want to go get a 64bit windows 7 to match your hardware anyway
thanks for the great article. this sure saves me a lot of money. i have AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ with HD4850. I can get to play Racedriver:GRID in Ultra setting. Reading your articles makes me think to upgrade it to 6000+.
I'm impressed to see that the single core athlon didn't completely crash and burn anywhere. Just for kicks it would have been funny to see it try to drive a 4870X2. I can definitely tell it weighs down my 6400+X2 even at 3.45GHz. Entertainment value aside, this is one of the more objectively conducted articles I've seen here recently, and I actually like seeing some of these oddball scenarios getting played out. I can second the finding that an Athlon X2 at 2.4GHz as a ballpark minimum for driving an 8800/9800 or 4800 series card. Fortunately most X2s can overclock to around 3+GHz...other hardware allowing.
Interesting article. I find it amazing that its almost 2009 and i can still play the likes of stalker clear sky fairly well on my 939 asus a8n-sli motherboard that was released early 2005 with an aging 4200+ x2.
I've always avoided upgrades just for the sake of so called "future proofing" and so have been trying to get the most out of my 4200+ X2 which i've overclocked from 2.2 to 2.8ghz (rock solid stable).
Currently getting Getting 10500 in 3dmark06 and can handle most games to date at 1280 x 1024 bar crysis / warhead. I have 2 8800gt's in SLI so no GPU limitation there (i know its overkill but got them to use with my next rig).
However, got my copy of farcry 2 today which i expect to be the nail in the coffin for my 939. With the likes of deadspace and fallout 3 still to play im looking at an e8400 to give my 8800gt's something to chew on.