The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Athlon AM2 Processor Questions
HadjiQuest
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
I've noticed some of the recent dual cores come in normal versions with 1.3/1.35V voltage, and then there are 65W versions that run at a lesser voltage.
They're exactly the same price, and they seem to have all the same specs otherwise. Two questions here:
1. What's the real difference?
2. Do I have to look for a motherboard that will support the lower voltage, or will all socket AM2 boards support it standard?
They're exactly the same price, and they seem to have all the same specs otherwise. Two questions here:
1. What's the real difference?
2. Do I have to look for a motherboard that will support the lower voltage, or will all socket AM2 boards support it standard?
HadjiQuest on
0
Posts
2. no, yes
3. get a core 2 duo setup
I don't have the extra organs to sell for a core 2 duo setup.
$190 for E6300
965 chipset mobo - $100
yeah... real big difference eh?
Yeah, actually. Around $50, when I'm only working with about $800.
the long term investment is far more worth it in the core 2 duo
but anyways thats all i got
Ehhh.....
Intel's always been far worse at holding onto slot types.
Now that Intel has the superior architecture, AMD will be the ones playing catch-up and replacing platforms to keep pace. Translation: AM3
Deusfaux has given you plenty of reasons to go Intel, and while I'm still on 939, my next upgrade with be to a Core 2 Duo for the very reasons he stated.
AM3 Processors will work with Slot AM2 boards, and the only drawback will be that DDR3 isn't supported. [/url]
Are you fucking kidding me?
Intel - Socket 478, and then 775, since fall 2001
AMD (in that SAME TIME) - Socket A, Socket 754, Socket 939, Socket 940, Socket AM2, Socket F: Opteron, Socket F (1207 FX) - already announced - Socket AM3, "Possible use of an interim socket dubbed "Socket AM2+" which supports HT 3.0 and DDR2." -wiki
but getting a socket 775 platform means you could get a dual core now, and a quad core for the same thing down the road - which again is a significant gain.
but yes, GPU is time and time again the most important piece of hardware and most worthy of getting upgraded in relation to gaming
I just have fond memories of the low low price I paid for this Athlon XP 2000+, and how it's carried me for 3 or 4 years.
Which side/who did or does it better?
And when do the mid-range DX10 cards show?
I still suggest staying away from them, as even in best cases they aren't likely to offer better performance than a faster single-card solution, unless you use two faster cards to begin with, which will be expensive.
Mainstream DX10 cards should come out sometime in march or april, I think before that ATI will release its 8800GTX/GTS counterparts (end of January or so?) so maybe you'll be able to get the slower cards at ~$350.
also: if you'll be waiting until then, then Intel will be releasing a slightly slower (1,8GHz) E4300 C2D at ~$160, and will be dropping its price soon to $133 and eventually to $113; other C2D prices will also drop a notch.
edit: Xbitlabs benchmarked the E4300 already - it doesn't overclock as well as Conroes but at default clock it's not much slower than the E6300, and should be easier to overclock to lower speeds (~3GHz).
At night, the ice weasels come."
An E6300 is really the best value CPU at the moment. I've had my Core 2 Duo for a few months, and I'm still amazed at its performance.
Even if you don't plan to tax the CPU, an entry-level Core 2 Duo is a wise choice, since it will extend the time you will need until your next upgrade (compared to an entry-level AM2). I can't remember a time when the Intel/AMD performance race was this one-sided.
Not much. Most games wouldn't be CPU-bound on that setup.
If you were planning to build a new machine, then Core 2 Duo would be a really good choice, but it isn't going to do much for GPU-limited games on your existing setup.
You forgot to factor in chipset changes for Intel.
depends on what resolution you're running things at too.
let put it this way - I had a 4800+, and could expect to get 10 more FPS in oblivion by moving to an E6600.
When you're not averaging even 60 FPS, that is HUGE.
factor chipset changes into what?
With each newer/faster processor line, the latest chipset that was required upon release.
LGA775 C2D won't work with 845 chipset LGA775 motherboards.
Intel switched chipsets quite a few times during LGA775.
Oblivion really is the exception at the moment. It eats all your CPU-time for dinner, and still wants more.
your logic is suggesting each chipset change was so that newer processors could work at all.
my point stands, he was acting like intel switches slots/sockets all the time, and since 2001, that's hardly the case; its the other way around.
Intel swapped major system changing chipsets about as much as AMD changed sockets. So neither has an advantage.
Then you must have been asleep for the past few years when A64s were dominating any Pentium chip in most applications.
At night, the ice weasels come."
It depends what you are doing, and whether you overclock. The E6300 certainly has a slight advantage for some games, and this advantage really blows out if you overclock, which the E6300 does ridiculously easily:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2802&p=10
At stock speed the difference is pretty small - 2-3% - so most likely not noticeable in games, so it wouldn't be a disaster to get a 4600+ if you have to get AM2 or something and don't want to overclock.
With overclocking the E6300 you also have to get a motherboard that can achieve FSB of ~500MHz to get most out of the chip; but yeah - Conroes overclock awfully well.
It's a bit scary that Athlons don't get much faster even with clockspeeds close to 3GHz, and their 65nm chips don't seem to be any faster than the present ones :?
At night, the ice weasels come."
(Don't answer, I already know it doesn't. Why did I invest 2GB of DDR1 so late in the game?
OTOH, assuming you have a socket 939 system, you can get the X2 3800+ and overclock it a bit, or just stick with the faster single-core chips (I think newegg has the s939 4000+ <$100), which should still be good enough for a great majority of games.
At night, the ice weasels come."
Yes it does. On certain mobos, and performace is on-par with DDR2:
http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2810
I think it was like $50 to go from top end DDR400 to DDR2-800 top end
If you count Socket 940 and Socket F, you have to count Intel's socket 603, 604, and 771.