Single or Dual Core - any suggestions?

[Chakka]

Since prices have dropped significantly for AMD chips, I have an old winchester core 3000+ that cant overclock for beans. The rig that I want to use this new chip is "Only for Gaming", so should I go with this cheaper single core 3700+ san diego from MWave (I think they have it mispriced) for $98:
http://www.mwave.com/mwave/viewspec.hmx?scriteria=BA21445

or go with a more expensive dual core like a X2 4200+ for $188:
http://www.mwave.com/mwave/viewspec.hmx?scriteria=BA21463

I really only use this machine for gaming and can easily turn off the internet connection, firewall, anti virus and anti spamware before I play. My other rig is more multi-tasking, non-gaming machine. The 4000+ chip is slightly more at $128.

Ive read that single core gaming machines perform better than multi core gaming machines. Any suggestions?

[werty316]

Dualcore is more future proof and upcoming games should be developed to take advantage of a dualcore, or so we hope.

Single core CPUs tend to be a bit faster in a single application situation.

[darkorb]

i think u should get a dual core. the 4200+ looks really nice

[Das Capitolin]

Why couldn't you use the X2 4200+ in your multitasking system, and use that systems' old 4000+ in your gaming unit? If it works, I would go this route.

[Chakka]

Why couldn't you use the X2 4200+ in your multitasking system, and use that systems' old 4000+ in your gaming unit? If it works, I would go this route.

I got it explained wrong. I currently have a X2 3800+ which I want to do like you said and put that into my multitask rig.

I currenly have a winni 3000+ single core and want to upgrade it (its worthless for overclocking). I had thought that the single core san diego chips were really FX chips with locked multipliers...and I thought they were great overclockers too.

I think werty may be right that I would be future proofing the rig if I got another dual core chip. Its just that those single core sandys look really sweet at $100.

[Das Capitolin]

Oh, if that is the case then you should make sure you go dual-core so it will be 64-bit and future proof.

[Bio-Hazard]

I was going to get one of the single cores when I got ready to order, but at the last minute I decided to jump on one of the 4200..........:) I think I made the right decision.

[Chakka]

I was going to get one of the single cores when I got ready to order, but at the last minute I decided to jump on one of the 4200..........:) I think I made the right decision.

I just read your thread - "cant take it anymore". I see that Im having the same dilemma that you had....single core sandy or dual core manchester...I going to get to the point where I cant take it anymore either.

[Kougar]

I would grab the X2 3800+ processor that is going for $154 (http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80721-1) shipped and just OC it to 2.6ghz. You'd gain a good bit more performance than a stock 3700+ Athlon, and still have a good dual-core rig.

[tomato]

I agree that a dual-core CPU is the way to go right now, especially with those sweet AMD price drops ;) You can't go wrong there, and it will be more "future-proof", that is, if the companies starting manufacturing programs that will properly take advantage of a dual core cpu...

[Scott]

1 word "Crysis" Get dual core man, they are going to use it in the game.

[Victor]

IF the price diff is not that big (which is not) you should go for dual core. Given to the fact that almost all cpu that's coming out are dual core, more software will be taking this advantage and start supporting it, hence it should be the future. The 4200 can easily be overclocked to the speed of 4600(2400+) and with good memory you can get even higher than that.

[GIBSON]

IF the price diff is not that big (which is not) you should go for dual core. Given to the fact that almost all cpu that's coming out are dual core, more software will be taking this advantage and start supporting it, hence it should be the future. The 4200 can easily be overclocked to the speed of 4600(2400+) and with good memory you can get even higher than that.
the 4800+ looks interesting as it sports the 2*1mb L2 cache instead of the 2*512kb L2. I'm actually looking at one right now for 258€ (these price drops rule!:grin:)

[werty316]

The 4800+ is fine if you don't plan on overclocking but I would go with the 3800+ X2 or 4200+ X2 and overclock it to 4800+ X2 speed (2.4GHz). Plus none of the 1MB X2 are suppose to have a price drop.

[Bio-Hazard]

Some of the US sites have also dropped the 2x1 meg cache chips also, you need to look hard for them, but they are out there. Ewiz.com had the 44oo listed for a day or so slightly more than the 4200, to bad my chip was already shipped or I would have canceled it and got the 4400...........;)

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core Processor 4400+* Retail
A64-44CDBX$ 230.00


http://www.ewiz.com/detail.php?src=eb&name=A64-44CDBX

[Chakka]

Against all of your advice, I went with a sandy 3700+ for $105 from Newegg-it was so cheap compare to what they used to cost. Btw, I already have a X2 3800+ and its overclocked to 2.5ghz but to be honest, Ive had trouble playing games from time to time (and yes, i have the hotfix, amd optimzer, etc loaded). So when games begin to take advantage of dual core cpus, Ill either put back the X2 3800+ or upgrade to ddr2 or ddr3.

Im hoping Ill get one of the legendary sandy cores. Its an E4 stepping and many have been noted overclock as high as 3.0ghz or more on air alone.

[Chakka]

Hey guys, I just got my sandy 3700+ and its this chip - KACAE (0606) - from the attached link:

"KACAE - Possibly the best chip for air cooling and can reach very high speeds with low voltage. Most KACAE’s will achieve >3GHz, but some steppings (i.e. the 0602GPMW) are capable of 3.2GHz! Unlike the KAB2E’s they do not seem to scale well with Vcore and tend to perform best when at a lower Vcore."
http://www.overclock.net/faqs/101138-info-what-different-3700-san-diego.html

I dont think Ive ever been as excited about computers as I am now but I wont be able to test it until this weekend - cant wait! Hopefully it will be as good as this guy says it is. Heck, I would be more than happy if it reaches 3.0ghz on air. This chip came from the New Jersey distribution center of Newegg.

[werty316]

Did some searching and some users got to 3.2GHz with 1.5V on air while most got to 3.0GHz at 1.4V so this stepping is damn good.

[GIBSON]

Argh, they're all out of 4800+ and the next cheap retailer is 348€ which is way too much. Guess I'm going to have to settle for the 4400+ which is 210€. The 2*1mb L2 cache is a 33€ price premium compared to the 4200+. So I guess that's kind of acceptable to go with the 2*1mb.

[Scott]

Shoot, get 3 on air and pick up a 7950 an you may give me a run for my money.

[Bio-Hazard]

"KACAE - Possibly the best chip for air cooling and can reach very high speeds with low voltage. Most KACAE’s will achieve >3GHz, but some steppings (i.e. the 0602GPMW) are capable of 3.2GHz! Unlike the KAB2E’s they do not seem to scale well with Vcore and tend to perform best when at a lower Vcore."
http://www.overclock.net/faqs/101138...san-diego.html (http://www.overclock.net/faqs/101138-info-what-different-3700-san-diego.html)

The Sandies are a great chip, I almost got one, but opted for the X2 instead. I may still get one a bit later, if they are still around, just to play around with.

[werty316]

Its a good overclocking chip but at an candian etailer its a bit expensive at $240 which I would rather get a 4200+ X2 for the same price.

[markkleb]

I had a 3700+ and it was my favorite chip. It easily OCd to 2910(and I am VERY new to OCing)

I bought a Opty 148 for my new comp and feel so stupid I paid over double of another 3700.

[GIBSON]

I had a 3700+ and it was my favorite chip. It easily OCd to 2910(and I am VERY new to OCing)

I bought a Opty 148 for my new comp and feel so stupid I paid over double of another 3700.
What exactly favours the opterons versus a regular athlon 64?

[werty316]

Opterons were known for being super overclocking chips compared to A64 equivalent chips.

It seems the Opteron chips aren't so hot these days when you could get a A64 single or dualcore for a cheaper price. I never knew how amazing the 3700+ sandy chips overclock, just amazing you can get to 2.9-3.0GHz on air with stock volts.

[Assassin]

If your doing a gaming rig the single core was the right choice. My guess is that games wont be using dual core rigs for another year give or take. By then dual cores will be very cheap and better. Right now I'm running a 3200 @2.5 (wont go higher because of craptastic ram... or so i think). I have no problem really in any game i play. Even when the antivirus scan comes on, it doesn't really phase it too much. My specs 939 3200 venice@2.5, Biostar Tseries NF4ultra, 1gb mix ram, 6800xt. I get on average 80fps in cs source :grin: , and fear like 40fps because fear is god and eats computers for breakfast :lol:

[Chakka]

Well I have my sandy 3700+ installed and I cant remember if its a good idea to wait a day and let it run overnight before I start overclocking (burn in or something like that)?

[Assassin]

Yes burning it in is what its called. Usually 24 hours of TOAST or Prime is a great way to burn it in. Or you can just do day to day activities (gaming helps) it just takes an extra day or two.

[werty316]

I would let it burn in first before you start OC'ing it. Just run Prime95 and Stress Prime 2004.

[GIBSON]

To be honest there is no real proof that this has some effect. It's more kind of a superstition than anything IMHO. Might be good to look for instabilities before OC'ing (and before you void your warranty), but otherwise...

[werty316]

What are you talking about? he will run Prime to burn in the CPU in at stock speeds.

:lol: void your warranty. Its like he is gonna tell AMD he overclocked the chip :lol:

[Chakka]

Ok I waited a day before I started overclocking. Anyway Im very stable at 255x11=2.8ghz with 1:1 memory timings of 2.5,3,3,8 1T (overnight prime95). I had to increase vcore from 1.35v to 1.45v and my temps are 32c idle and 50c load.

I posted at 3.0ghz, ran superpi and got just under 30 sec with the 1M test (29.797). But it showed signs of instability so Im back down to 2.8ghz. Need to work memory dividers, vcore, vdimm but I think its very possible to run this chip at 3.0ghz or higher.

Just not sure if I need to. Running my rig at 2.8ghz with above mem timings seems good enough for me...

[GIBSON]

What are you talking about? he will run Prime to burn in the CPU in at stock speeds.

:lol: void your warranty. Its like he is gonna tell AMD he overclocked the chip :lol:
I'm talking about burning in. There is no proof that it helps your oc's later on, though a lot of people believe it does.

[darkorb]

go for 3, people will say oo a p4 3ghz nice, then u can be like no, 3ghz dual core amd :D

[werty316]

I'm talking about burning in. There is no proof that it helps your oc's later on, though a lot of people believe it does.
I never said burning in helped with OC'ing. I just mentioned he should burnin the CPU first since its new and thats it.

[DarkstaR]

i heard that intel core2duo is realllly good, look into that. the benchmarks beat out very expensive amds and tomshardware. id save it and just get one of those...

[GIBSON]

I never said burning in helped with OC'ing. I just mentioned he should burnin the CPU first since its new and thats it.
If you don't think it helps, what's the use of it then? Getting your electricity bill a boost?

[werty316]

If you don't think it helps, what's the use of it then? Getting your electricity bill a boost?
I said he should burn the CPU in before he OCs and I never said burning in helped with OC'ing. I always burn in any new hardware for a day before doing any tweaking and that includes OC'ing. Also it won't produce a higher electricity bill since you only burn in for a day.

[GIBSON]

I said he should burn the CPU in before he OCs and I never said burning in helped with OC'ing. I always burn in any new hardware for a day before doing any tweaking and that includes OC'ing. Also it won't produce a higher electricity bill since you only burn in for a day.
Might be, but again, what's the use? To me it seems more as some kind of superstition.

[tomato]

To me, "burning in" a CPU is kind of like "breaking in" a new vehicle... you gotta baby it for the first 6,000-10,000kms before really revving up the engine, or else risk lowering its overall life cycle... or is that a superstition to you as well?

[GIBSON]

To me, "burning in" a CPU is kind of like "breaking in" a new vehicle... you gotta baby it for the first 6,000-10,000kms before really revving up the engine, or else risk lowering its overall life cycle... or is that a superstition to you as well?
Cars have moving parts, cpu's don't :wink:

[Vaerilis]

Might be, but again, what's the use? To me it seems more as some kind of superstition.

Burning in hardware is mostly a means to test stability. CPUs can't be "burned in", burn-in tests are just testing their stability.
There are a few exceptions, though: numerous headphones sound better after a long (often at least 200 hours long) burn-in period and BH-5 memory could actually run at higher frequencies without errors after a special burn-in process... But that's a different story.

[GIBSON]

Burning in hardware is mostly a means to test stability. CPUs can't be "burned in", burn-in tests are just testing their stability.

Well, i suggested that one, but werty said it had nothing to do with stability so I really couldn't see any other reason.

[werty316]

Well, i suggested that one, but werty said it had nothing to do with stability so I really couldn't see any other reason.
Never said that either.

[GIBSON]

To be honest there is no real proof that this has some effect. It's more kind of a superstition than anything IMHO. Might be good to look for instabilities before OC'ing (and before you void your warranty), but otherwise...

What are you talking about? he will run Prime to burn in the CPU in at stock speeds.

:lol: void your warranty. Its like he is gonna tell AMD he overclocked the chip :lol:

Are these two quotes enough for you werty?

[werty316]

Everyone will do whatever they want with their rig and thats final.

I guess you don't understand why users "burn in" parts before doing any tweaking.

[darkorb]

maybe burning in is just waiting for the thermal greese to settle.

[GIBSON]

maybe burning in is just waiting for the thermal greese to settle.
Good idea, hadn't thought that far. At last a valid point!

[werty316]

You don't necessarily need to burn in a CPU to let the thermal paste cure as the CPU generated heat will cure teh thermal paste but not as fast as if you were to burn in the CPU.

[Mirrim]

I haven't overclocked anything I have yet, but figure it's good policy to set things up and let it run stock for a day or two merely to test the system for stability and that the chip is good. Maybe I'm just cautious, but figure it doesn't hurt overall.

[Kougar]

You don't necessarily need to burn in a CPU to let the thermal paste cure as the CPU generated heat will cure teh thermal paste but not as fast as if you were to burn in the CPU.

Actually you do. This was the exact reason you should not use AS5 on a waterblock because you can't get high enough temps from a burn in to properly cure the AS5 for the best effect. Arctic Ceramique was designed to cure at much lower temps, so it wouldn't matter with that one, but AS5 needs to be burned in. Arctic Silver warns to not even keep the CPU fan turned up in the instructions, they say keep the fan speed to low to keep the temps high until it cures.