upgrade to AMD , need comments

Discussion in 'Processors and motherboards AMD' started by bangsatlo, Aug 1, 2005.

  1. bangsatlo

    bangsatlo Master Guru

    Messages:
    351
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    SLI Geforce Go 7900 GS
    Guys

    im thinking to upgrade to AMD processor soon.
    i never use any AMD in my PC so dunno nethin bout this i know FX 57 currently is the best w the newest mobo a8n sli , am i right ? but those costs me about 1,000-1,200 , plus the 7800 GTX , prolly total arround 1,700.
    neway , what u guys think the best performance/price in AMD family ? either its athlon or FX .or..whatever it is..
    also which mobo is the best for gaming too ?
    ne comment will be greatly appreciated .

    Peace ,
     
  2. G L

    G L Don Juan

    Messages:
    10,261
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Leadtek 8800 GTS 640 MB 600/1000
    Best price/performance, probably 3200+ but I'm guess that's not what you mean. The two high-end chips are the FX-57 and X2 4800+, both about $1000. The 4800+ has two cores which can be a huge performance advantage, but games can only benefit from one core right now so it only performs like a 4000+ in games, and a 4000+ is half the price.

    However, Nvidia has promised a new driver to get a boost from dual-core, and then after that game developers may throw in a few tweaks. The 4000+ is probably 10% slower in games than the FX-57, so the question is whether we can expect the 4800+ to benefit from the second core in games over 10% sufficiently quickly that it will be worth your while to take a short-term loss with the X2.

    Unfortunately, don't have the answer to that one...
     
  3. Panda.Expresso

    Panda.Expresso Member

    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    eVGA 7800 GS AGP 8x 256MB
    Speaking on the same platform, the FX-55 has great overclockability and only at 800-ish. Whereas FX-57 is the fastest single-core chip right now, going dual-core will benefit you greatly in the future.
     
  4. bangsatlo

    bangsatlo Master Guru

    Messages:
    351
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    SLI Geforce Go 7900 GS
    ur info are really helping me guys .
    k...so what is an X2 ? and whats the diff between FX and X2 and standard Athlon ?
    neway , whats the highest Athlon in the market right now ?
    is it the 4000+ ?
    is it worth it ? if its really only 10 percent slowet than FX 57 then i prolly go with this one..
    am i rite ?
     

  5. G L

    G L Don Juan

    Messages:
    10,261
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Leadtek 8800 GTS 640 MB 600/1000
    You can see the performance difference for yourself:

    http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64-fx57_8.html

    X2s are dual-core, basically two complete Athlon 64s rolled into one. So the X2 4800+ is two complete Athlon 64 4000+ chips. Now, this sounds way better than any FX could be, but as I said, games right now can't take advantage of the second core, so for your average joe its just a bonus for multitasking.

    I think a 4000+ should be more than sufficient... It isn't a *huge* upgrade from a 3.2e, but then again you don't need a huge upgrade. For instance:

    http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/athlon_64_geforce_7800_gtx_scaling/page10.asp

    The CPU makes a difference with undemanding settings, but if you're going to run high resolutions and/or high AA+AF (and I presume you will with a new 7800 GTX), it all flattens out. And even in that first benchmarks where the difference is highest, the FX-57 is only like 10% faster than the 4000+.
     
  6. bangsatlo

    bangsatlo Master Guru

    Messages:
    351
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    SLI Geforce Go 7900 GS
    thanks man .
    so what about this X2 thing ? are they gonna last in the future of gaming ?
    panda express said so .
    perhaps i should go with this or athlon 4000 instead ?
     
  7. G L

    G L Don Juan

    Messages:
    10,261
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Leadtek 8800 GTS 640 MB 600/1000
    As I said, I really don't know. But this should be sobering for anyone expecting a quick dual-core gaming revolution:

    http://www.neoseeker.com/news/story/4807/

    However, dual-core will help with other things, like multitasking and encoding...

    Dual-cores will also get cheap in a year's time, so if you expect to upgrade again around then, you might just want to go for the best single-core for your money.
     
  8. reflex

    reflex Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    BFG 8800GT 725/1800/2000
    The AMD X2 3800+ just came out, its around 373$ It would be the best future proofing you could get with the money. And i suggest you wait and see what ati has to offer soon, hopefully.
     
  9. T8000

    T8000 Master Guru

    Messages:
    269
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GF6800 LE 128 MB 12p_softmod, fanless (24dB_total)
    Game performance

    If you play at high settings, you will not gain any noticable DX9 game performance if you replace a 3.2 Ghz P4 with a 2.8 Ghz or lower AMD CPU.

    Check this page for some figures to go with that:
    http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/200508011/athlon_64_x2_3800-08.html

    If you want additional application performance, dual core should be considered. The review mentioned above also includes some popular dual core CPU's.

    Overclocked Pentium D820's are currently the best bang for the buck in dual core, but if you really want AMD, make sure its an X2, because their single core CPU's will feel slower than your current P4 when multitasking.
     
  10. Daku

    Daku Guest

    X2 are dual core and fx is one core and the higest in dual core are the
    AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ 2.4GHz Dual Core Socket 939 1MB L2 Cache ( Retail Box ) Which run at a speed of 2.4 and the fX runs at 2.6 but with overclocking you can easily oc them to speed of 3.0 witht the right setup so after all they are the top of the line in cpus of toady you may think there pricey but when you experince the performance you will be saticfied
     

  11. G L

    G L Don Juan

    Messages:
    10,261
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Leadtek 8800 GTS 640 MB 600/1000
    Re: Game performance

    Assuming he *does* any heavy multitasking... other than running virus-scan while they surf occassionally, most people probably don't do any. Also, overclocking a 820 is not easy, he'd be lucky to even get the same CPU performance as he does now in non-multithreaded software, much less more. Dual-core *can* have impressive benefits, but only if you know you will do be doing a significant amount of heavy multitasking or use applications that are known to benefit heavily from multiple cores, which are pretty rare when we're talking about a desktop PC.

    These are also more typical of the gaming benchmarks I've read:

    http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/athlon_64_geforce_7800_gtx_scaling/page10.asp

    His 3.2e probably performs like a 3000+. The differences are small but there, but will flatten out at the higest resolutions and AA+AF settings.
     
  12. bangsatlo

    bangsatlo Master Guru

    Messages:
    351
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    SLI Geforce Go 7900 GS
    does X2 really benefits for gaming purpose ?
    i dont do multitasking , just gaming , 3d max , n that kinda stuff.
    i guess i better go with single core then , right ? either FX , or athlon 4000+ , but you said 4000+ atlon wont do any huge improvement from 3.2E , if its P4 , what kinda P4 is AMD 4000+ ? i mean how fast is it compared to P4 series ? 3.6 ? aite thanks guys.
     
  13. G L

    G L Don Juan

    Messages:
    10,261
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Leadtek 8800 GTS 640 MB 600/1000
    For gaming, yes, for 3dsmax, no:

    http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64-fx57_12.html

    The X2 4800+ is essentially a dual-core 4000+. In these benchmarks, the extra core is good for 45% and 37% shorter render time. The cheapest is the X2 4200+, which is $530, and is a dual-core 3500+. AMD just announced an even cheaper one, the X2 3800+, abput $350, which is a dual-core 3200+.

    Intel has a dual-core P4 2.8 GHz, $250, dual-core P4 3.0 GHz, $350, and a dual-core P4 3.2 GHz for around $500.
     
  14. scheherazade

    scheherazade Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    fullHDs
    Since most benchmarks level out when the video options are turned up, you should see very little difference in games between the fx57 and the x2 4800.

    1600x1200 with high quality, and up = essentially identical.

    so if you want something 'nifty' as much as fast, go with the x2 4800.

    if you just want something as fast as possible for games (even if its only 1% faster at nice graphics settings) go with the fx57.

    if you do _anything_ productive on your pc, you should prolly get the x2 tho... might as well have that better CC time.

    -scheherazade
     
  15. bangsatlo

    bangsatlo Master Guru

    Messages:
    351
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    SLI Geforce Go 7900 GS
    wait a minute...im kinda confused here..
    so X2 dual core means doing 2 tasks at the same time ..or what ?
    what si the benefit of having this chip instead of a fast single core ?
     

  16. T8000

    T8000 Master Guru

    Messages:
    269
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GF6800 LE 128 MB 12p_softmod, fanless (24dB_total)
    Dual core

    Like all other dual core CPU's, X2 acts like 2 CPU's, able to do completely independent tasks. Theoretically, they could power 2 PC's out of one case.

    Current PC's can only use them to split up the work, provided that there is more work than one core could handle and that the task supports this.

    Hardly any current game supports splitting the load. Besides, current games are not limited by the CPU if you turn up the settings.

    That is why most CPU benchmarks that use games, turn the settings all the way down, to use the game engine to show differences between CPU's. Unfortunately, when a gamer sees such a benchmark, he might think that he will get a simular advantage. But if he turns the settings back on, the difference between most current CPU's will drop below one FPS.
     
  17. G L

    G L Don Juan

    Messages:
    10,261
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Leadtek 8800 GTS 640 MB 600/1000
    Dual-core means there are two CPUs situated in one socket. The easiest way to benefit is by running two demanding tasks at the same time, in which case one application will run on one CPU and on on the other. Of course, they must share all other system resources (except cache), but still it can be very close to twice the performance. The other way is with a single application that is programmed so it can work with two CPU simulatanously. This is difficult and works best on relatively static tasks, but the good news is that 3D modeling can benefit quite a bit, 40% shorter render times with a second core is certainly realistic.

    Once again, gaming performance *can* flatten out quite a bit, but I would not say the CPU is as irrelevant as that.

    http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/athlon_64_geforce_7800_gtx_scaling/page10.asp

    All 3 have 4x AA and 16x AF, so we're not talking minimum graphical settings here, the only difference being the resolution. In these three, the FX-57 is 50%/25%/9% ahead of the 3000+ at 1024x768/1280x1024/1600x1200 with the 7800 GTX.

    Now 9% isn't very much and probably not worth $800 more, but there is, nevertheless, still some gap.
     
  18. bangsatlo

    bangsatlo Master Guru

    Messages:
    351
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    SLI Geforce Go 7900 GS
    k , the diff is not that much i saw .
    i think i'll go with FX 55 or Athlon 4000+ .
    what is San Diego , Claw hammer , Sledge hammer , or whatever...
    there are many types of'em , i guess it's like Presscott , Northwood , in P4 , correct me if im wrong ...
    thanks for the info guys ;)
     
  19. G L

    G L Don Juan

    Messages:
    10,261
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Leadtek 8800 GTS 640 MB 600/1000
    I'd say 4000+ (San Deigo) for an emphasis on gaming performance, or an X2 for emphasis on modeling performance.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/200508011/athlon_64_x2_3800-10.html#applications

    You'll notice here in the 3DS Max benchmark that the 4000+ takes 3:30, but the X2 3800+ only takes 2:12, so basically 1/3 less time. The X2 3800+ should be a bit less than the 4000+, so for rendering performance the X2 is the obvious choice.

    As for gaming performance with the X2, games can only work with one core, so it works out this way:

    X2 3800 = 3200
    X2 4200 = 3500
    X2 4400 = 3700
    X2 4600 = 3800
    X2 4800 = 4000

    So just go back to the gaming link:

    http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/athlon_64_geforce_7800_gtx_scaling/page10.asp

    And see how low gaming performance you can handle, then see how much the dual-core equivalent costs, and think if its worth it to you to pay that much more for the better modeling performance.

    Here's pricewatch:

    $1049 - Athlon 64 X2 4800 Dual Core
    $785 - Athlon 64 X2 4600 Dual Core
    $677 - Athlon 64 X2 4400 Dual Core
    $496 - Athlon 64 X2 4200 Dual Core

    The X2 3800+ should be about $350. So buying dual-core usually does cost nearly twice as much as the single-core processor of the same specs, so it really depends on how important 3DS Max performance is to you.
     
  20. bangsatlo

    bangsatlo Master Guru

    Messages:
    351
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    SLI Geforce Go 7900 GS
    yea i'll go with the single core i think ..
    but which one the fastest ? sledgehammer , clawhammer ,etc ??
    are these codename exist in FX , X2 too ?? or just in Athlon XP ?
     

Share This Page