Opty or A64

C

claudius

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 26, 2005
Messages
120
I'm building my first somputer and should I get an Opteron 148 or a Athlon 64 3700 SanDiego processor, I will no be doing any major overclocking for a while, but I wouldn't mind getting into it sometime. And also is it compatible with ASUS A8N5X???

Thanks...
 
If you can get the Opteron for sure, then get it.

If it's special order, or back order, you mid as well get the 3700+ from whats going on recently.
 
claudius said:
I'm building my first somputer and should I get an Opteron 148 or a Athlon 64 3700 SanDiego processor, I will no be doing any major overclocking for a while, but I wouldn't mind getting into it sometime. And also is it compatible with ASUS A8N5X???

Thanks...
Click to expand...
Yeah it's compatible. Both are socket 939 chips. Get an Opteron.
 
definately the opteron... i like the 146's better because the 148's cost quite a bit more (over $80 usually) for only a 200 mhz increase. go 146 IMO
 
sumofatguy said:
definately the opteron... i like the 146's better because the 148's cost quite a bit more (over $80 usually) for only a 200 mhz increase. go 146 IMO
Click to expand...
though for those of us in a hurry the 148 may be worth it.
in my case I was going to wait like a month for a 146 but got a 148 right away from flickerdown
 
I see the general consensus is that the Opteron is a much better CPU. I'm going to look stupid here, but why is that? I guess I'm just not sure of the difference between the two types of chips. I'm also considering picking up an Opteron 148, because I've seen reports of them being OC'd to close to 3Ghz. What Athlon 64 would this be comparable to at the stock 2.2Ghz speeds, and also at 2.6 or so?
 
Opterons go through stricter testing procedures due to them being produced for workstation/server buisness use rather than residential. Generally, this shows by how well they overclock. This doesnt mean A64's are cheap or slow, quite the contrary. It just all depends on what you truely want it for. Looking for the ultimate overclock? Best bet is an Opteron.
 
firegod66 said:
I see the general consensus is that the Opteron is a much better CPU. I'm going to look stupid here, but why is that?
Click to expand...

You're right to be suspicious. The Opteron is NOT a much better CPU. The only spec that is different is the L2 cache. All Opterons have 1MB L2 cache per core (so do some A64's of course, but not all). People want the Opterons because they are special (only available in limited quantity), the L2 cache, and mostly because they seem to overclock better than your average A64. So an Opteron at 2.0ghz will perform only slightly better than a 3200+ Venice because of the increased L2 cache (512kB vs. 1024kB), and an Opteron at 2.6ghz should perform identically to an FX-55.

In other words, performance with regard to the specs are identical. With regard to the quality of the silicon (for overclockability), the opterons seem to be better. Everyone is recommending the Opteron because all else being equal, there's no reason not to get the Opteron over the A64.
 
if you are build your first computer, take some time, do a little research. if you dont know the difference between an opteron and a 64, you might want to rethink overclocking one. theres not like a little dial you turn and it runs faster. there power considerations, heat probs just to start. this is on top of the standard ram incompatibility, bios issues, doa hardware. i am not talking down to you. unless you have nice reserves of cash, and a very high tolerance against frustration, just get a solid machine built first. you can always pick up a cheap cpu later and overclock it. with video cards it is something like you turn a little dial and it goes faster. something like.
good luck.
 
I ended up just getting the X2 3800 since I don't plan on overclocking anytime soon, so hope fully everything will the great.
 
I just bought some stuff from newegg, including another X2-3800+, with plans to OC to around 2.6Ghz. But I am wondering if a nice dual core Opty 170 would yield me better results? I would assume both chips are going to get about the same OC in terms of MHz, but will the extra on chip cache improve encoding performance very much? Enough to justify the jump in price ($100)? I guess if I really want to get a boost, I should find some dual cpu MB and plug in two Opty 270's. Hmmmmm...
 
From a performance stand point, I'd pay the extra 100 for the cache. I don't have the money yet, but I will be buying the extra cache.
 
Skolar said:
From a performance stand point, I'd pay the extra 100 for the cache. I don't have the money yet, but I will be buying the extra cache.
Click to expand...

From a performance stand point, I wouldn't pay the extra 100 for the cache. Paying $100 for the extra cache is pretty ridiculous IMHO. The 2-5 FPS (at best) gain is NOT worth the extra $100. Until I see benchmarks that show the extra cache being worth a $100 difference, then there's no way I can recommend it.
 
I notice a difference when multitasking when doubling my cache from 256 to 512, so I assume it increases from 512 to 1024 as well. Maybe it's only something about me, but I'll still spend the money even if the benchmarks don't show it.
 
kirbyrj said:
From a performance stand point, I wouldn't pay the extra 100 for the cache. Paying $100 for the extra cache is pretty ridiculous IMHO. The 2-5 FPS (at best) gain is NOT worth the extra $100. Until I see benchmarks that show the extra cache being worth a $100 difference, then there's no way I can recommend it.
Click to expand...

If for no other reason than your name, I have to follow your advice! :D

Thanks,

Kirby
 
Skolar said:
I notice a difference when multitasking when doubling my cache from 256 to 512, so I assume it increases from 512 to 1024 as well. Maybe it's only something about me, but I'll still spend the money even if the benchmarks don't show it.
Click to expand...

it's a noticable improvement since >256 and <512 is used. It's like video cards. You see a large gain nowadays going from 128mb to 256mb, but not nearly so much going from 256mb to 512mb. Doubling does not always mean better. RAM is another example. 2GB can be useful, but 4GB doesn't give a boostat all. If you don't use all that you have, more doesn't help.
 
i have been swapping my cpus lately. i have a 144 opty, 146 opty and 3800 x2. the 146 and the 3800 x2 run about 2800-2900, the 144 runs around 3g. i dont notice any difference from any of these proceesors while gaming, de/re/en coding vid or anything else that i, personally, do. there may be some measurable gains from using the opterons, but i dont notice anything during real time. i prefer the x2 because i can run anything i want on 1 core, while gaming on the other. if there is a $100 price diff between the 3800 x2 and the opteron dual core i dont think its worth the extra cash. you also hear things about the opteron having "better silicon", better mem controllers, better qc, etc. i dont know about all that. my optys and my x2 overclock around the same. the optys seem to run just a bit warmer, but no big deal. good luck in whichever you choose.
 
Personally, I went with the Opty 165 over the X2 3800+ only because I figured it would clock higher on less voltage (see also single core Opty's ;) ). The cache was an extra bonus as I didn't switch simply for the cache. Sure enough, I ended up being on the lucky end of the spectrum, and my Opty does about 200mhz more on the same voltage than my X2 3800+. From what I've seen now, both the X2's and Opty's are hitting around the same speed. If that's the case, get whatever is cheaper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top