I have an X2 245, are any of these CPUs worth upgrading to?

L

LordJezo

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2003
Messages
471
Here is the support list for my motherboard:

http://support.asus.com/cpusupport/list.aspx?SLanguage=en-us&m=m4a78lt-m le

95w only for the motherboard so I can't step up to the 125w stuff, just whats on the list.

Are any of those worth upgrading to? Would I notice a good difference with something more than I have now and a low profile video card like a 7750? Right now I have a 6670.

Worth it for me means $100 for a nice jump in speed for games. Don't care about highest resolution and all sorts of AA and AF, I just like things to run smoothly and look nice.
 
Phenom IIX4 960T (HD96ZTWFK4DGR),3.0GHz,95W,rev.E0,SocketAM3,Quad-Core would net you the biggest gain in performance since you can not overclock at all.

If you plan on sticking with AMD and getting a better board (am3+) down the line than I would go with this one since if you get a better amd board down the line for what ever reason you can overclock this one pretty far.
Phenom IIX6 1045T(HDT45TWFK6DGR),2.7GHz,95W,rev.E0,SocketAM3,6-Core.
 
If you are lucky enough to have a Microcenter nearby they have the 1045T for $79.99. Also check local Craigslist and the FS forum.
 
How does the 1045 compare to the 960, both running at stock speeds? I dont plan on overclocking anything.

And yes, I actually do have a Microcenter within easy driving distance, so thanks for the suggestion.
 
LordJezo said:
How does the 1045 compare to the 960, both running at stock speeds? I dont plan on overclocking anything.

And yes, I actually do have a Microcenter within easy driving distance, so thanks for the suggestion.
Click to expand...

1045 is easily the better value if your local MC has one in stock.
 
what games are we talking about playing?

unless they are able to run on more than 2 cores you will not notice much difference with a 6 core cpu.


I know you said you aren't gonna overclock, but honestly, you would be better off just overclocking your current cpu and saving the cash, unless you really need more cores.
 
Saint's Row III, Batman, now Bioshock, stuff like Tomb Raider, Alan Wake..

All single player games, I dont play competitive FPS or anything like that. I play them all on my HPTC which is hooked up to my 47" LCD on the couch using a 360 wireless pad. No in depth crazy strategy games.
 
I'd be jumping all over the hexacore 1045T if I were faced with your scenario.
 
So it's been a while since I paid attention to these things.. the 1045t 2.7 ghz chip while the 245 is a 2.9 ghz chip. But the 1045t is a better chip overall? How are chips rated these days if "slower" ones are actually faster?
 
You are missing something important here. The 1045T is a Phenom II with 6MB of L3 cache. The Athlon II line of cpus has zero L3 cache and that makes a big difference in some applications.

See here: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/athlon-l3-cache,2416-6.html
In Left for Dead, even at the same low 2.6 Ghz clock speed they got a 20% boost in performance from changing from an Athlon II quad to a Phenom II quad.
Other games showed less of a difference, but there is a consistent difference.

Now check out the poor BF3 performance with a Athlon II dual core: http://www.techspot.com/review/458-battlefield-3-performance/page7.html
This shows the same thing. A Phenom II dual core was much faster. Note that this is probably single player that was benchmarked. Multiplayer is more cpu intensive. AMD quads suffer sometimes in multiplayer and the 6 core Thubans do much better.

Going from a dual core Athlon II that has no L3 cache to a 6 core with L3 cache will be a big jump for you in many areas.

Also the 1045T has Turbo to 3.2 Ghz when the cpu is lightly loaded. That will help performance also.
 
Link for BF3 multiplayer benchmarks showing Phenom II dual, quad, and 6 core cpus, plus other common cpus: http://www.sweclockers.com/artikel/14650-prestandaanalys-battlefield-3/5#pagehead

Note how bad a Phenom II dual core performs. Now remember that a Phenom II dual is faster than Athlon II in BF3. That was already shown in a previous link.

The 1045T is obviously slower than the 1100T in that graph, but I bet it's slightly faster than the 980 in this game because it seems that BF3 likes cores more than clock speed.

Of course I don't know what games you play, or want to play, but the bottom line is that the 1045T should be a solid upgrade for under $100.
 
Last edited:
For the price it sounds like the 1045t is a no brainer.

I'll toss that in there and enjoy my little gaming machine for a few more years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top