Battle of The CPU's (Opteron 170 Vs. X2 4400+)

[KlNGPlN]

lol , interesting people actually voted for the 4400+, too bad they did not give any reasons as to there vote. and Nathan, 165 is good to, but I think 170 compares more to the 4400 and they are around the same price range.

 

[Mentali$T]

NUMBNUTS!!?? what are you talking about? the 4400+ is awesome. I chose this over any of the opty's. From my experience with it, its great.

 

[NathanM]

lol , interesting people actually voted for the 4400+, too bad they did not give any reasons as to there vote. and Nathan, 165 is good to, but I think 170 compares more to the 4400 and they are around the same price range.

I know. I just thought I'd voice my opinion while I was here.

 

[PZEROFGH]

The 4400+ would be a nice choise IF IT DIDNT COST SO MUCH MONEY

 

[Waphlez]

Most 4400+ CPUs can reach the same overclock range as the Opteron 170, it's just that the Opteron 170 is cheaper, so if you are going to OC the 165/170 would be better for the price (and has 2 x 1mb of cache if your putting it against the 3800/4200/4600+ cores).

Since the X2 Athlons are clocked higher then their Opteron counter-parts they can reach the around the same speed as Opterons. A 4400+ can OC to the same range as a 165 or a little higher (but since the 165 costs $330 and the 170 at $400 with the 4400+ at $460, the opteron would be a better choice finanically).

Although I would rather get a Opteron 170 because even at 2Ghz stock it runs current games fine, runs more stable since it's a server CPU, and it is 60 dollars cheaper. It also OCs just as good as the 4400+.

 

[Green Radience]

A 4400+ is rarely going to reach 2.8Ghz while a Opteron 170 is practically guaranteed to. I'd pick a Opteron 170 over even a X2 4800+.

 

[old_geekster50]

They are both great procs.

The steppings will make a big difference which will OC better. From what I have read, it appears that the 170 would win the battle; 2.6-2.7 average on air. I have heard of 3. on liquid.

One thing to keep in mind when purchasing an Opteron to use in a desktop PC, the manufacturers will not support it. The Optys are made for use in servers. AMD won't allow it.

Here is an example:

http://www.dfi-street.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26642&highlight=opteron

 

[The General]

i currently have an athlon x2 3800+


i cant overclock it worth a ****, its running at 2.2ghz (stock is 2)

i know a guy who'll buy it for 200 bucks, would it be worth it to get the 165 or the 170? which should i get?

 

[Waphlez]

A 4400+ is rarely going to reach 2.8Ghz while a Opteron 170 is practically guaranteed to. I'd pick a Opteron 170 over even a X2 4800+.

I've seen 4400+ CPU reach 2.9ghz on a Zalmann 9500, I guess the guy got a lucky CPU, I've also seen dud 165/170s that only got to 2.2-2.4ghz max, so don't say it's guaranteed. A 3800+ easilly gets to 2.5 or 2.6ghz on air cooling, my friend has one at 2.65ghz on air.

A 4400+ usually get 2.7GHz - 2.8GHz and usually a Opteron 170 gets 2.7-2.9 or 3GHz if you got a good CPU.

But I agree that that the Opteron 170 is a better choice. I just don't like it when people say that that Athlon cores don't compare to Opterons when they get around the same range. But since the Opterons are clocked lower, it makes them get higher OCs then the Athlons.