4800 or 4400?

[NosBoost300]

okay i'm wondering which would oc better.... i would think because they're the same core they would have the same limitations... but with a 4800 if i were to run a 1:1 ratio i could easily hit 3.0 ghz.... now would this be true.. or would it be just as limited as the 4400 would be?? its coming close to purchase and the 2 cpu's arent too far from each other... so which would be the better buy?

and no.. i don't wanna hear anything about a conroe

 

[CrazeD]

Well, if you want to OC then the 4400 is a better buy. If not, get the 4800.

I think the 4800 has a slightly large L2 cache too...but I'm not sure.

 

[lancec2c30]

sorry I must not know, but why no conroe?

If you have the money I would just get the 4800

 

[Nitestick]

sorry I must not know, but why no conroe?

i assume he only wants to upgrade the cpu.

ok you are right, the 4400+ and 4800+ do both basically level out ~3ghz with enough cooling. the 4400+ of course has less chance of making it that far because it is lower clocked but it is also cheaper and better value. have you or will you consider an Opteron 165/170?

 

[Lord AnthraX]

i assume he only wants to upgrade the cpu.

ok you are right, the 4400+ and 4800+ do both basically level out ~3ghz with enough cooling. the 4400+ of course has less chance of making it that far because it is lower clocked but it is also cheaper and better value. have you or will you consider an Opteron 165/170?

Correct me if im wrong, but arent the 4400 and 4800 basically the same cores (toledo) and same chips, just one on a lower frequency?

Kind of like the opteron.


A opteron 165 can overclock just as well as a 180 at 2.4 GHz versus 1.8, as most opterons with a good stepping stop at 3.1 GHz with good cooling. Some people think you can get that "head start" when really there is none.


Of couse it all depends on what weak your core comes with.

 

[Nitestick]

i didn't say there was a head start per se. they do all fall short around 3ghz and the fact is that the higher the clock is the higher the chances are of reaching that magic 3ghz. the 4400+ may well make 3ghz but the 200mhz defecit makes it less likely because that is an extra 200mhz above it's binned speed that you must make up for.

that brings me to my next point. speed binning. due to the speed binning process the 4800+ is guaranteed to run at least 2.4ghz or higher. whereas the 4400+ only 2.2ghz or higher.

 

[Lord AnthraX]

i didn't say there was a head start per se. they do all fall short around 3ghz and the fact is that the higher the clock is the higher the chances are of reaching that magic 3ghz. the 4400+ may well make 3ghz but the 200mhz defecit makes it less likely because that is an extra 200mhz above it's binned speed that you must make up for.

that brings me to my next point. speed binning. due to the speed binning process the 4800+ is guaranteed to run at least 2.4ghz or higher. whereas the 4400+ only 2.2ghz or higher.

But thats where my question comes to.


Are they not the same exact core with diffrend frequencys and multiplyers?


So even if you have that 200 MHz isn't it most likely that it wont make a diffrence really becuase the 4400 is a 4800 with a 10 multi and 200 MHz lower clock speed?

 

[CrazeD]

Well, I know the 3200+ runs at 2.0GHz. It gets that by having a 200MHz FSB, with a 10x multiplier.

The 3500+ (same chip, faster speed) runs at 2.2GHz. It gets that by having a 200MHz FSB, but an 11x multiplier.

Not sure if it's the same with the 4400/4800.

 

[Nitestick]

But thats where my question comes to.


Are they not the same exact core with diffrend frequencys and multiplyers?


So even if you have that 200 MHz isn't it most likely that it wont make a diffrence really becuase the 4400 is a 4800 with a 10 multi and 200 MHz lower clock speed?

yes they are the same core but speed binning differentiates them. remember it could be that a processor may not even run a 1MHz overclock. so yes they are the same core but they are not the same processor, speed binning sets them apart by what frequencies they should be capable of running.

 

[gaara]

Higher clocked core does not mean higher overclocking potential, I've seen 4800+ cores that crap out after 200Mhz, the guranteed headstart doesn't mean anything considering every single core reacts differently and binning is a huge luck of the draw

This is why opterons were so popular, they are infact binned probably 200-400MHz higher than they're shipped to run at for stability reasons hence why they go so far without any vcore change.

But no, every single core is different. For example, my opteron 165 pushes all the way up to about 2.55ghz without touching vcore, then around 2.6ish you have to start feeding it about 0.025v increments for every 50MHz or so. Vcore to frequency is not proportional therefore a 4800+ will not overclock better than a 4400+ because it is 200MHz faster stock

Speedbinning is not a science. Supply and demand, if there is a large demand for slower operating chips they will simply test them at say 2.2GHz and leave it at that when in fact the chip is capable of 2.8GHz