Which is a better processor? - Page 3 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > New Systems | Building and Buying
Closed Thread
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-11-2005, 10:05 PM   #21 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
macdawg's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 813

wouldn't the 3.0 Ghz Intel with DDR2 800 RAM be faster than the X2 4400 with DDR 3200 RAM?

macdawg is offline  
Old 12-11-2005, 10:31 PM   #22 (permalink)
Monster Techie
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,842
Send a message via AIM to lazerman Send a message via Yahoo to lazerman

Nope. Different technologies....

The Stargate MMORPG
lazerman is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 02:32 AM   #23 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,782

X2 uses DDR ram even though its slower AMD are more efficient at processing data at a slower rate, and AMD have a great memory controller.
Core 2 Duo E6400, DFI Infinity 975X/G, 2x 512mb DDR2 667mhz, Albatron 7900gt, WD 200gb SATA, Samsung DVD-RW, Silverstone ST-50EF 500w PSU.
waynejkruse10 is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 03:01 AM   #24 (permalink)
Junior Techie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 68
Send a message via AIM to CrimsonGX

Originally posted by macdawg
wouldn't the 3.0 Ghz Intel with DDR2 800 RAM be faster than the X2 4400 with DDR 3200 RAM?
What's faster, a person running 5 steps or a car driving 30 mph for half of a mile? The car. What will finish the task faster? The person.

AMD CPU doesn't use the northbridge, since the memory controller is built on the CPU, so it can travel slower, get there faster since it travels less.
CrimsonGX is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 05:02 AM   #25 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
Apokalipse's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 14,556

yeah, the AMD K8 CPU's can talk to RAM directly. Intel's have to talk to the motherboard's memory controller which then talk to RAM.

there's not much difference in RAM communication between an Intel with DDR2 and an AMD K8 with DDR1

the AMD K8 can communicate to RAM directly. the DDR2 RAM is faster, but Intel's CPU's have to talk to the memory controller on the motherboard which then talks to RAM.

when socket M2 comes out, CPU's in socket M2 will be able to use DDR2 RAM, and will communicate with RAM a lot faster than Intel's.

AMD spent a bit more time on dual core CPU's, and have really got it right. although it often does depend on the programs run whether you will see a performance gain. that applies to both Intel and AMD dual core CPU's

anyway, instead of Asus's A8N, I would recommend a DFI NF4 SLI-DR, which is less expensive and better than the Asus board. there's heaps of support for DFI boards at www.dfi-street.com

anyway, I would recommend:

if you can, get an Opteron 165 dual core.
essentially, they are exactly the same as the Athlon 64 X2's, but with a different name.
the 165 is 1.8GHZ against the 2.2GHZ 4400+, but still has the 2x1MB L2 cache you won't find in any lower end Athlon 64 X2.

having the same core as the X2's, they will be able to get similar speeds through overclocking.

2x512MB G.Skill RAM with Samsung TCCD's
G.Skill's RAM with Samsung TCCD's will clock well, and you should be able to get it to at least DDR500.

motherboard: DFI Nf4 Ultra-D
this board is the best for overclocking.

using that motherboard, CPU and RAM, you should be able to get around 2.6GHZ and at least DDR500.
I'll quote myself from a previous thread, so you can get an idea of overclocking:
originally posted by apokalipse
a CPU communicates to RAM at a certain speed, normally 200MHZ
DDR400 actually runs at 200MHZ, but transfers twice the data per clock cycle of the older SDRAM, so people say it runs at 400MHZ
your CPU has a multiplier, which is a number, that multiplies the CPU-to-RAM communication speed (normally called the Front Side Bus, but Athlon 64's technically don't have one, I'll explain after) to get the core speed

basically, to overclock your CPU, you increase your Front Side Bus (FSB, or HTT in Athlon 64's)
just say you had a 3000+, it runs at 2GHZ (2000MHZ) with a multiplier of 10
you increase the FSB (or HTT) to 250MHZ and your CPU speed is 250x10=2500MHZ

because you are increasing the CPU-to-RAM speed, you also overclock your RAM when you do this. this means your CPU can communicate to your RAM faster.
so what people often do, is they find the core limit of their CPU. let's say it can't get past its stock speed of 2000MHZ, they can increase the FSB/HTT to 250MHZ and decrease their multiplier to 8, so that 250x8=2000MHZ
the core speed is not increased, however their CPU communicates to RAM faster, meaning your system can be faster overall when parts need data from RAM (even if not the CPU itself, which is very often)

typically, when a CPU wants to communicate to RAM, it actually communicates through a memory controller chip (MCC) which is normally on the motherboard. the CPU itself does not normally 'know' how to talk to RAM. it is the link between the CPU and MCC which is called the FSB.
because the CPU has to talk to the MCC, it creates a bottleneck.
when AMD designed their K8 CPU's (Athlon 64's, Opterons, Semprons) they put the memory controller on the CPU itself. the MCC being just next to the CPU, not through the motherboard, means it can communicate much faster to RAM
because of this, there is no real need for a 'bus' to communicate with the MCC, it communicates almost directly to memory. AMD called the link between K8's and RAM "HyperTransporT" or HTT (don't confuse it with HT, which is Intel's HyperThreading)
anyway, the Opteron 165 has a core speed of 200 x 9 = 1800MHZ
the RAM at DDR500 will give you a core speed of 250 x 9 = 2250MHZ
the RAM I suggested should be able to reach DDR600 (300MHZ) with loose timings, which would make a core speed of 300 x 9 = 2700MHZ.
if your RAM can't reach 300MHZ, you can use a memory divider to make the HTT run at 300MHZ (or as high as it will go) and the RAM run at a lower speed, so you can still get a faster core speed.

also, for overclocking, a PSU is also important. a bad PSU can output irregular voltages and cause crashing, especially on a CPU that's overclocked.
plus, a lot of cheaper PSU's don't actually rate what they can constantly output, only their peak.
so you'll want a good PSU to power it all. I'd recommend an OCZ, Antec, or Thermaltake.
that's one of the best PSU's, which is really stable. it's peak output is 620W and can constantly output 520W.
Apokalipse is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 11:54 AM   #26 (permalink)
Newb Techie
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22

**** thanks for the massive support there apokalipse wasnt expecting all of that.. I have actually ordered the aspire x-super alien case it comes with a power supply i was hoping i could run off of that for a while until i did anything drastic.. But im definitely going to look up everything else you suggested.. As far as the processor goes are you saying that the opteron and this 64x2 will hit the same processing speed even thought the x2 has a 400mhz head start?
Munson is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 04:55 PM   #27 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 943

yep thats right almost all the time the opturon will actually be better
AMD 64 939 3200+@2.7ghz
Segate 120gig SATA
1gig PC3200 Geil Value Ram Duel Channel@ddr480 3-3-3-8
Gigabyte 6600GT-PCI-E@580/1.3
Sh0r_ty is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 05:07 PM   #28 (permalink)
True Techie
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 224
Send a message via AIM to The Kraut

Keep in mind though, that the opteron series is not officialy supported by DFI (even though many people use them). So if something goes wrong...
Better sig coming soon.
The Kraut is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 05:10 PM   #29 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,339

I'd go with the AMD. Since you will not be overclocking you can save yourself some cash with the X2 category.
<form action=\"http://www.srsyo.org/tfsearch.php\" method=\"get\">
<input type=\"text\" name=\"search\"> <input type=\"submit\" name=\"submit\" value=\"Search TF before you post!\"></form>
Vista Discussion | 64 Bit Discussion |Microsoft Homepage | Yo Linux | Paul Thurrott | Fire Fox | Thunder Bird | Image Shack | Photo Bucket | Put File | Anti-Spyware | MS Anti-Spyware | Trillian | Anti-Virus | On Line Virus Scan
Tyler1989 is offline  
Old 12-22-2005, 04:33 AM   #30 (permalink)
Newb Techie
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22

what is the highest anyone here has overclocked their opteron 165 to stable? And would it be the best idea to get an opteron 165 rather than the 4400 x2? will they overclock at the same speeds? just curious about other peoples opinions on these 2

Munson is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities

Copyright 2002-2015 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.