2.64GHz single core vs 2.54GHz dual core

[f4phantom2500]

I've got two 939 processors, an Athlon 64 3500 CBBLE 0512DPAW and an Athlon 64 X2 3800 CCBWE 0545RPMW. I had the X2 running Prime for at least 12 hours at 2.4GHz (10x240) ~1.4V (going to 1.45 didn't really help, don't want to go past that). Right now I have the 3500 running 2.7GHz (11x245) at 1.5~1.55V and it's running Prime95 fine so far. So, assuming both of these processors are stable at these speeds, which should I keep, which should I sell? I game, don't usually have other intensive stuff going on while running a game, and right now I'm into Medieval 2 Total War. The thing is like I don't think dual core is really worth it right now for gaming, and by the time it is worth it I don't think my 3800 @ 2.4GHz will really be good anymore. However, if I keep the dual core now it will have a higher resell value later than the 3500 will, and the 3500 has a decent resell value right now. So, which should I go with?

EDIT: the 3500 failed Prime95 after 40 minutes, but I bet if I give it a tad more voltage or throttle it down a few MHz (at least 2650), it'll be stable.

Poll edited in accordance to new OC results.

 

[aigomorla]

well if its my choice, id keep the X2. Im sure 2.4ghz isnt the limit on it either. My X2 was doing 2.6 downvolted, and 2.8 at 1.4v

My Opty is a completely different story.

You see for yourself

I dont think i'll ever get a OC that good ever again.


But yeah, id stay with the dual core as more and more things are getting DC optimized.

 

[myocardia]

You do realize that both are much faster than your 7600GT can take advantage of, don't you? And to date, there has been a total of one game released that was written to take advantage of dual-core processors. Of course, there have been 5 or 6 that have patches to "take advantage" of dual-cores, but it doesn't seem to work nearly as well as it does when the game was written for SMP all along. With that in mind, I voted for the 2.6-2.65 Ghz single core. In the future, I'm sure you'll have to have a dual-core for gaming. But then again, I said that a year ago.

 

[CCityInstaller]

The 3800x2 for sure. 200mhz isn't gonna make a huge difference, although the buttery smoothies of a dual core would be like night and day.

 

[cpl edge]

i think dual core is nice in the respect that you can minimize a game, mess with another program, then restore the game with no trouble at all. i could never do this "easily" on a single core no matter what speed it was running... like bf2 and teamspeak is a good example.

 

[f4phantom2500]

Originally posted by: myocardia
You do realize that both are much faster than your 7600GT can take advantage of, don't you?

I have an X1900GT now.

And to date, there has been a total of one game released that was written to take advantage of dual-core processors. Of course, there have been 5 or 6 that have patches to "take advantage" of dual-cores, but it doesn't seem to work nearly as well as it does when the game was written for SMP all along.

Yeah that's one of the things that's really holding me back.

In the future, I'm sure you'll have to have a dual-core for gaming. But then again, I said that a year ago.

That's the other thing...by the time dual core is a *must* my x2 3800 will suck too much to matter lol.


I think I'm gonna stick with the dual core guys, thanks for the replies. The thing that really put me over the edge on the dual core was that I upped the voltage just a tad more, ~1.48, and am now running prime95 at 2.55GHz . At this point it looks like the speed difference would be about 100MHz tops between the two processors, so I might as well go with the dual core. Amazing what a bit more vcore can do eh?

Btw, I know 1.48 is a bit over the 1.45 recommended, but it's still fine right?

And the maxtcase for this processor is 63 C, the TDP is 65.6 Watts, if it means anything to anyone. Right now the proc is at 56~57C after running prime95 for 20 minutes, so I feel safe with that considering that's pretty much the highest it'll get. I'm gonna go reboot and jack up the fsb

 

[Arkaign]

DualCore FTW .. the clock speeds are close enough that it's worth having the extra core, particularly to handle extra stuff in the background (Various windows threads, antivirus layer, etc) .. and the SMP-aware games are gravy. Quake 4 w/SMP patch is pretty nice. Most major new game releases will probably benefit from DC. Cheers

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Only reason not to go with the dualcore would be for programs that don't play nice with it, but there are many ways of getting around such issues, even getting programs to run on one core by default if necessary.

 

[f4phantom2500]

UPDATE

It looks like the x2 is doing fine at 2.6GHz, kinda surprised I read this stepping sucks for OCing, but I know you can't base how well you'll overclock solely on that, due to standard deviations and such. The one thing that's getting to me here is the temp...it's tapping 60C and, like I said, the maxtcase is 63C. I'm thinking better cooling is in order. I just put on a Freezer 64 Pro, but the stock thermal paste was in a tube and not on the heatsink itself (oem or whatever, got it when it was like $16 shipped on newegg), and I couldn't get it to spread on the processor because of the consistency. So, I just put on some AS3 I had lyin' around, trouble is I didn't have a lot left...there was some on the heatsink already because it was on my 3500, so I mean it's doing ok I guess, but I really think it could be doing better. I had that AS3 since my barton 2500 . When I get some cash I think I'll just order some AS5, but idk how much better it will do, probably a few degrees. Anyway, I'm rambling, any comments/ideas/suggestions?

EDIT: ...crap, it just failed prime95...looks like 2.55GHz will have to do .

btw I got this chip for $75 shipped from the fs/ft forum about a week ago

 

[A554SS1N]

2.55Ghz is still good for dualcore - 150Mhz is still tiny, and think of all the extra performance with two cores in apps that can use it!

 

[Munky]

I'd keep the dual core. I'm usually not one to parade the dual core bandwagon, but if you already have both, and the clockspeeds are somewhat close then go with the dually. The difference in clockspeed is small enough that you won't notice the difference, but the dual core will be much faster in apps that can actually put both cores to use.

 

[superHARD]

3800X2 FTW!

 

[secretanchitman]

dual core > single core.

besides...you'll appreciate that extra core.

 

[wolfman11]

I'd definately go with the dual core, particularly for $75.

 

[gOJDO]

X2

 

[Dream Operator]

I went from a 3500+ to a X2 4200. I have been very pleased with the dual core performance. It's still not where it should and could be, but it is much better than single for multitasking and apps that utilize multithread/core. I currently have my 4200 at 2,585Mhz. It gets up to 60/61c. I may get a better cooler as well.

Enjoy the X2!

 

[VirtualLarry]

Curious, would the consensus been different, had the single-core been running at something like 2.9Ghz instead? Especially if one was interested in gaming?

 

[Bull Dog]

I'd stick to a dual core processor.

 

[sjwaste]

If you ever decide to build an HTPC, you'll want to have that dual core around. My HTPC runs on a Barton 2500 (oc'ed to 3200 speed), but I offload all the transcoding to my main PC which is an Opteron 165 @ 2.5 GHz. It's really nice to encode on both cores when I'm not around, or just in the background if I am. Next step is to go to gigabit ethernet on the home network, as that's the bottleneck during certain stages of the transcoding process right now.

Keep the dual core.

 

[Dream Operator]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Curious, would the consensus been different, had the single-core been running at something like 2.9Ghz instead? Especially if one was interested in gaming?

Even if one games a lot, I would say unless that is the ONLY thing they do, I would go single-core. Even then it I would be curious to know the FPS difference. Probably 5-6 or something like that. Depending on the game, etc.

 

[dguy6789]

2.54+2.54 > 2.6

/thread