3800+ X2 or Opteron 165?, That is the question.

[Sean Maxwell]

I am a heavy gamer, and love a smooth and responsive desktop. Other than that, I am just an everday user. I want to make the jump to a dual core processor. Now I just learned that the Opteron 165 could be a better choice than the 3800+ X2. Please take my rig into consideration too (my signature). Can anyone help me out with this?

Focus points:

Opteron 165 has ($317):

- 2 x 1MB L2 cache
- Overclocks extremely well? 2.6 and up?
- Only has 9x multiplier that doesn't unlock?
- Availability?

3800+ X2 has ($322):

- 2 x 512MB L2 cache
- Overclocks OK? 2.4GHz - 2.5GHz?
- Has a 10x multiplier that doesn't unlock?
- Very available

Again, I am overclocking and playing a lot of demanding games. And I love a responsive and quick desktop. I want the processor that will benefit those characteristics the most. Thanks for any input.

 

[Ricemarine]

Get an opteron 165, they overclock higher.

3800+ has a 9 multiplier, since its 1.8 Ghz.


But, if you can find the Hot deal with the opteron 170 for $351, by all means GO FOR THE 170.

if you cannot, get the 165

 

[Fallengod]

Well 1 thing to correct is x2 3800 can be both 2x512 and 2x1mb, so its sorta the same as an opteron. Opterons also produce more heat. Not to mention even if it is a manchester(512x2), cache matters little.

Also, x2 3800+ is 2.0ghz at stock, where as the 165 is 1.8ghz at stock.

In terms of ocing, well sorta hard to say. Ive seen alot of people have their x2 3800's up around the 2.7ghz range but... I would assume opterons OC better. However, id have to admit, I really havnt paid much attention to dual-core opteron overclocks so...

Personaly, id go for the x2 3800+ for one main reason. Price. They sell for (used) about $220-$250 now. I just bought 2 new retail boxed ones for $240 and one for $250 shipped. I also saw one sell on ebay TODAY for $235 total shipped. So the question becomes, do you really need that much overclocking for spending significantly more? The opteron 170 that is equal to the x2 3800+ at 2.0ghz at stock is $400. Id much rather take a x2 3800+ for $250.

My 2 cents.

:beer:

 

[Fallengod]

3800+ is 2.0ghz, opty 165 is 1.8

Originally posted by: Ricemarine
Get an opteron 165, they overclock higher.

3800+ has a 9 multiplier, since its 1.8 Ghz.


But, if you can find the Hot deal with the opteron 170 for $351, by all means GO FOR THE 170.

if you cannot, get the 165

 

[Sean Maxwell]

Originally posted by: Ricemarine
Get an opteron 165, they overclock higher.

3800+ has a 9 multiplier, since its 1.8 Ghz.


But, if you can find the Hot deal with the opteron 170 for $351, by all means GO FOR THE 170.

if you cannot, get the 165

hey thanks for the fast response! but can i get reasons for the 170?

 

[n7]

165 if you can find it.

Otherwise 3800+

There's no reason to spend more than the 3800+, well unless you have money to throw away.

 

[Sean Maxwell]

Originally posted by: modempower
Well 1 thing to correct is x2 3800 can be both 2x512 and 2x1mb, so its sorta the same as an opteron. Opterons also produce more heat. Not to mention even if it is a manchester(512x2), cache matters little.

Also, x2 3800+ is 2.0ghz at stock, where as the 165 is 1.8ghz at stock.

In terms of ocing, well sorta hard to say. Ive seen alot of people have their x2 3800's up around the 2.7ghz range but... I would assume opterons OC better. However, id have to admit, I really havnt paid much attention to dual-core opteron overclocks so...

Personaly, id go for the x2 3800+ for one main reason. Price. They sell for (used) about $220-$250 now. I just bought 2 new retail boxed ones for $240 and one for $250 shipped. I also saw one sell on ebay TODAY for $235 total shipped. So the question becomes, do you really need that much overclocking for spending significantly more? The opteron 170 that is equal to the x2 3800+ at 2.0ghz at stock is $400. Id much rather take a x2 3800+ for $250.

My 2 cents.

:beer:

So I can get a 1MB x 2 L2 cache 3800 X2? How so? is it a difference between the Manchester and Toledo core? Which as 1MB x 2 L2 cache?

 

[DrMrLordX]

I'd say get the 3800+ unless you're sure you're getting a 165 with a good stepping that can do 2.8 ghz or higher. The 3800+ should be able to hang with the 165 in terms of maximum clock speed, and some are reporting that the 165 will produce more heat at the same clock speed. The cache difference shouldn't be too staggering.

 

[Sean Maxwell]

i can get a opty 165 for $317, and a x2 for $322

 

[Fallengod]

Yes a toledo x2 3800 core is 2x1mb cache, same as opteron. Go for the 165 if you can get it cheaper. If you know youre ocing, get the 165. I always go for used items myself to save money but if you want a new one, more power to ya.

 

[harobikes333]

um i thought the toledo 3800 X2 had half of its L2 cache disabled so its just like the manchester one:\?

 

[Sean Maxwell]

OK, some recapping:

- The opteron is usually "specially" picked to be more thermo-friendly and stable/reliable?
- The opterons by reputation DO overclock higher?
- I'm not sacrificing anything by going Opteron over X2 right? Ex: The opterons are just as good for gaming as the X2s?
- The fact that its a server based processor doesn't hurt me as a gamer/everyday user at all?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this seems like a no-brainer now -

Opteron is cheaper, reaches high clock speeds, has 2 times the cache, and outperforms the 3800+ x2?

btw, my budget is $350

 

[Sean Maxwell]

Originally posted by: harobikes333
um i thought the toledo 3800 X2 had half of its L2 cache disabled so its just like the manchester one:\?

I thought that as well :-\

 

[Zebo]

FWIW- I sold my 165 - did'nt like the heat produced compared to smaller cached 4200+. Seemed to run about 10C hotter at same freq and volts.. 2500Mhz and 1.45. But 165 will be slightly faster at same speed than 1MB X2's like 3800/4200 in games..

Just depends what important to you.

Another thing is 165 will have better resale by $20-50 due to poor supply and everyone fasinated by 2MB LVL2.

 

[NeezyDeezy]

if you're into gaming you'd be retarded to not just keep using your winchester at 2.6

seriously, there's a good chance you are going to spend 300 dollars just to see your gaming performance decrease

 

[Sean Maxwell]

Originally posted by: Zebo
FWIW- I sold my 165 - did'nt like the heat produced compared to smaller cached 4200+. Seemed to run about 10C hotter at same freq and volts.. 2500Mhz and 1.45.

This means you would recommend the X2? By the way, I run everything pretty cool.

My 3200+ Winnie is at v1.55 and 90F

 

[Sean Maxwell]

Originally posted by: NeezyDeezy
if you're into gaming you'd be retarded to not just keep using your winchester at 2.6

seriously, there's a good chance you are going to spend 300 dollars just to see your gaming performance decrease

I was under the impression that an overclocked dual core to 2.6GHz or more w/ 4 times the cache of my processor would be much faster?

this isn't true?

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Another thing is 165 will have better resale by $20-50 due to poor supply and everyone fasinated by 2MB LVL2.

:laugh:

So true.

The whole OMGWTF 2MB of L2 cache PWNZ0RS is so silly, yet i see preaching about how it's oh-so-much-better than a faster 1 MB X2 every day...

Originally posted by: Sean Maxwell
I was under the impression that an overclocked dual core to 2.6GHz or more w/ 4 times the cache of my processor would be much faster?

this isn't true?

Nope.

Sure, the X2 will be nice for multithreaded appz, or maybe encoding video as you game, but just for games?

Certainly not worth upgrading just for that, since you'll never see a difference.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Sean Maxwell

Originally posted by: Zebo
FWIW- I sold my 165 - did'nt like the heat produced compared to smaller cached 4200+. Seemed to run about 10C hotter at same freq and volts.. 2500Mhz and 1.45.

This means you would recommend the X2? By the way, I run everything pretty cool.

My 3200+ Winnie is at v1.55 and 90F

Dude it's night and day difference from a winny - that was coolest A64 ever made. Anyway I dunno at that price.. with 3800+ I like 10X multiplier better, I like cooler better.. But at the same time with 165 - 2MB lvl2 and cherry picked opteron silicon is attractive... I'd pick a 3800 because i'm into silence and more temps for marginal performance gains is just not worth it to me. But from a pure performance standpoint Opteron is more attractive overall.

 

[Sean Maxwell]

Originally posted by: n7

Originally posted by: Zebo
Another thing is 165 will have better resale by $20-50 due to poor supply and everyone fasinated by 2MB LVL2.

:laugh:

So true.

The whole OMGWTF 2MB of L2 cache PWNZ0RS is so silly, yet i see preaching about how it's oh-so-much-better than a faster 1 MB X2 every day...

Originally posted by: Sean Maxwell
I was under the impression that an overclocked dual core to 2.6GHz or more w/ 4 times the cache of my processor would be much faster?

this isn't true?

Nope.

Sure, the X2 will be nice for multithreaded appz, or maybe encoding video as you game, but just for games?

Certainly not worth upgrading just for that, since you'll never see a difference.

My parade has been rained on T_T

 

[Sean Maxwell]

Anymore input?

 

[Sean Maxwell]

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

[nealh]

3800 X2 has 512kb of L2 cache period...the toldeo core the other 512kb is disabled with no way to turn it on

The opeteron is toledo core as is some of 3800x2...they will clock close to the same..in most cases

I would get the cheapest one...I just got a Opteron 165 and still testing but it looks like 2.6 is best spot..2.7 gonna need more vcore and heat production

 

[harobikes333]

Just go with the 3800 X2

 

[Krogoth255]

If you can get a 165 on the cheap then get it, overwise stick with the 3800+ X2. L2 cache does very little for gaming performance, but helps out more in video encoding.

IIRC, Toledo-based X2s and Opterons always generated more heat, then their Manchester counterparts.