Ahahaha I didnt even get a dual core

[Mucker]

----> http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merchant...roduct_Code=120331&Category_Code=amdop

IMO, still the very best single core for your money. I've used 6 and all of them did 2800 to 3000 MHz......

m

 

[saiku]

watagump,

My sympathies. Paying $150 for a single core, when games are going to get optimized for dual-cores very soon (e.g. Crysis), is not a very astute move.

 

[BreadFan]

Originally posted by: saiku
watagump,

My sympathies. Paying $150 for a single core, when games are going to get optimized for dual-cores very soon (e.g. Crysis), is not a very astute move.

Can you name (not speculate) any other game coming out that's dual core optimized? If he's a gamer, single core is still a viable choice. By the time the majority of games released are dual core optimized, I'm sure we will have gone through a couple of generations of dual core processors.

 

[secretanchitman]

i wouldnt care if its single or dual core. you have a VERY fast chip for the price. forget what people tell you. if its fast enough for you, then thats all that matters.

but if i had the choice for a single or dual core chip for the same price...i would get a dual core.

 

[Crescent13]

Originally posted by: broly8877
Ewww, single core.

 

[CelSnip]

A dual core processor will last longer. It's not a big deal though.

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: Crescent13

Originally posted by: broly8877
Ewww, single core.

Even if I was going to upgrade to a single core, I would just wait a couple months until they're giving them away in Happy Meals.

 

[inveterate]

Any of you out there with x2 3800s I bet i can PWn u in any gaming bench with my 150 dollar opty

 

[Topweasel]

Originally posted by: broly8877
Ewww, single core.

Everyone below me is free to quote this as a reponse.

Everyone below me is free to quote this as a reponse.

 

[spittledip]

If he is mainly a gamer, it only makes sense to get a the 4000+ over the 3800x2 b/c of the significant incrase in FPS in every game out there (especailly considering they both go for 150)

 

[WaTaGuMp]

Originally posted by: spittledip
If he is mainly a gamer, it only makes sense to get a the 4000+ over the 3800x2 b/c of the significant incrase in FPS in every game out there (especailly considering they both go for 150)

Actually mine was $133, $149.53 total. The 3800+X2 is starting at 153 or so then tax etc, so mine was slightly less money.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
Good job! I'm still running a 3700+ single core @ 2.8ghz. With all the conroe hubbub and the AMD price drops, I've been itching to upgrade to an X2 but for the life of me I can't justify it. I very, very rarely encode a video, the only multi-threaded app that I run is photoshop and not very often and just for basic touchups, and I don't do heavy multitasking. I just hope that good cheap 939 X2's are still around when and if I need to upgrade

Exactly buy what you need not the hype. And when that dual CPU game comes out that actually shows signifgant improvement from having two cores you will make the move natually.

Dual cores have negatives hardly anyone talks about.. like power consumption and all that goes with that increased noise for fannage, increased PSU requirements, increased HSF spendage.. less overclockabilty.. more money.. And it's not like a A64 Single core can't multitask, they do very well if I remember right.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: inveterate
Any of you out there with x2 3800s I bet i can PWn u in any gaming bench with my 150 dollar opty

No you own me with your video card.. Games that's where it's at...processor is a negligible for the most part.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTEwOCwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: inveterate
Any of you out there with x2 3800s I bet i can PWn u in any gaming bench with my 150 dollar opty

No you own me with your video card.. Games that's where it's at...processor is a negligible for the most part.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTEwOCwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

I agree on the gamins issue, but how can you overlook 2 cores for the price of one??? Whether he needs it now or down the road....Even you say the 3800+ can hit FX-57 levels...I think this was a bad move by someone who from his statements obviously was not well informed on dual cores of late...

 

[wolfman11]

Originally posted by: Mucker
----> http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merchant...roduct_Code=120331&Category_Code=amdop

IMO, still the very best single core for your money. I've used 6 and all of them did 2800 to 3000 MHz......

m

QFT

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: inveterate
Any of you out there with x2 3800s I bet i can PWn u in any gaming bench with my 150 dollar opty

No you own me with your video card.. Games that's where it's at...processor is a negligible for the most part.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTEwOCwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

I agree on the gamins issue, but how can you overlook 2 cores for the price of one??? Whether he needs it now or down the road....Even you say the 3800+ can hit FX-57 levels...I think this was a bad move by someone who from his statements obviously was not well informed on dual cores of late...

Well the decision already been made time to look at positive and it's not like he bought a pentium D or anything.

Yes I agree 3800+ X2 is "the" processor to get from AMD today.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Exactly buy what you need not the hype. And when that dual CPU game comes out that actually shows signifgant improvement from having two cores you will make the move natually.

Dual cores have negatives hardly anyone talks about.. like power consumption and all that goes with that increased noise for fannage, increased PSU requirements, increased HSF spendage.. less overclockabilty.. more money.. And it's not like a A64 Single core can't multitask, they do very well if I remember right.

QFT. All these people who say single core is dead are the same people who have been saying for two years that socket 754 is dead. They're just trying to justify the extra money they've spent and try oh so hard to find synthetic reasons to prove they made the right choice. I say they made the right choice if they're happy with their purchase - no need to force other people to make the same choice that they made.

I think the $133 4000+ was a great choice. Twice the cache plus 400MHz more than the 3800+, for $20 less.

Not everybody runs multiple programs simultaneously that are really CPU intensive. Not everybody uses software that takes advantage of dual core. Also, single core chips don't just magically stop working next year. Cinderella's carriage may have turned into a pumpkin but single core chips will keep on doing what they've been doing all along.

 

[WaTaGuMp]

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: Zebo
Exactly buy what you need not the hype. And when that dual CPU game comes out that actually shows signifgant improvement from having two cores you will make the move natually.

Dual cores have negatives hardly anyone talks about.. like power consumption and all that goes with that increased noise for fannage, increased PSU requirements, increased HSF spendage.. less overclockabilty.. more money.. And it's not like a A64 Single core can't multitask, they do very well if I remember right.

QFT. All these people who say single core is dead are the same people who have been saying for two years that socket 754 is dead. They're just trying to justify the extra money they've spent and try oh so hard to find synthetic reasons to prove they made the right choice. I say they made the right choice if they're happy with their purchase - no need to force other people to make the same choice that they made.

I think the $133 4000+ was a great choice. Twice the cache plus 400MHz more than the 3800+, for $20 less.

Not everybody runs multiple programs simultaneously that are really CPU intensive. Not everybody uses software that takes advantage of dual core. Also, single core chips don't just magically stop working next year. Cinderella's carriage may have turned into a pumpkin but single core chips will keep on doing what they've been doing all along.

Well said my friend.

 

[imaheadcase]

Well i guess no one pointed out the obvious you have overkill with your video card even if you just play WoW.

mmorpg minus the few fps/space sims are more cpu limited than gpu limited.

 

[WaTaGuMp]

Originally posted by: imaheadcase
Well i guess no one pointed out the obvious you have overkill with your video card even if you just play WoW.

mmorpg minus the few fps/space sims are more cpu limited than gpu limited.

Yeah ok try being in a HUGE grp of people before you say that CPU means more the the GPU. I was on AGP before and there is ZERO doubt this setup is much better for WoW. I dont just play WoW either just most of the time.

 

[MrUniq]

Well if you don't plan on keeping your rig around for the next 2 or years than single core is still significant. 939 is on it's way out anyway..just rebuild again down the road.

I'm not bias..i just installed at 4600 x2 (love it) to hold me down until 2008.

 

[imported_Crusader]

Originally posted by: HardOCP
Dual Core Problems


In our gameplay we did come across some problems that we believe are associated with dual core CPUs, games and possibly drivers. There were times in some games, such as F.E.A.R. that we would ?feel? a slowdown in the framerate. It was as if we were moving along smoothly and then out of no where, unexpectedly in situations not typical of bringing the framerate down we would feel a change in the framerate. Now, it wasn?t enough of a drop to bring us below 30 FPS or cause the game to not be playable. It was however a slight annoyance because when you are at a high framerate and the framerate drops, let?s say for example from 80 FPS to 50 or 40 FPS you feel that change in the framerate and it may bother you.


We feel this is a problem with dual core CPUs because we did not experience this problem with the single core 2.8 GHz Prescott or our regular single core FX-55 we test with on a regular basis. This was only felt on the dual core CPUs. We aren?t sure if this is a game problem with the way it interacts with the CPUs or if it is a driver problem as well, all we know is that it happened with the dual core CPUs and it didn?t happen with the single core CPUs.


Another issue which really isn?t a problem is some weird framerate capping in World of Warcraft with dual core CPUs. Head back to page 6 of this evaluation and look at the World of Warcraft graphs. Look at the Pentium 4 2.8 GHz Prescott single core CPU graphs. You can see that the framerate has a maximum that goes well up to 100 FPS. Now look at the dual core CPU graphs. It seems the framerate is being capped at around 65 FPS. This is extremely odd, we verified VSYNC was off, our monitor was at 75 Hz anyways at 1600x1200, yet the framerate seemed to be capped at 65 FPS. This only occurred with the dual core CPUs. It is a weird issue but one that wasn?t detrimental to gameplay since 65 FPS is plenty of performance for smooth gameplay. It was just worth noting because there does seem to be something different going on in World of Warcraft between single and dual core CPUs.

So in conclusion I believe I'll take HardOCPs opinion and experience over nearly anyone elses.
Thats just me

I think you made a fine choice. But yes I personally would have gotten the 3800+ if buying today because these issues will prob be wrinkled out.
But as you said, you have the option to upgrade.. it requires less power, has less heat and frankly will knock the pants off a 3800+ X2 in gaming. Thats just the fact of the matter.

2.4ghz > 2x 2.0ghz in non-threaded gaming by far.
Of course you can overclock, but theres no guarantee there.. and I prefer if I can afford it, to have the 100% guaranteed stability of a non-overclocked rig.

I remember tons of people that had "stable" OCs found tons of issues with Doom3 when it first came out because it didnt like OC'd boxes.

Fast at stock is > than slower at stock.
And the 4000+ is simply superior to the 3800+ in gaming.. with no pitfalls like DualCore has currently.





I'm hanging onto my single core A64 like others because I dont need dual core.
Crysis is nothing.
When the multithreaded UnrealEngine and Source engine is out, I'll make sure to never buy another single core CPU again.

 

[MrUniq]

yea...i'm not suprised there is some issues with dual core. Game developers probably using shortcuts in their code to give the illusion of taking advantage of it. But yea..i think after this year they will have 'native' support for dual core in all new games.

 

[inveterate]

Originally posted by: MrUniq
Well if you don't plan on keeping your rig around for the next 2 or years than single core is still significant. 939 is on it's way out anyway..just rebuild again down the road.

I'm not bias..i just installed at 4600 x2 (love it) to hold me down until 2008.

"YOU WISH it'd last you that long. You hopping on the train to buy a dual core, shows u have the URGE man,, URGE to upgrade,, "ALL THE FREAKING TIME".. I myself am like this.. i'm willing to bet that u'll upgrade much sooner than 2008.

Single cores have a much better Chance of Overclocking than a Dual core. So yes that opteron mentioned above for only 120 is better than a 3800+,,

3800s reaching top top is like 2.7,, 2.4 is More than likely,, 2.6 is LUCKY. and if u use anything above a 7800GTX, u're best with an AMD proc that can do 2.6. and with 4000+ ur almost guareenteed of that. I'd still hit that opteron though.

 

[Crassus]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: inveterate
Any of you out there with x2 3800s I bet i can PWn u in any gaming bench with my 150 dollar opty

No you own me with your video card.. Games that's where it's at...processor is a negligible for the most part.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTEwOCwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

I agree on the gamins issue, but how can you overlook 2 cores for the price of one??? Whether he needs it now or down the road....Even you say the 3800+ can hit FX-57 levels...I think this was a bad move by someone who from his statements obviously was not well informed on dual cores of late...

Well the decision already been made time to look at positive and it's not like he bought a pentium D or anything.

Yes I agree 3800+ X2 is "the" processor to get from AMD today.

Actually, I think the way AMD CPUs are priced right now, the 4200+ is more appealing. Without any time investment I o/c'd it to 2.75ish GHz. it just feels smoother as before with a single core (3000+ o/c to 2.4ish GHz). I left the Taskmanager running on my 2nd screen while WoWing and even if the game doens't take advantage of the second core, all your background OS tasks will (I guess that also means grfx driver overhead etc.). I get an about 20% usage reading off the second core - which otherwise would also execute on your single core. I'm happy I went with the X2. Just my $0.02.