amd 939 cpu upgrade single or dual core?

[felang]

Ok, so my current setup is
mb: DFI INFINITY NF4 ULTRA
proc: 3200+ venice @ 2.6 ghz stable
ram: 2 gig dual channel @ 433 cas 2.5 (will not go any higher)
video: 7800gt

I've had this pc for about a year and am still very happy with it's performance, and wasn't really looking to upgrade but i thought i might as well get a faster cpu since 939 is getting phased out and current prices seem to be dirt cheap. Like I said, i currently run my processor at 2.6ghz. I use my pc mainly for gaming (bf2142 mostly) but recently have done a lot of xvid and wmv encoding.

I am currently looking at a 4000+ (single core) or maybe even an opty 170 (dual core). Both have 1mb l2 cache per core. Research I've done leeds me to believe I can realistically expect about 2.6-2.9 ghz from either option. So this is my question is it worth paying double for the opty? I am actually quite picky about running processes in the background and don't usually multi task (don't even run anti-virus) So that sort of negates the benefit of dual core setup presently, although I am well aware of upcoming games being multi-threaded. I expect to get a compeletely new system in about a year anyway. So single core for about 100 bucks or dual core for about 200?. I am not even considering an opty 165 as the clock speed would probably be quite similar or even lower than my current setup, what would you guys recommend?

 

[Regs]

I don't know of any games coming up being multi-treaded. If they are I doubt the performance benefit will be very quantitative. Multi-threaded programming is still in its very infancy and it will take awhile for programmers to take full advantage of it.

I'm sure others will agree with me but there is no point upgrading to another DDR system. At least an AM2 will get you another year or two before you will want to upgrade to DDR3. You have Core Duo out now and Barcelona coming out in a few months. You will have buyers remorse by October if not sooner.

 

[felang]

thanks for the reply, the thing is that i can get the 4400+ for under 80 bucks shipped, i thought it might be a worthwile upgrade until I get a new rig in about a year. I do understand that going the am2 or core duo route would be the best option but that just isn't in the cards for now...

 

[yh125d]

the 4000 will be a nice upgrade for $80. I'd go for it.

 

[o1die]

I recommend you sell your old cpu on ebay or your local paper, then proceed to purchase a new one. I have countless extra junk laying around that I've purchased over the years and haven't used. No point in upgrading unless you need it. You'll just have an extra cpu laying around. I give alot of stuff away now to friends and family members. I can't sell it at any reasonable price, with Fry's and Dell in my area.

 

[felang]

I just got an offer of 50$ for my 3200+ (I live in Mexico and hardware is a lot more expensive) so the upgrade to a 4000+ for only 30 bucks more seems like a no brainer... Still curious about that opty 170 though, although at about 180 it is a a lot more expensive and I may end up with bad stepping that won't go over 2.6ghz. I am still confused about something though, would an opteron 170 be faster than a 4400+ running at the same clock speed in a single thread app or game? I would guess so as the specs are the same otherwise, only difference being the extra core.

 

[f4phantom2500]

Originally posted by: felang
I just got an offer of 50$ for my 3200+ (I live in Mexico and hardware is a lot more expensive) so the upgrade to a 4000+ for only 30 bucks more seems like a no brainer... Still curious about that opty 170 though, although at about 180 it is a a lot more expensive and I may end up with bad stepping that won't go over 2.6ghz. I am still confused about something though, would an opteron 170 be faster than a 4400+ running at the same clock speed in a single thread app or game? I would guess so as the specs are the same otherwise, only difference being the extra core.

The 4400 is a dual core, at stock the 4400 should be faster since it's 2.2GHz and the Opteron is 2GHz, but if you had them both running at 2.2GHz any difference would most likely be within a margin of error. There's no real telling which would overclock better as you might get a dud ocer or phenomenal ocer in either case, but afaik you'd have a better chance with the opteron. However you should also consider that the 4400 is faster at stock, so that does potentially balance things a bit. Try to get one that you can learn the history of before you buy it, that way you know you'll be getting a good overclocker.