Conundrum -- Upgrade Socket 939 single core to dual core?

[WhipperSnapper]

I currently have a Socket 939 Opteron 148 and I am considering upgrading. I want to be able to game on this computer for the next three years with the primary and perhaps only game being the upcoming Unreal Tournament 3 (which will, reportedly, take advantage of dual core processors). Of course, it would also be nice if the computer were a little faster.

What would you guys recommend? Assume that my motherboard is comfortable with a 25% overclock to 250 Mhz but not much beyond that, in which case CPU multipliers become an issue.

The options are:

Dual core Athlon 3800 (2.0 x 512) or Athlon 4200 (2.2 x 512). These see to be available for under $80 shipped.

Dual core Opteron. An Opteron 165 (1.8 x 1 MB) goes for about $95.50 shipped. The 170 (2.0) is $114 shipped. The 175 (2.2) is $143 shipped. And the 180 (2.4) is $170 shipped. (Forget about the much more expensive 185.)

Might it make the most sense to get the Athlon 4200 and be happy with whatever overclock is possible on it? Or would it be better to get the Opteron 170 or 175 for significantly more money and enjoy the larger cache (1 MB v. 512) and better overclocking?

I'd rather have the Opteron 170 for an extra $18.50 over the 165, but does it make sense to spend $34+ more over the Athlon 4200? Is the Opteron 175 worth $29 more than the 170? If I had to choose right now I think I'd go with the 170.

Can we expect the Socket 939 dual core Opteron prices to decrease in the near future?


I also have a RAM issue. Although my 4 x 512 Corsair Value RAM survives stress tests, it causes Unreal Tournament 2004 to freeze in menu screens, so I'm currently running the computer at 2 x 512 but hope to be able to go to 4 x 512 for UT3. (Note that I don't have any problems with FEAR: Combat at 4 x 512; the problem only shows up with UT 2004.) I don't know if the issue is the RAM itself, that specific game's just disliking my RAM, or if it involves the combination of the motherboard and the RAM, in which case, if I were to get new RAM, I might as well just get a new mobo, new CPU, and new RAM.

Given that, might it make the most sense to just go with a new motherboard and socket (whether Intel 775 or AM2), new CPU, and new DDR2 RAM?

For now I'm planning to just upgrade the CPU and hope that the 4 x 512 RAM works with UT3. Otherwise I'll have to slug it out with the 2 x 512. Of course, I'm also hoping to do a video card upgrade, but I'd be doing that regardless. (Currently on a Radeon x800 GTO unlocked to 16 pipes and overclockable to x800xt speeds.)

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I'd keep it cheap and get the 4200 myself. As to the 4x512mb, are you using 2T/ Because it is absolutely necessary with 939 IME. Upping voltage and if need be, slightly relaxing timings can make a big difference for stability too.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
I'd keep it cheap and get the 4200 myself.

As would I, especially since it has a higher multiplier than the 165 & 170, which will help with overclocking. Of course, it also has a higher non-overclocked speed, in case you aren't able to overclock (much) with 4 sticks of RAM.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

The RAM issue is a problem that has frustrated me to no end. In the past I had run the computer for months with the 4 x 512. (I just wasn't playing UT 2004 at the time.) with 4 x 512 the computer was able to survive a Stress Prime 95 test and it runs FEAR: Combat without a problem. It also runs UT 2004 maps--if I open a map via the UT Editor (avoiding all menus) I can fly around the map and run and shoot without a problem. However--as soon as I open up an in-game menu the whole computer freezes. Go figure. After removing 2 x 512, leaving me with 2 x 512 installed and the in-game menus are fine. I posted on Corsair's forums and the RAM Guy suggested increasing the Northbridge voltage, though I'm not sure what the heck that would have to do with preventing a crash in an in-game menu. (I haven't tried it yet since I'd already removed 2 x 512 RAM.) I've also been through the RAM settings and made sure it was at 2T.

I'm hoping that UT3 won't have this problem so that I can have my 4 x 512 back againl

The 11x 4200 for under $80 is tempting. It doesn't have the 1 MB cache per core like the Opterons, but would I even notice a difference? I figure that an overclock on the 4200 ought to match up with an overclock on a 165 but that a 170 or 175 would beat it at overclocking.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper
The 11x 4200 for under $80 is tempting. It doesn't have the 1 MB cache per core like the Opterons, but would I even notice a difference? I figure that an overclock on the 4200 ought to match up with an overclock on a 165 but that a 170 or 175 would beat it at overclocking.

With your stated 250mhz limit does it really matter to you that the 170&175 might be capable of higher absolute clock speeds? The extra cache shouldn't make any real world difference in game performance, outside of perhaps, a few isolated examples. The vid card upgrade will do much more for that. The savings by getting the X2 can always go towards a slightly faster card too. In the end, the FPS difference will be effected far more by the GPU than CPU, so the 4200 overclocked or not is the best bang for buck pick imo.

 

[NoSoup4You]

The 4200+ is the way to go if your overclocking is limited by the 4 sticks of RAM. I don't seem to have any issue overclocking with 4 sticks on my DFI s939 board, but I run the RAM with a divider so it's not really an issue anyway.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

[EDIT -- I'm putting this in a separate thread.]

What's the difference between these two Athlon 4200's? One is a A64-42BV the other is a A64-42CD and they're almost the exact same price? One is an E4 stepping? Which one would you get?

Specifications:

* Mfr Part Number: ADA4200DAA5CD
* Process Type: AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core 4200+*
* Frequency: 2.2 GHz
* FSB: 2000MHz HT Speed
* Cache: 2x 512KB
* Process: 90nm SOI
* Socket: Socket 939
* Power Consumption: 89 W
* Package: OEM

* Mfr Part Number: ADA4200DAA5BV
* Process Type: AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core 4200+*
* Frequency: 2.2 GHz
* FSB: 2000MHz HT Speed
* Cache: 512KB x2
* Process: 90nm SOI
* Socket: Socket 939
* Core: Manchester
* Stepping: E4
* Package: OEM

 

[DAPUNISHER]

The CD is an E6 the BV is an E4, I think the E6 handles 4 sticks better without the 333mhz reduction. It has been a good while though, so others will have better feedback.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Thanks Dapunisher. Yup, just saw it at AMD's website. The BV is an E4 and the CD is an E6. So which one to get? Does one of the steppings overclock better than the other?

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: NoSoup4You
The 4200+ is the way to go if your overclocking is limited by the 4 sticks of RAM. I don't seem to have any issue overclocking with 4 sticks on my DFI s939 board, but I run the RAM with a divider so it's not really an issue anyway.

Couldn't I use a RAM divider to lower the speeds of the RAM? That's what I've been doing.