Difference between E8400 & Phenom X4 920/940

[choli00090]

Hello Everyone,

I currently have the C2D 8400 & was thinking about upgrading my processor & one of them I was looking at was the Phenon X4 920 or 940 & wanted to know what people thought of this cpu & if there would be a noticable difference. For the main part I do simple video editing & play some games.

Thanks

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

If you moved to a Phenom, you'd need to get a new motherboard.

For most games, an e8400 will be as good or better than most other CPU's.

IMO, there's no point in upgrading your CPU right now - and if you did, just get an Intel 9xx0 quad and go.

Check out AT's review of the newest Phenoms - the benchmarks include the e8400. http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...ts/showdoc.aspx?i=3512

 

[blackpanther26]

another thing to think about the price of the E8400 compared to the AMD Phenom II X3's. The E8400 is about $20 more than the 720 and $40 more than the 710.

 

[SlowSpyder]

It's kind of hard to compare them directly as one is a dual and the other is a quad. I would imagine the E8400 is faster at single threaded things, the Phenom at multithreaded. If you're thinking about going quad I would think your best bet would be to buy an Intel quad as your motherboard would probably accept it. That would be cheaper/easier then buying a motherboard/processor.

 

[AstroManLuca]

For your uses, there's absolutely no reason to upgrade. The E8400 is plenty fast. It should take to overclocking pretty well too.

Now, if you want gaming, that requires a decent video card. What do you have right now?

 

[LoneNinja]

Phenom II is a little slower clock for clock than the 45nm Intel C2D/C2Q, you'll loose a little performance in most applications or stay roughly the same. You'll only see improvements in a few games that handle quad core, video editing, professional software, overall multitasking and such. There is no way it would be worth the money to purchase an all new motherboard and processor. If you really want a quad just pick up a Q9400, it rivals the Phenom II 940 and you won't need a new motherboard.

 

[choli00090]

My video card is a Radeon x1950

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: choli00090
My video card is a Radeon x1950

You need a video card upgrade WAY more than a CPU upgrade.

 

[RallyMaster]

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: choli00090
My video card is a Radeon x1950

You need a video card upgrade WAY more than a CPU upgrade.

This.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: choli00090
My video card is a Radeon x1950

This needs to be upgraded first. Even with the best CPU in the world, you would not be able to play Fallout 3.

I might as well add some content to this post. As you can see in this tom's hardware CPU chart, 3DMark scores do not change all that much with CPU. Certain games, specifically RTS games, can be very CPU intense, but all other games are GPU.

Now looking at the GPU chart, we see that good video cards and bad video cards are orders of magnitude apart. Your card has a score of ~6700. My 8800GTX, which just barely runs Fallout 3 at 1680x1050, scores ~11200, and a Radeon 4870 worth about $210 scores a ~13000. It's not hard to see where you should be putting your upgrade money.

This sum of frames chart shows more of a real world performance result. Your card scores 217 frames at super high resolution. A Radeon 4870 gets a more reasonable 468 frames.

 

[choli00090]

After looking at the chart that was Flipped Gazette posted the link to, I would agree with everyone that technically there is really no reason for a cpu upgrade & if I did want one, to just get a Q9xxx & go with that.

For the video card issue, I will agree especially after looking at the charts on that, so my next upgrade will probably be a better video card.

So for video cards, what do you all recommend that is at at good pricing point for the type of card. I will say my monitor has the standard connection, & not near an HD tv so not sure if I need an HD card at the moment.

Thanks!!

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

What resolution do you game at, and what kind of budget?

Off the top of my head, the Radeon 4830, 4850 & Nvidia 9800gt seem like good values.

 

[choli00090]

When I do game, its usually set for the same resolution that my monitor can handle, which in this case would be 1280 x 1024 (yes I was just a regular standard 19" Lcd).

For a budget I would say between $100 - $200.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: choli00090
So for video cards, what do you all recommend that is at at good pricing point for the type of card. I will say my monitor has the standard connection, & not near an HD tv so not sure if I need an HD card at the moment.

When looking at performance, I strongly recommend you look at benchmarks that are done at very high resolution with AA and AF enabled. Even if your monitor sucks and you don't use either of those, the high resolution benchmarks give you an idea of what the cards are capable of doing, and whether or not a card will be able to play games in the future.

crysis at high res, high quality. When settings are pushed to the extreme, differences between cards really start to stand out.

The cards to check out would be ATI Radeon 4850, ATI Radeon 4870, Nvidia GTX 260, Nvidia GTX 280. The Radeon 4870 1gb model is arguably the best value at ~$200. Be sure to read the video card section of the forum before deciding.

 

[ural]

Here is a good GPU analysis: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3517.
Good thing about this particular analysis is the "Performance per $100", i.e. how much bang you get for your buck. There were 7 games tested, so I added up "performance per buck" for all 7 games for HD 4850, 4870, 4870 1GB, 4870 X2 and 9800 GTX+, GTX 260(top NVIDIA "performers per buck"). For 1680x1050 resolution HD 4870 512MB came on top with 219.6(167.34 in CrossFire) cumulative score, followed by 4850 at 210.2(179.49 in CF), 9800 GTX+ at 202.4(177.34 in SLI), 4870 1GB at 180.96 (130.56 4870 X2) and GTX 260 at 156.05 (122.41 in SLI). For 1920x1200 resolution - 4870 at 192.63 (154.46 in CF), 9800GTX+ at 176.2 (155.91 in SLI), 4850 at 168.9 (146.47 in CF), 4870 1GB at 158.69(117.67 in 4870 X2), GTX 260 at 152.8 (109.97 in SLI).

It is clear that 4870 512MB gives the most bang for the buck, with 4850 right next to it. So if you want a card that will work hardest for your money - it is 4870 512 or 4850. And if you factor in the Power consumption - I think 4850 is the sweet spot.

As far as the CPU goes - E8400 will perform similarly or better in games compared Phenom 940. Check here:http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...ts/showdoc.aspx?i=3492

 

[blackpanther26]

This 4870 should satisfy you it's $164.99 before a $20 dollor MIR. http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814161236

 

[octopus41092]

Originally posted by: RallyMaster

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: choli00090
My video card is a Radeon x1950

You need a video card upgrade WAY more than a CPU upgrade.

This.

Get a Video card upgrade. I'd recommend a HD4870 at your price point. This will last you plenty long seeing as how you run games at 1280x1024. You should be able to run everything with all the eye-candy.

 

[choli00090]

Well Folks, I pulled the trigger & ordered the 4870 from NewEgg. They also had a promo code for another 10 (or was it 15%) off.

Yesterday I had stopped at Fry's & picked up the 4670, thinking that the choices recommended was something like 4870 or 4670, but it was actually the 48xx.

Oh well, so I get to go back & return the card to Fry's. All I can say is that the price difference between the B&M Fry's & Newegg is quite a bit (not saying that Fry's deals are bad, cause a lot of them are pretty good)

For my processor upgrade, if I do go ahead & do it (still not sure), I would probably go for the Q9650, and reading some of the reviews, people have been able to get this chip to overclock to anywhere between 3.7 - 4.0 ghz, or am I wrong on that?

Thanks for the video card recommendation!!

 

[Gikaseixas]

very good choice, enjoy your new toy.

For cpu upgrade just get a Intel quad. Why spend $$$ on a new mobo and cpu? Q9550 will do just great, it oc's very well also (3.7ghz to 4.0ghz is comon on these too)

 

[Denithor]

The only reason you should consider a quad is if you do a lot of video encoding (of the HD variety). The extra cores won't help in 90% of games at all so your only benefit will come in your encoding (which can be a significant boost).

Certainly not enough of an advantage to switch cpu/mobo. If you feel you gotta have a quad just grab a Q9400 or a Q9550 (unless you can get a deal on a Q9650).

Keep in mind the Q9650 is literally two e8400 processors bolted together under the same heat spreader. The Q9550 is the same but with slightly lower clocks (2.83GHz), while the Q9400 has less L2 cache (3MB per pair of cores - like two e7x00 chips stuck together).