Dual-core NOW! or later?

[c0d1f1ed]

Hi all,

I was wondering what your opinions are about investing in a dual-core Athlon system. I really like dual-core (works really smooth and it's very future proof), but the prices are close to insane. On the other hand, if I buy a cheap single-core processor now, how long will it take before dual-core becomes really affordable so I can upgrade? Or is it a wise choice to just go for dual-core and use it for a long time?

It all comes down to: how fast will the prices drop? If they will drop in the next few months, I'd choose a cheap single-core now and upgrade a little later. If they stay high for a long time, I might as well shell out the cash since I want dual-core as soon as reasonably possible...

It also suprises me that there aren't any Athlon 64 X2, 2.0 GHz processors. Is it expected that AMD will lauch such lower clocked models in the near future (i.e. they've saved them up to be able to flood the market), or is production capacity just insufficient?

Anyway, buy now or wait? Thanks,

c0d1f1ed

 

[bREwIn dOdgEr dUDe]

huh...............?..... lower clocked x2processors, AMD saving up?....... get a 3200 64 venice, call it a day... should keep you sufficient for a good two years.... start reading more CpU forums...

 

[Xcobra]

yup go venice and dont worry about upgrading for like two or three years...

 

[c0d1f1ed]

That's not an option. I want a dual-core system as soon as reasonably possible, without throwing money out the window. I'm an amateur programmer so I'd like to have the most recent technology at a fair price. So all I'm trying to find out is whether it's worth waiting a few more months (filling the gap with the cheapest single-core processor), or if the wait will be so long that it's better to buy a dual-core right away.

I hope that clarifies my question?

 

[Cheesetogo]

AMD will probably release a 2 ghz dual core soon, which would probably run about 350-400. In the meantime, you could get a 3000 venice or a sempron.

 

[c0d1f1ed]

Thanks Cheesetogo, that's the kind of information I was looking for!

 

[bersl2]

Once retailers start getting their shipments, prices should come back down closer to the per-1000 prices a few weeks after. So unless anybody has any insight on the supply problems AMD seems to be having, wait and see.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Based on the lack of information of lower speed X2's in AMD's roadmaps and based on the current low production and supply of the current X2's, I do not believe you'll see a lower speed X2 til the end of the year. Thus, I don't see prices dropping down below MSRP any time in the future. AMD has also stated that they don't want to price the X2 like Intel is doing with their dual-cores b/c it would overlap into their single core products and cause confusion.

Go single core and buy someone's Socket 939 X2 when that person upgrades to a Socket M X2.

 

[Mattd46612]

Venice 3000+ for now and upgrade when the prices become a little more reasonable. You can OC the Venice so it will keep your comp flying until you feel the time is right.

 

[Zim]

Originally posted by: bREwIn dOdgEr dUDe
huh...............?..... lower clocked x2processors, AMD saving up?....... get a 3200 64 venice, call it a day... should keep you sufficient for a good two years.... start reading more CpU forums...

If you specifically want a dual core processor then a 3200+ 64 isn't going to be of interest. Personally I want an X2 and even if you clocked your Venice's to 10GHz I wouldn't be interested. Dual core is the future... if you read the cpu forums.

I think the prices should come down under $400 for an X2 4200+ as soon as the supply chain stablizes. That might be by the end of this year, although I just don't know what AMD's plans are. What I can say with reasonable certainty is that now isn't the time to buy if you're looking for value.

And as for an AMD 64 3200+ keeping you satisfied for the next two years (even if overclocked)... are you telling me that at this time next year when everyone is running their Athlon X2's and their Pentium D's that you're gonna be happy? Good for you if you are! If that's the case then the processor the guy already has will probably do for the next two years. I have an Athlon XP Mobile clocked to 3000+ and it could do the next two years if I wasn't too picky.

And BTW, X2's overclock too!

 

[superfly27]

Yeah, I've seen some benchmarks and the 3000+ socket 939 is a pretty good deal.
I know what you mean about not knowing what to do. I couldn't stand my Celeron 667 MHz and Geforce2 MX200. So, I got a cheap Duron 1.8 GHz and Ti4200. Believe it or not, those parts were completely brand new. But I did build my rig thinking I will eventually upgrade to dual core. I learned how to build a machine just to do that so it would be cheaper when I will.

Anyway, if I can't wait again to upgrade when UT2007 comes out and dual core prices are too high, I know AMD has a Sempron 3700+ on their roadmap. So, I would get that and an Abit KV8 Pro.

 

[phaxmohdem]

Seeing that you are an amateur programmer... My guess is that you would like a dual core box as soon as possible so that you can practice writing multiithreaded code?

If I were you I would go ahead and purchase an X2 4200 (Or if you need to be manly and show off a bit the 4400+) Yes the prices are higher on these chips, however if you want to start writing multithreaded apps, get crackin now and ride the wave of software that will be coming soon.

My suggestion in short: buy the low end X2 NOW, and if in the future you need more horsepower for some reason, you can always trade up to a newer model which will be cheaper by then anyway.

Don't expect single core AMD's to drop dramatically any time soon.

 

[imported_Otter]

I doubt we'll see X2's come down to $400 this year. As has been mentioned already in this thread, AMD wasn't originally planning on a budget dual core. Now that they've seen the demand for dualcore desktop processors, they might change their minds, but I don't expect them to come out with anything cheap very soon. They will probably sell quite a few dual cores in the five to six hundred dollar range before demand slacks off enough and their production ramps up enough to warrant a budget chip. Also, when the dual cores do become cheap, that's going to knock down the resale value of your single core quite a bit. In the long run, buying only one CPU might not be all that much more expensive.

My guess would be that by mid-July we'll see prices come down to what people call the MSRP (AFAIK, AMD doesn't actually release an MSRP). If you can wait till then or maybe early August, you can probably get one for $540 to $600, depending on how much cache you want and where you get it. AMD might surprise us, but I think cheap dual cores in the next six months are a long shot. If you can afford that and you'll actually use the second core, then I think you'd be better off buying now/soon.

That's how I've placed my bet. I've got a 4400 Toldeo on order from TankGuys for just under $600 shipped, and I'll cancel that if I see a reliable vendor with the part in stock at a reasonable price before TG can ship.

Oh, one thing about the X2's that might concern you as a programmer: They don't seem to support the big-brotherish "security" features (like DRM and "trusted computing") that will be required to run Windows Longhorn. From what I've read, Longhorn will run with an X2, but it will be crippled in various ways. It might be something like running in safe mode with Win2k or XP. The next generation of AMD dual cores for socket M2 will support corporations taking control of what you do with your computer so you can run Longhorn normally. They're calling it "presidio". Romantic name for for a power grab, eh? But the M2 CPU's won't be hitting the street for about a year, and I wouldn't count on those being introduced at $300 either.

 

[Sentry2]

Just wait until the M2 socket comes out.......then you can buy my X2 4400+
Make you a great deal

 

[c0d1f1ed]

Thanks for all the opinions! Although they are a bit confusing...

Anyway, I'm the kind of person who bought a Celeron 1200 MHz just for the SSE capabilities, while there were much 'faster' Athlons at that time which were just as cheap. I used SSE very intensively and I still don't regret that choice. SSE alone made my applications run much faster on the Celeron than any Athlon without SSE. So now I really want dual-core as soon as possible.

I'm starting to believe that prices won't drop fast. There's the Athlon 4000+ and Athlon 4200+, and they're not going to make a dual-core with a lower rating, nor will they make the 4200+ cheaper than the 4000+. Unless... they change the naming scheme. I suppose that isn't expected to happen and AMD will just slowly remove the single-core processors and introduce new dual-core processors (on socket M2) with even higher ratings next year?

Cheers,

c0d1f1ed

 

[BlingBlingArsch]

lol, X2 are the latest highend products and out for only 1 month and some are already asking for price drops. wont happen until September or xmas.

 

[BlingBlingArsch]

and let me add this: Think twice if u really need a dualcore. Maybe ur doing weeks of rendering or ur encoding alot of stuff, but if ur just programming this and that u wont even use all the power an X2 can give u. Just dont buy it becuz everyone else is talking about it. Think bout what ur really doin with ur comp and then decide.

 

[c0d1f1ed]

Originally posted by: BlingBlingArsch
Think twice if u really need a dualcore. Maybe ur doing weeks of rendering or ur encoding alot of stuff, but if ur just programming this and that u wont even use all the power an X2 can give u. Just dont buy it becuz everyone else is talking about it. Think bout what ur really doin with ur comp and then decide.

Trust me, I know exactly what dual-core has to offer. And it's not during the programming that I'll see the benefits, but when running the multithreaded multimedia applications I develop. So I definitely want dual-core, no doubt about that. I was just wondering whether it would be smarter to wait a few more months if prices are going to drop fast.

But I think you're right about the price drop...

 

[Capt Caveman]

Bite my tongue, looks like there will be a lower priced X2.

X2 3800+ $345 on August 1

 

[clarkey01]

Originally posted by: Cheesetogo
AMD will probably release a 2 ghz dual core soon, which would probably run about 350-400. In the meantime, you could get a 3000 venice or a sempron.

The 3800 X2, due next month, about 350 ~

 

[clarkey01]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Bite my tongue, looks like there will be a lower priced X2.

X2 3800+ $345 on August 1

Beat me to it ^

 

[c0d1f1ed]

Thanks Capt Caveman! If this is true then Cheesetogo was right-on. So what I'll do is get the cheapest Venice, wait a month or two, and if there's a cheap dual-core I'll buy that one, else I'll buy the 4200+ anyway.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Sounds like a good plan. Like the current pricing situation, the X2 3800+ will probably be priced at $400, thanks to the price gougers out there but go down in a month or so. But I see it being a very popular cpu for the money.

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: Otter
Oh, one thing about the X2's that might concern you as a programmer: They don't seem to support the big-brotherish "security" features (like DRM and "trusted computing") that will be required to run Windows Longhorn. From what I've read, Longhorn will run with an X2, but it will be crippled in various ways. It might be something like running in safe mode with Win2k or XP. The next generation of AMD dual cores for socket M2 will support corporations taking control of what you do with your computer so you can run Longhorn normally. They're calling it "presidio". Romantic name for for a power grab, eh? But the M2 CPU's won't be hitting the street for about a year, and I wouldn't count on those being introduced at $300 either.

Not that I have too much doubt about your statements (never underestimate large corporations' desire to shove DRM down our throats), but do you have the links to where you read that?

And on the topic: If you have the money now, you might as well get an X2 4200+, instead of getting a cheaper single core and then buying a cheaper dual core later, because you'll end up spending just about as much money. If, however, you need a new system now, and can't afford a dual core CPU at this time, then the latter strategy makes perfect sense.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Someone wrote: Just dont buy it becuz everyone else is talking about it.

Someone else asked me "Why do you 'need' the extra speed?"

And my answer was: "Surfers are people; people don't 'need' to surf -- they just do it."

Will I really get maximum value out of an SLI-enabled rig? Probably not.

Will I really reap benefits from a dual-core processor? Probably, but I don't 'need' them.

Eventually, though, I'm gonna do it all.

Now -- the question that has not been asked on this thread, which is exclusively about the Athlon 64 X-2. "Will Intel eventually get their act together and evolve the Smithfield and future dual cores into something that at least breaks even with AMD?"

Or "When will Intel introduce a dual-core with hyperthreading enabled?"

Sooner or later, I will have to decide once and for all to defect from Intel and become an AMD advocate. Between the "Green" awards and the performance of the AMD dual-cores, it looks as though I'm headed that way.

That Tom's Hardware marathon benchmark comparison not only broke INtel's back -- it broke the Smithfield.

Anyway, if I "needed" to do it now -- as the originator of this thread seems to indicate for himself, I'd go ahead and get a 4200+ or 4400+ dual core rather than go through this two-stage wallet-leakage experience. If you were planning to over-clock or experiment with over-clocking, you could get the cheaper and slower dual core (such as the one expected in August), then flip it on EBay later and put the money into the faster model. Those are the expected costs of over-clock experiments, anyway.