From 3200+ to X2 4400 (s939) : worth $100 ?

[DetConan]

Here is my system
Case : Sonata II, 450 PSU
MSI K8N-NEO4f s939
3200+
XFX 7600gt xxx
2 X 512 DDR

Mainly to play (for me) and scrapbooking, music, internet (for my wife)
No Overclocking.

For now, this system is very good for me. In a perfect world (where s939 would not have been phased out), I would not upgrade now. But as the s939 processors are disappearing, i feel that I have to upgrade before it becomes impossible.

I Found a X2 4400 s939 for $100. Would the upgrade be performance-wise ? Should I go for it, or just keep my money and upgrade the videocard later next year, when the prices of the 8800 will drop a little, for instance ? Would a X2 4400 make a better use of this 8800 card than the 3200+ ?

 

[requiem1]

im in almost exactly the same boat as you, so far it seems like people have told me to get a total of 2gb ram and the 8800GT - to get the most bang for buck for doing a current upgrade. I plan on doing a full upgrade in 1 year.

 

[NXIL]

Dear Det,

that is a tough one: going from a single core 3200 to a dual core 4400 is definitely going to speed some things up, but not everything. Web surfing, email: no change, on course, unless you are also running things in the background like virus check, etc.

Games: slightly better with the dual core, since you are going to 2.2 ghz on each core from one 2.0 ghz core.

A year ago I went from a 3000 (1.8ghz?) to a dual core 2 x 2.0 ghz socket 939, and it has worked out really well, since I like to have a lot of windows open and run several programs at once....it has made the machine much more responsive....and, it cost me more than $100 at the time.

So, I would say "yes", will make that machine viable as an email/web surf/back up/video encode/home server/music machine that you can keep when you upgrade to a quad core game machine later.....

HTH,

NXIL

 

[serialb]

I am also on a S939 (3200 Winchester), DDR, NF4 config from 2 years ago. I'd say you would be better off to begin your rig makeover from the graphics department. The current platform we have is really coming to an end.

I actually picked up 2GB of DDR2. And I am painfully waiting for the next gen CPU will become affordable before Vista chokes my current system to death.

 

[WildHorse]

well I just changed out a 3200+ for an X2 4200+ (both overclocked), and increased from 1 GB to 2 GB of RAM.

I can't really tell any difference at all! I don't perceive a performance improvement. If I had it to do over, I wouldn't. I'd have been better off waiting for the next generation of cpu's & motherboards coming soon.

But if you decide to forge ahead, you might consider downshifting from that X2 4400+ for $100, to instead buying the X2 4200+ S939 for $63.50 with free shipping from Newegg. It's a better deal.


Edit: If you go to Newegg.com and register for an account there, which is free to do, be sure to check the box to receive Newegg's weekly news bulletin with special promotion codes for hot deals.

This week they have that X2 4200+ S939 for $50-something (I don't remember, deleted my copy of it) with free shipping IF you have their newsletter promo code. Typically those special price deals die in 1 week.

Maybe you could ask other posters here for that promo code to score the low price this week?

 

[fluffmonster]

games will gain smoothness since they won't have to share a core with other processes. I went from a 3700 to an x2 4400 about a year and a half ago and noticed some improvement in games. Some other generally better snappiness, and program hangs didn't slow down the whole system since they only choke one of the cores. I don't regret the move. I'd say it could be worth $65, but maybe not $100. However, if you ever do any video processing the second core will make a tremendous difference.

 

[Denithor]

I would second the $65 option but only if the system has a sluggish feel in games. A64-3200+ is really just overkill for scrapbooking/general use and the X2-4200+ is drastically more so. If the processor is currently acceptable for your games don't spend the money.

Also, if you plan to move to Vista, that should be the time for a full system refresh. You will need 2GB RAM minimum for Vista (4GB recommended if you go to 64-bit Vista) and I would not recommend spending $65-100 on a cpu and another $100 for a second gig of memory for a socket 939 system. $200 will go a long way toward a complete rebuild especially with prices where they are these days.

 

[felang]

If you plan on playing modern games, then a dual core will definitely help. Most games that are coming out are multithreaded and actually use both cores.

I went from a 4000+ single core @3.0ghz to a 4200+ @2.8ghz dual and have definitely noticed an improvement. Keep in mind that you will need a decent video card. I went from a 7800gt to a 8800 gts 640mb and can run all current games maxed out at 1680x1050. My roomate has the exact same video card paired with an q6600 and while he does get an an increase of about 5-10 fps in games, it is not really noticeable during actual gameplay.

what you could do is get that 8800gt and 4400 for about $350, and I'm sure the rig will last you at least another year. Also, you could always swap that 8800gt into a new rig if you decide to go ahead buy a whole new system...
although ideally you would also need to get another gb of ram.

 

[requiem1]

i would just save the $100...get a AM2 and than get like...a 6000 version for like 150$...

 

[kenrippy]

the dual core will be a great help if you want to do any cpu intensive apps, while doing something else on the side. (multitasking)

you'll find that with a dual core, you can burn a dvd/cd or surf the net while you're encoding video with no lag. that's something i could never do with a single core without noticeable lag.

 

[m1ldslide1]

Originally posted by: Denithor
I would second the $65 option but only if the system has a sluggish feel in games. A64-3200+ is really just overkill for scrapbooking/general use and the X2-4200+ is drastically more so. If the processor is currently acceptable for your games don't spend the money.

Also, if you plan to move to Vista, that should be the time for a full system refresh. You will need 2GB RAM minimum for Vista (4GB recommended if you go to 64-bit Vista) and I would not recommend spending $65-100 on a cpu and another $100 for a second gig of memory for a socket 939 system. $200 will go a long way toward a complete rebuild especially with prices where they are these days.

Seconded.

 

[formulav8]

I say a 4400+ would be a good upgrade. At stock speeds you can see up to 10%-15% or so increase in performance and much more increases in multi-threading situations. Ocing will obviously bring performance even higher.

BUT, there are cheaper dual core s939's like the 3800+ and 4200+. I believe the 3800+ X2 can be had for $60-$70? So, you could get similar clockspeed performance as your 3200+ but the potential for much higher threading based performance.

Overclocking either of the X2's will make it even better. I have a 3800+ X2 and can do 2600mhz with a little voltage bump. Thats alomost 25% increase in clockspeed performance over the stock 3200+.

But anyways, I say you should upgrade to a s939 x2. Also the 4400+ s939's are actually rare these days if you care about that


Jason

 

[DetConan]

In fact, I have just seen that the price of $100 is only good on the US site of Tigerdirect. On the canadian site, it is $120. And I have to add the shipping and taxes. So it would be $150. Is it still worth it ?

Is Tigerdirect a good site to buy from ? (As I am in Canada, Newegg is not an option)

 

[NXIL]

So it would be $150. Is it still worth it?

I would vote no. You said in your original post:

For now, this system is very good for me. In a perfect world (where s939 would not have been phased out), I would not upgrade now. But as the s939 processors are disappearing, i feel that I have to upgrade before it becomes impossible.

There is so much good stuff coming down the pike right now: better video cards, supposedly in a week or two, quad cores, DDR3 memory that runs at 1600 with tight timings, (not the DDR 400 memory you have now)--more power efficiency: maybe best to put the $150 canadian $ in the porcine bank, and wait until you get a game that needs lots of memory and a quad core....

HTH

NXIL

 

[GuitarDaddy]

If you don't upgrade often and gaming is the most CPU intense thing you do, I would say it's a good upgrade. I just upgraded my sons s939 rig from a 3200+ to a 4200+ (oc'd to 2.7ghz) for $70 +$45 for an extra gig of DDR and swapped an 8800gts 320mb in place of an X800gto. I'm hoping to get another 2-3yrs of life out of it.

IMO the $115 additional investment in the s939 platform is well worth it, if it extends the usefull life of the machine a couple of years.

If you like to upgrade more often than 2-3yrs and or you do alot of video/graphics type work or Folding at Home type stuff, then I would definately recommend to go ahead and make the switch to an Intel platform with a quadcore.

 

[spittledip]

Originally posted by: felang
If you plan on playing modern games, then a dual core will definitely help. Most games that are coming out are multithreaded and actually use both cores.

I went from a 4000+ single core @3.0ghz to a 4200+ @2.8ghz dual and have definitely noticed an improvement. Keep in mind that you will need a decent video card. I went from a 7800gt to a 8800 gts 640mb and can run all current games maxed out at 1680x1050. My roomate has the exact same video card paired with an q6600 and while he does get an an increase of about 5-10 fps in games, it is not really noticeable during actual gameplay.

what you could do is get that 8800gt and 4400 for about $350, and I'm sure the rig will last you at least another year. Also, you could always swap that 8800gt into a new rig if you decide to go ahead buy a whole new system...
although ideally you would also need to get another gb of ram.

Agreed, but why the 8800gt? People need not recommend which GPU to get until we see the HD3000 series and the 8800GT reviews. Do not a get any video card until you see them reviewed. Then you can make a decision based upon knowledge rather than bias.

Too many people are recommending one card or the other before even seeing reviews to compare them. Doesn't make sense.

 

[felang]

Originally posted by: spittledip

Originally posted by: felang
If you plan on playing modern games, then a dual core will definitely help. Most games that are coming out are multithreaded and actually use both cores.

I went from a 4000+ single core @3.0ghz to a 4200+ @2.8ghz dual and have definitely noticed an improvement. Keep in mind that you will need a decent video card. I went from a 7800gt to a 8800 gts 640mb and can run all current games maxed out at 1680x1050. My roomate has the exact same video card paired with an q6600 and while he does get an an increase of about 5-10 fps in games, it is not really noticeable during actual gameplay.

what you could do is get that 8800gt and 4400 for about $350, and I'm sure the rig will last you at least another year. Also, you could always swap that 8800gt into a new rig if you decide to go ahead buy a whole new system...
although ideally you would also need to get another gb of ram.

Agreed, but why the 8800gt? People need not recommend which GPU to get until we see the HD3000 series and the 8800GT reviews. Do not a get any video card until you see them reviewed. Then you can make a decision based upon knowledge rather than bias.

Too many people are recommending one card or the other before even seeing reviews to compare them. Doesn't make sense.

I was just using the 8800gt as an example, maybe what I should of said is get a card for around $250, whatever card gets you more bang for your buck, IMO that price range seems to be the sweet spot price vs. performance wise.

 

[WildHorse]

Look:

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2111283&enterthread=y

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: kenrippy
the dual core will be a great help if you want to do any cpu intensive apps, while doing something else on the side. (multitasking)

you'll find that with a dual core, you can burn a dvd/cd or surf the net while you're encoding video with no lag. that's something i could never do with a single core without noticeable lag.

How do you keep the HD from being a bottleneck? Both video encoding and DVD burning use the HD quite a bit.

 

[suklee]

I just went from a Venice 3000+ (stock 1.8GHz, OC'd to 2.25GHz) to a Toledo x2 4200+ (stock 2.2GHz, OC'd to 2.75GHz) and I've been happy with it. I generally like to have a ton of windows / browser tabs open so the second core definitely helps in that respect. I paid about $75 for mine.

I'm maxed out with 2GB of RAM (only two slots) and I've got a 7800GTX in my SN25P. Of course, I talked myself into buying a 500GB Seagate to go along with the CPU and now I'm even eyeing the 8800GT for BF2142, TF2, etc.

 

[BlueFlamme]

Been outta the hardware mix for awhile (having kids'll do that!)

I'm in a imilar situation here, looking for suggestions. I use the system to game and typically older games (newest being Company of Heroes and CS:S). Just upgraded to a 22" lcd and the native resolution dragged down my fps. Turned off the majority of the detail features just to be keep up in 4x4 multiplayer. Here is my rig:

Opteron 146
EVGA GeForce 7800 GT 256MB
EVGA nForce 4 SLI
G.Skill 2 x 1GB PC 3200 (2-3-2-5)

I'm looking to protect myself to play some future games (Starcraft 2) and not have to do a major upgrade for a long while (again, kids!)

Is it worth the $65 to get the X2 4200+ over OCing my Opt 146 to 2.8-3.0GHz?

Even with the 4200+, would my system be able to keep up with a future upgrade to a 8800 GT (hoping they'll be under $200 by Dec 08).


Thanks for any replies!

 

[taltamir]

horrible upgrade idea...
You will get more from your money getting a new video card (3850, 3870, 8800GT are the only ones worth buying ATM)
You will get way more upgrading ram from 1 to 2 gigs... If you plan on vista get 4 gigs.

I would honestly recommend you either wait a bit, or just go ahead and make a full system refresh right now.
I have been buying AMD processors exlusively for 4 years but the time has finally come where intel is the better deal. Don't upgrade to AM2. Get C2D instead. with 2-4gigs of ram and a new video card.

 

[BlueFlamme]

Originally posted by: taltamir
horrible upgrade idea...
You will get more from your money getting a new video card (3850, 3870, 8800GT are the only ones worth buying ATM)
You will get way more upgrading ram from 1 to 2 gigs... If you plan on vista get 4 gigs.

I would honestly recommend you either wait a bit, or just go ahead and make a full system refresh right now.
I have been buying AMD processors exlusively for 4 years but the time has finally come where intel is the better deal. Don't upgrade to AM2. Get C2D instead. with 2-4gigs of ram and a new video card.

I have 2gigs of RAM and according to Toms Hardware vid charts the 8800 GTS is only is 3-6 fps increase over my 7800 GT. $250 for the 8800 GT is well above my price range.

I was never intending to switch to AM2.

 

[m1ldslide1]

Originally posted by: BlueFlamme

Originally posted by: taltamir
horrible upgrade idea...
You will get more from your money getting a new video card (3850, 3870, 8800GT are the only ones worth buying ATM)
You will get way more upgrading ram from 1 to 2 gigs... If you plan on vista get 4 gigs.

I would honestly recommend you either wait a bit, or just go ahead and make a full system refresh right now.
I have been buying AMD processors exlusively for 4 years but the time has finally come where intel is the better deal. Don't upgrade to AM2. Get C2D instead. with 2-4gigs of ram and a new video card.

I have 2gigs of RAM and according to Toms Hardware vid charts the 8800 GTS is only is 3-6 fps increase over my 7800 GT. $250 for the 8800 GT is well above my price range.

I was never intending to switch to AM2.

You should double-check that Toms hardware chart - I believe you misread it. I upgraded from 7800GT to a GTS and am getting more like 30-40 fps increase. Every benchmark I've seen (oblivion, far cry, fear, bf2, bioshock, so on and so forth) agrees. The 7800GT is now lower mid-range, while the GTS is lower high-end. If you're still in doubt, then I can probably find some articles for you.

If your fps tanked after switching to a 1680x1050 monitor, I think it's pretty apparent that your bottleneck is your graphics card. That said, CS:S should still get excellent performance with a 7800GT - I have no idea why you would have to turn down detail settings. I would spend some time benchmarking your system and testing for stability. (3dmark06, prime95) Something just doesn't sound right about what you're experiencing.

As far as your real question, I would not recommend upgrading to dual-core unless you are going to do video encoding, heavy multitasking, or start playing a game that REALLY uses both cores (Supreme Commander is about the only one out right now). Otherwise I would hold off a few months and build a new setup in the spring. By then that $65 will get you a processor that's more than twice as fast as the 4200. Not to mention you'll get two gigs of ddr2-800 for like $25.

In the meantime it might be fun to learn how to OC your 146. Learning how to tweak and squeeze every last bit out of the thing could easily hold you off a few months.

 

[Backdraft11]

I'm in a similar boat, but I say just wait until you have enough cash to do a full upgrade. You can easily go to a Q6600, 8800GT, and 4GB DDR2 for under $800 (assuming you already have a case and decent PSU), and once all the new hardware is out the price will drop more. That's why I'm waiting to do a full upgrade instead of doing incremental upgrades that will only help a bit.