Gaming CPU

[darksum]

hi im building a gaming computer and need to know for now as well as the future if i should buy a 3700+ with a San Diego core or to just go with the X2 3800+. is the extra $100 worth it?

THIS IS STRICTLY A GAMING COMPUTER!

 

[SergeC]

If you don't plan to overclock, the 3700+ San Diego will yield much better performance in all current games. If you do, then it gets complicated. In the (near?) future, when games are coded to take advantage of multiple cores, the X2 will obviously be better, but as of now, no games use more than one core on a multicore machine anyway.

 

[darksum]

thats sort of a side question, how soon will games be coded to take advantage of the dual-core?

 

[Gamer X]

X2 3800+ = plays current games +plays future multithreaded games
3700+ =plays current games a bit better+doesn't play future multithreaded games

 

[tvdang7]

2007? i guess? ...

 

[Hyperlite]

Originally posted by: tvdang7
2007? i guess? ...

or now, i think fear and AOE3 are multithreaded. I think the X2 would be a better choice in the long run.

 

[the splat in the hat]

dual core pwns single core , and if you run fraps record in game program, dual core is the ONLY way, useing FRAPS really loads the cpu's up, and it really shows in performance, my fx55 @2.6 is no match for my 4400+ dual core @ 2.2 each , the only place my single core really pulls ahead is in Half Life 2 in single player mode , anything online is dual core turf, because of backround tasks , viris checher or whatever you want , mmm even encoding while you play, no no , there really is no comparison between dual core and single core, go dual.......

 

[Linflas]

So assuming the above scenario is it worth the extra cash to go with the Opteron 170 dual core instead of the X2 3800?

 

[Markbnj]

my fx55 @2.6 is no match for my 4400+ dual core @ 2.2 each

Not to mention that you can get 2.5 ghz pretty easily out of a 4400+, and some people have gotten 2.7+. I'm at 2.5 stable for a month, and I have a pretty crappy mobo for overclocking.

 

[Markfw]

I hace 2 3800's @ 2550 and one @2400 (can only set vcore at 1.4 on that board) a 4400+ @ 2550 and my 170@2600

 

[Concillian]

Originally posted by: darksum
thats sort of a side question, how soon will games be coded to take advantage of the dual-core?

They can now. But I think you are asking the wrong question.

The question I think you want to be asking is:
When will I really see a noticeable benefit from a dual core CPU in games?

I don't think many can argue that that time is here yet or will be here in the near future. My guess is it will easily be a year or more before that time comes, so if you are the type to upgrade reasonably often, you will probably not get any noticeable benefit from an x2. If you are the type to wait 3 years between upgrades, then it's probably worthwhile to get the "insurance" of an x2. But then the question is: are todays dual core CPUs going to be enough when that time comes? I mean how well to 2 and 3 year old CPUs perform in today's games? Not bad, sure, but a cheap modern CPU today can easily outpace the hot chip of a couple years ago.

Once games start coming out that virtually require dual core, it is my guess that dual core prices will likely plummet, at least on some models. Such that a decent gaming dual core machine will be more economically feasible than today.

I always buy computer technology for today, because who knows what tomorrow will really bring. Plus, I get more of a feeling of being "burned" if I buy for a future technology that doesn't materialize quite as expected.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Originally posted by: Concillian

Originally posted by: darksum
thats sort of a side question, how soon will games be coded to take advantage of the dual-core?

They can now. But I think you are asking the wrong question.

The question I think you want to be asking is:
When will I really see a noticeable benefit from a dual core CPU in games?

I don't think many can argue that that time is here yet or will be here in the near future. My guess is it will easily be a year or more before that time comes, so if you are the type to upgrade reasonably often, you will probably not get any noticeable benefit from an x2. If you are the type to wait 3 years between upgrades, then it's probably worthwhile to get the "insurance" of an x2. But then the question is: are todays dual core CPUs going to be enough when that time comes? I mean how well to 2 and 3 year old CPUs perform in today's games? Not bad, sure, but a cheap modern CPU today can easily outpace the hot chip of a couple years ago.

Once games start coming out that virtually require dual core, it is my guess that dual core prices will likely plummet, at least on some models. Such that a decent gaming dual core machine will be more economically feasible than today.

I always buy computer technology for today, because who knows what tomorrow will really bring. Plus, I get more of a feeling of being "burned" if I buy for a future technology that doesn't materialize quite as expected.

Great post! and right on the money!

I'm currently running a SD3700+ overclocked to 2.8ghz and it rocks in all current games. I don't do a lot of multi tasking or video encoding, therfore I won't upgrade to dual core until my SD isn't getting the job done, by then maybe games will be fully taking advantage of the second core and dual cores will be much cheaper

If I were starting from scratch on a new build, I'm not sure which way I would go as its a difficult choice at the moment. I guess if I had the extra bucks I would go with an x2 like everybody else

 

[aka1nas]

Originally posted by: Concillian

Originally posted by: darksum
thats sort of a side question, how soon will games be coded to take advantage of the dual-core?

They can now. But I think you are asking the wrong question.

The question I think you want to be asking is:
When will I really see a noticeable benefit from a dual core CPU in games?

I don't think many can argue that that time is here yet or will be here in the near future. My guess is it will easily be a year or more before that time comes, so if you are the type to upgrade reasonably often, you will probably not get any noticeable benefit from an x2. If you are the type to wait 3 years between upgrades, then it's probably worthwhile to get the "insurance" of an x2. But then the question is: are todays dual core CPUs going to be enough when that time comes? I mean how well to 2 and 3 year old CPUs perform in today's games? Not bad, sure, but a cheap modern CPU today can easily outpace the hot chip of a couple years ago.

Once games start coming out that virtually require dual core, it is my guess that dual core prices will likely plummet, at least on some models. Such that a decent gaming dual core machine will be more economically feasible than today.

I always buy computer technology for today, because who knows what tomorrow will really bring. Plus, I get more of a feeling of being "burned" if I buy for a future technology that doesn't materialize quite as expected.

All good points, but keep in mind that clock speed will likely not be increasing at the rate it has in the past for the at least the next few years barring some huge breakthrough in materials science. In 3 years it may be a choice between 2 moderately fast cores from 2005 or 4 slightly faster cores. They are going to have enough trouble getting decent performance gains from dual cores, don't expect them to be able to get anything close to linear scaling with 4 or more cores in just 3 years.

 

[Zebo]

How long you want to keep your computer? 2 years or more get 3800+..less than get 3700+.. kepp in mind resale will suck on 3700 though... I would'nt buy a single core CPU anymore.

 

[Shenkoa]

Before reading anyone elses posts.

At the moment I would not bother with a X2 for gaming, I mean yeah mutithreaded games are comming up but when??? and how much faster of gameplay will it offer and in which games??

Consider that games these days are more GPU limited, you would be better off with a high end single core CPU and a killer video card.

Things will be differents in a couple years, but hey you will want to upgrade by then any way !

 

[MBrown]

I thought FEAR was multithreaded.

 

[Unkno]

X2 3800+. Doesn't matter if games are multi-threaded or not, since that you'll get better fps when one core is devoted to gaming while the other handles all your background operations (anti-virus, firewall, OS, system files...) AND with multi-threaded drivers, your FPS would increase a lot. (Nvidia already has multithreaded drivers, ATI should have it in like 14 days or something)

 

[biostud]

go to xbitlabs.com click the CPU tab read the two articles about gaming and CPU's.

 

[caz67]

X2, single core is dying.

 

[crispy2010]

3700 sd is much more powerful than the 3800 x2, look at the benchmarks. The only thing the x2 is faster at is encoding and the such. My kids 754 3400+ killed my x2 3800+, this is with the same vid cards and the same ram.

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: crispy2010
3700 sd is much more powerful than the 3800 x2, look at the benchmarks. The only thing the x2 is faster at is encoding and the such. My kids 754 3400+ killed my x2 3800+, this is with the same vid cards and the same ram.

It depends on your video setting, click the links in my sig and see that a X2 4800+ can outperform the FX-57 in Serious Sam 2. But the bottom line is that the videocard is the limiting factor if you want to run with FSAA, AA, high details and high resolution. And since the computer is for gaming I guess that would be the limiting factor.

I got a X2 3800+ and o/c as I think that future games will benefit from it, but if using $100 more on the CPU means $100 less on videocard then it would be a bad advise for a gamer.

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: Shenkoa
Before reading anyone elses posts.

At the moment I would not bother with a X2 for gaming, I mean yeah mutithreaded games are comming up but when??? and how much faster of gameplay will it offer and in which games??

Consider that games these days are more GPU limited, you would be better off with a high end single core CPU and a killer video card.

Things will be differents in a couple years, but hey you will want to upgrade by then any way !

Unreal 3 engine games are supposed to be released during '06, but what the 2nd core will be used for we don't know. I think I saw somewhere it could be used to acces data from the HDD while you gamed so it could render the term "level" useless, as the 2nd core would load data to the memory as you advanced in the game, and the 1st core running the game smoothless.

 

[dlebeau]

Well, I am going with opteron or x2 only because I tend to run multiple instances of various games on the same machine. I think that will get easier, but otherwise I would be buying a decent single core and putting some more cash into different parts.