Opty vs. X2

[nikko]

ok, i have some questions about what the difference is. i've read a few different threads about the same topic, but honestly, i'm still confused.

From what I've read, Optys and X2 are basically the same, but Optys are supposedly better because they are intended for servers and are thus more reliable. Is that true? And what does it mean in real world performance?

Another thread I read said deciding between an Opty and X2 depends on your mobo and RAM, but I'm not really sure how. In my case I'm gonna have to buy a new mobo too, so I guess that part isn't a consideration. However, I do have 1 gig of PC3200 RAM (two sticks of 512) that I want to be able to use in my new system. Actually, I want to upgrade to 2 gigs, so I need a mobo that will support 4 sticks of 512. Anyway, knowing that I want to have 2 gigs of PC3200 RAM in my system, does that steer me to an Opty or an X2? Or should it not affect my decision either way?

By the way, the computer I'm upgrading is primarily used for audio & video decoding/encoding and gaming.

Thanks in advance for any help you can provide.

 

[terry107]

Opteron processors are put through a much more demanding testing process; therefore, these processors can handle more before they actually fail. In other words, the overclock very well. I'm running an Opteron 165 (1.8ghz stock) at 2.7ghz and it's perfectly stable on both cores. The Opterons were cheaper than the X2s at one time, but AMD has recently upped the price on them to encourage more people to buy the X2s. If you're planning to overclock, I would recommend an Opteron.

 

[robertk2012]

Originally posted by: nikko
ok, i have some questions about what the difference is. i've read a few different threads about the same topic, but honestly, i'm still confused.

From what I've read, Optys and X2 are basically the same, but Optys are supposedly better because they are intended for servers and are thus more reliable. Is that true? And what does it mean in real world performance?

Another thread I read said deciding between an Opty and X2 depends on your mobo and RAM, but I'm not really sure how. In my case I'm gonna have to buy a new mobo too, so I guess that part isn't a consideration. However, I do have 1 gig of PC3200 RAM (two sticks of 512) that I want to be able to use in my new system. Actually, I want to upgrade to 2 gigs, so I need a mobo that will support 4 sticks of 512. Anyway, knowing that I want to have 2 gigs of PC3200 RAM in my system, does that steer me to an Opty or an X2? Or should it not affect my decision either way?

By the way, the computer I'm upgrading is primarily used for audio & video decoding/encoding and gaming.

Thanks in advance for any help you can provide.

Finally someone who isnt asking the same old tired which is better.

Q1 your correct. It likely means the optys are better overclockers, use less power, and run cooler.

Q2 It depends on your Motherboard and not your ram. Value ram is fine but a good motherboard is required to get the Opty to high clockspeed due to the 9x multiplier.

Do not use 4 sticks of ram. You have to run them at 2t instead of a much faster 1t. Remmeber timings are more important than bandwith for AMD processors.

If your purchasing a new mobo go for the ultra-d and get a opty-165. Cant really go wrong with that combo.

 

[nikko]

Thanks for the feedback guys. I'm not really sure if I want to overclock or not. I haven't OCed a CPU in ages. Is it pretty easy to do? Do I get more bang for my buck that way? Do all Optys OC?

Also, I'm confused by the 200 series of Optys. Is the only difference between them and the 100 series that they are socket 940 as opposed to 939? It appears that the 265 and 165 are roughly the same price. What are the advantages/disadvantages to going with one over the other?

 

[robertk2012]

There are very few 200 series boards and are expensive so ignore those. The 100 series is where you want to be. 165 if you overclock. 3800 if you dont. Its easy to overclock and I would recomend you do at least a moderate overclock either way.

 

[couppi]

The 200 series just has the extra controllers to talk to another processor. It also requires registered ecc ram to do this, which is very expensive. Definately go with the 1xx series for single processor systems.

 

[Furen]

The 200 series is for dual-socket configurations, so the obvious advantage of getting two 265s is that you'll have 4 cores. Its disadvantages are that a) you'll need registered ram and b) you'll need an expensive motherboard that probably won't overclock very much, if at all. If you dont know if you want to overclock or not then I'd suggest getting an X2 4200+, which runs at 2.2GHz at stock. I'd actually hesitate to recommend Opterons unless you are absolutely certain that you will overclock simply because if you stick to stock clock speeds you'll end up overpaying for the performance you get (for example, a 3800+ will almost always outperform a 165 at stock because it has a higher clock, the cache doesn't make as much of a difference as the clock speed).

 

[nikko]

Originally posted by: Furen
I'd actually hesitate to recommend Opterons unless you are absolutely certain that you will overclock simply because if you stick to stock clock speeds you'll end up overpaying for the performance you get (for example, a 3800+ will almost always outperform a 165 at stock because it has a higher clock, the cache doesn't make as much of a difference as the clock speed).

Hey there. Thanks for the advice. Let's say I'm willing to OC the 165. What's a realistic, stable, no-brainer OC that I should be able to get with it? What are the cons of OCing? Will I be able to use the stock heatsink/fan? Is it a lot noisier? Basically, is there any reason I shouldn't consider overclocking?

 

[robertk2012]

Stock HSF is pretty good. 2.4 would be an easy overclock with little or no extra voltage. Its also about that point that framerates increase very little for increases in clock speed. Encoding on the other hand scales up no matter how high you go.

 

[Furen]

The reason to not overclock would be peace of mind. Whenever I have a problem with anything (software or hardware) I always blame my overclock first and go back to the bios, reset the settings and try to replicate my problems. If running at stock, however, you can pretty much ignore this first step. Like robertk said, you wont notice much of a difference in games because you'll most likely be limited by video. The HSF can get a bit noisy but I'm a bit of a silence freak (my only fans are my video and my PSU fan) so that may not be an issue for you.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: robertk2012
Q1 your correct. It likely means the optys are better overclockers, use less power, and run cooler.

The lower-end X2's are 89W and all the 100-series Opterons are 110W, so I can't see how the Opty's would consume less power. Some of the 200 and 800-series (HE) are outstanding in this though.

http://www.amdcompare.com/us%2Den/opteron/Default.aspx
http://www.amdcompare.com/us-en/desktop/Default.aspx

 

[robertk2012]

Originally posted by: Madwand1

Originally posted by: robertk2012
Q1 your correct. It likely means the optys are better overclockers, use less power, and run cooler.

The lower-end X2's are 89W and all the 100-series Opterons are 110W, so I can't see how the Opty's would consume less power. Some of the 200 and 800-series (HE) are outstanding in this though.

http://www.amdcompare.com/us%2Den/opteron/Default.aspx
http://www.amdcompare.com/us-en/desktop/Default.aspx

Your right. The low end x2s are rated at 89 watts but the high end x2s are rated at 110 watts. I was talking more in terms of overclocking though. It takes more voltage on average to get an x2 to the same point as an opteron. Also there are many who undervolt the opteron at otherwise stock settings to reduce heat and power usage substantially.

 

[Furen]

The TDP is the thermal specification for system builders, not the actual power draw for the CPUs. Opterons having a higher TDP means that motherboards designed for them will need to use better components, which is a good thing in the server arena. In truth, however, neither of the CPU families gets even close to the TDP, the FX-60, for example, only draws between 70-90W while it's rated at 110W, the same can be said for the rest of AMD's CPU's and also Intel's Dothan... only Netburst actually draws about the same as its TDP or even more.