Proc comparison Single Core Opty vs. Dual Core vs. A64 vs X2....

[czech09]

Alright I've searched this forum and various other places and have yet to find a complete comparison of the latest/most popular AMD procs.

Pretty much what I'd like to know is how what kind of performance one should expect to see with the following processors in various situations listed below. I know it's a game of guessing sometimes but I'm sure some probably know what they're talking about here so they might know but anyways...

Opty 148 vs. Opty 170 vs. A64 3200+ vs. 3800+ X2

Stock settings, and what I'd like to know for each is performance in:

Gaming
Photoshop/other intensive programs
General use

Since most of these are known for great overclocking I'll throw in another scenario:

Opty 148 @ 3.0ghz vs. Opty 170 @ 2.6ghz A64 3200+ @ 2.6ghz, 3800+ X2 @ 2.4ghz

From what I've read the some of the single core opty's are very good overclockers vs. in general supposedly the X2s aren't as great overclockers.

Same tests:

Gaming
Photoshop/other intensive programs
General use

Thanks in advance for any help. I'm aiming for the Opty 165 but I'd like to know if it's worth it before I buy one.

 

[PClark99]

I went from a 148 at 2805 to a 170 at 2500.

Is it worth trading 300 Mhz for a second core at 2500. Hell yeah.

I don't have the time or inclination to benchmark.

What I can tell you is this. There is minimal difference in gaming. General use, everything just seems a bit snappier when multitasking when using the 170.

Other intensive programs should benefit from the second core by allowing you to do more apps simultaneously without a big hit in performance.

 

[robertk2012]

check out tomshardware.com......they have cpu charts that will help you just look on the home page.

 

[czech09]

Originally posted by: PClark99
I went from a 148 at 2805 to a 170 at 2500.

Is it worth trading 300 Mhz for a second core at 2500. Hell yeah.

I don't have the time or inclination to benchmark.

What I can tell you is this. There is minimal difference in gaming. General use, everything just seems a bit snappier when multitasking when using the 170.

Other intensive programs should benefit from the second core by allowing you to do more apps simultaneously without a big hit in performance.

The other thing is whether it's worth the price difference - used venice going in at $100 vs. a used 165 coming in at (at very least) $250.

 

[kyotousa]

Originally posted by: robertk2012
check out tomshardware.com......they have cpu charts that will help you just look on the home page.

can i get a link?
try to consider if i want to trade my 3000+ oc to 2.6ghz
to opty 165 try to get to at least 2.4ghz.

will i notice difference when running vista?
someone posted the vista experience on the other site...it's using up about 600mb of physical memory...crazy