S939 X2/DDR vs. C2D/DDR2 vs. wait for quad core

[Solema]

400w might be pushing it, but I believe there are s939 X2's running an 89w TDP, so that will help. It also remains to be seen what "mid-range" DX10 cards will be out by summer and what kind of power they will draw.

As for 939 vs C2D overhaul, I was in the same boat and decided to max out my 939 rig with an FX-60 from TD and 2x1GB DDR400 from FS/FT. Like you, I plan on bypassing DDR2 and going directly to DDR3/Quad Core. BUT, don't forget AMD has a native quad-core chip on their roadmap for Q4 '07, so that will boost competition and lower prices as well.

 

[archcommus]

Originally posted by: Solema
400w might be pushing it, but I believe there are s939 X2's running an 89w TDP, so that will help. It also remains to be seen what "mid-range" DX10 cards will be out by summer and what kind of power they will draw.

As for 939 vs C2D overhaul, I was in the same boat and decided to max out my 939 rig with an FX-60 from TD and 2x1GB DDR400 from FS/FT. Like you, I plan on bypassing DDR2 and going directly to DDR3/Quad Core. BUT, don't forget AMD has a native quad-core chip on their roadmap for Q4 '07, so that will boost competition and lower prices as well.

Thanks, you are encouraging me further to do the same. Let's get into some of the specifics. My current memory is 2x512 CMX512-3200XLPRO (1 gig kit, model of kit is TWINX1024-3200XLPRO). This memory is PC-3200 but is very overclockable, however I am running it at stock speeds with my A64. The timings are extremely low, 2-2-2-5 at stock, I believe. Now, I most likely wouldn't want to spend the money to get another gig of this quality DDR to match it. Would it be a bad idea to get a gig of Corsair value RAM, match it with this RAM and run it all at the same higher timings?

Then to go with that I might try to find an 89W s939 X2 like you mentioned.

 

[drum]

i'm still sitting on my xp2500 9500pro setup. i may get around to it when r600 and c2d price drops come

 

[wolfman11]

I just decided to do the same thing. I have 2x1 gig OCZ Platinum 2-3-2-5 DDR400 sticks and decided for me it was better to grab an Opteron 185 and max out my current rig. I decided against rolling the dice for a good stepping on an Opteron 170 or 175 as there seems to be a wild range of steppings coming out of newegg (my Opteron 146 was purchased from tank guys where I could select a stepping). Honestly, the Opteron 146@2700 is plenty fast, so the 2x2.6 Opteron 185 will definately hold me over till DDR3 and quad cores are reasonable (or whatever else comes down the pike 2 years out).

I'd just go with a descent 2x512mb set of cas 2 sticks to go with what you have, since you'll have to bump to 2T (assuming you are at 1T with the 2 sticks you have). Maybe something like this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820227031

Which has timings close to your existing sticks.

 

[Solema]

Originally posted by: archcommus
Thanks, you are encouraging me further to do the same. Let's get into some of the specifics. My current memory is 2x512 CMX512-3200XLPRO (1 gig kit, model of kit is TWINX1024-3200XLPRO). This memory is PC-3200 but is very overclockable, however I am running it at stock speeds with my A64. The timings are extremely low, 2-2-2-5 at stock, I believe. Now, I most likely wouldn't want to spend the money to get another gig of this quality DDR to match it. Would it be a bad idea to get a gig of Corsair value RAM, match it with this RAM and run it all at the same higher timings?

Then to go with that I might try to find an 89W s939 X2 like you mentioned.

I had that exact same RAM, which I have passed on to my wife. Thing is, the timings DO make a decent difference in performance, but the main issue is that s939 AMD chips often don't like running 4 sticks of RAM together, and most default to 333MHz when you do it. You'd be much better off selling the 3200XL (which is AWESOME ram) and get 2x1GB sticks of DDR. In fact, I'd recommend checking ouf FS/FT, as I got my two 1GB sticks of OCZ 2-3-2-5 PC3200 for $150 from a user on there. You could probably get around $100 for your 3200XL on eBay then and it's almost a wash.

As a side note, my buddy just built a C2D rig and has 2x1GB Corsair XMS DDR2-800 and it scores a 5.0 in Vista's performance analyzer. My 2x1GB OCZ DDR scores a 5.9

 

[archcommus]

Originally posted by: wolfman11
I just decided to do the same thing. I have 2x1 gig OCZ Platinum 2-3-2-5 DDR400 sticks and decided for me it was better to grab an Opteron 185 and max out my current rig. I decided against rolling the dice for a good stepping on an Opteron 170 or 175 as there seems to be a wild range of steppings coming out of newegg (my Opteron 146 was purchased from tank guys where I could select a stepping). Honestly, the Opteron 146@2700 is plenty fast, so the 2x2.6 Opteron 185 will definately hold me over till DDR3 and quad cores are reasonable (or whatever else comes down the pike 2 years out).

I'd just go with a descent 2x512mb set of cas 2 sticks to go with what you have, since you'll have to bump to 2T (assuming you are at 1T with the 2 sticks you have). Maybe something like this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820227031

Which has timings close to your existing sticks.

According to CPU-Z I'm currently already at 2T. It says 2-2-2-5-11 at 2T. I don't know enough about memory timings to know what these numbers actually mean.

If Solema is right about issues with 4 sticks of RAM on socket 939, I guess it would be best to sell the Corsair and buy a new 2 GB kit. Or maybe add a single 1 GB stick? I don't know how it'd be with three sticks.

I guess I'll start considering the details more heavily after mid-range DX10 parts are out from both AMD and NVIDIA, and after the DX10 titles are released.

Originally posted by: Solema
As a side note, my buddy just built a C2D rig and has 2x1GB Corsair XMS DDR2-800 and it scores a 5.0 in Vista's performance analyzer. My 2x1GB OCZ DDR scores a 5.9

Haha nice. So a good fast set of DDR should still be plenty for next gen titles.

 

[MrUniq]

You are better of maxing out your current rig. Check out my sig...my old system is #2 and I actually upgraded my MB and Vid card. But I can easily get a DX10 card and run Alan Wake or Unreal 2007 in the future. If you are sill shakey..get an Asrock that can run DDR + Core2 chips.

 

[archcommus]

Thanks for the opinions, everyone. Maxing out my current platform definitely seems like the right idea then, finding some sort of X2 on eBay or here on AT, selling my Corsair, picking up 2 gigs of some other DDR, and getting a reasonable DX10 video card.

However we all know, it's better to wait to upgrade until you need to, not before you need to in preparation for what you THINK will require it. So I won't be doing this until a next gen game is out and I give it a try on my current system for comparison purposes. The earliest that might be could be Crysis in June.

 

[archcommus]

Hmm now I am slightly reconsidering. Most people recommended maxing out my current platform, which I agree with for price reasons, but now I'm thinking - this round I'm probably going to be going for budget much more than I ever did before, mainly because I don't game TOO much and just want to keep up with the times and be able to run new stuff at least decently. So if I want to spend minimally and get something that will last me awhile, it might be in my better interest to get something that has more headroom, so instead of getting a remaining s939 X2 and old DDR RAM, instead get a cheap C2D and OC the hell out of it, along with some budget DDR2 memory and a ~$250 DX10 video card. This may allow me to play new games on at least medium settings for close to a couple years, without spending much more than $450 after selling current stuff.

What do you think?

 

[AlgaeEater]

Originally posted by: archcommus
Hmm now I am slightly reconsidering. Most people recommended maxing out my current platform, which I agree with for price reasons, but now I'm thinking - this round I'm probably going to be going for budget much more than I ever did before, mainly because I don't game TOO much and just want to keep up with the times and be able to run new stuff at least decently. So if I want to spend minimally and get something that will last me awhile, it might be in my better interest to get something that has more headroom, so instead of getting a remaining s939 X2 and old DDR RAM, instead get a cheap C2D and OC the hell out of it, along with some budget DDR2 memory and a ~$250 DX10 video card. This may allow me to play new games on at least medium settings for close to a couple years, without spending much more than $450 after selling current stuff.

What do you think?

Wait until April if you can, since prices will drop on C2D all around and you'll have more room to flex and bend with your upgrade.

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: Blain

What games or applications, currently take advantage of 4 cores?

And what OS is good for running quad cores?

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: Nickel020
I don't htink that having DDR1 as opposed to AM2 and DDR2 is gonna be a big problem in DX10 games. If I remember the initial AM2 reviews correctly, then DDR2 didn't really perform any better than DDR1.

http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2738&p=4

Just checked, not a huge difference here, epsecially since your memory is likely gonna be faster than DDR400 if you overclock. And good DDR1 scales better latency-wise than DDR2. My G.Skill DDR400 2-3-2-5 with Infineon chips runs at 3-3-3-7 at 281MHz (haven't tried any lower latencies, and motherboard doesn't want to do a higher FSB at the moment).

This is my RAM btw: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820231032

This is what I was going to say. For AMD platforms, DDR2 did nothing. Hell, AT did a memory benchmark with C2Ds with various speeds of DDR2 and DDR1 (remember, intel doesn't have an ondie memory controller so if the motherboard takes DDR1 it can use it) and the speed difference looks pretty much nil there also. The only real reason to dump DDR for DDR2 is they stopped making the former and there aren't really any great motherboard choice for the intel platform.

AM2 really doesn't offer much of anything for s939. I was in this spot awhile ago myself. Games are pretty much all about the video card and I didn't have any speed complaints so I upgraded to 2GB of DDR and stuck a dual core in my machine. I'll upgrade the video card again next. C2D is definately faster, but I was (and still am) looking at having to replace my memory, motherboard and processor all at once.

 

[archcommus]

Originally posted by: AlgaeEater

Originally posted by: archcommus
Hmm now I am slightly reconsidering. Most people recommended maxing out my current platform, which I agree with for price reasons, but now I'm thinking - this round I'm probably going to be going for budget much more than I ever did before, mainly because I don't game TOO much and just want to keep up with the times and be able to run new stuff at least decently. So if I want to spend minimally and get something that will last me awhile, it might be in my better interest to get something that has more headroom, so instead of getting a remaining s939 X2 and old DDR RAM, instead get a cheap C2D and OC the hell out of it, along with some budget DDR2 memory and a ~$250 DX10 video card. This may allow me to play new games on at least medium settings for close to a couple years, without spending much more than $450 after selling current stuff.

What do you think?

Wait until April if you can, since prices will drop on C2D all around and you'll have more room to flex and bend with your upgrade.

Yeah I wouldn't be doing this until May at the earliest.

Originally posted by: PingSpike

Originally posted by: Nickel020
I don't htink that having DDR1 as opposed to AM2 and DDR2 is gonna be a big problem in DX10 games. If I remember the initial AM2 reviews correctly, then DDR2 didn't really perform any better than DDR1.

http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2738&p=4

Just checked, not a huge difference here, epsecially since your memory is likely gonna be faster than DDR400 if you overclock. And good DDR1 scales better latency-wise than DDR2. My G.Skill DDR400 2-3-2-5 with Infineon chips runs at 3-3-3-7 at 281MHz (haven't tried any lower latencies, and motherboard doesn't want to do a higher FSB at the moment).

This is my RAM btw: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820231032

This is what I was going to say. For AMD platforms, DDR2 did nothing. Hell, AT did a memory benchmark with C2Ds with various speeds of DDR2 and DDR1 (remember, intel doesn't have an ondie memory controller so if the motherboard takes DDR1 it can use it) and the speed difference looks pretty much nil there also. The only real reason to dump DDR for DDR2 is they stopped making the former and there aren't really any great motherboard choice for the intel platform.

AM2 really doesn't offer much of anything for s939. I was in this spot awhile ago myself. Games are pretty much all about the video card and I didn't have any speed complaints so I upgraded to 2GB of DDR and stuck a dual core in my machine. I'll upgrade the video card again next. C2D is definately faster, but I was (and still am) looking at having to replace my memory, motherboard and processor all at once.

Yeah I could do this too, and just upgrade my video card and nothing else for a few years, but I'm afraid I'm going to become CPU limited at one point, and maybe I'd have more headroom with a C2D.

 

[NaOH]

I suggested to one of my friends to upgrade to a 939 system recently. He wants to play some games like source but not really anything else. I currently also have a 939 system with a 3800x2 OCd and it runs EVERYTHING I've thrown at it so far so I'm pretty happy with it. Just make sure you get a GOOD graphics card.

 

[SlowSpyder]

I had a single core A64 939 system with 1 gig and had to decide what was the best way to upgrade too. I ended up getting an Opteron 165 and putting in another 2 x 512MB sticks of memory in the system. It does anything and everything I ask of it without a problem. I know it's far from the fastest thing on the market these days, but more often then not you'll still be video card limited in games anyway. I'm happy with my decision, I'll probably keep this for another year, maybe even longer with a video card upgrade.

 

[archcommus]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
I had a single core A64 939 system with 1 gig and had to decide what was the best way to upgrade too. I ended up getting an Opteron 165 and putting in another 2 x 512MB sticks of memory in the system. It does anything and everything I ask of it without a problem. I know it's far from the fastest thing on the market these days, but more often then not you'll still be video card limited in games anyway. I'm happy with my decision, I'll probably keep this for another year, maybe even longer with a video card upgrade.

If a 90 nm s939 X2 will not be a bottleneck through all of 2008, then I would do that as well but I'm not entirely sure if that would be the case.

 

[Solema]

I really don't think that a 90nm 939 OC'ed to 2.7-2.8 will be much more of a bottleneck than a 3.2GHz C2D. You're talking C2D's inherent efficiency advantages and a 400MHz clock advantage. All-in-all not a huge difference, especially when added up with the fact that, as people have said, DD2 has almost no impact on performance whatsoever. I still think if you want to be on the cheap, go with the upgrade.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Wow I'm really surprised so many people are in the same boat. I'm facing this as well.

Currently have:

A64 @ 2.7Ghz (s939)
2GB DDR
7900GTO

I keep seeing deals on E6400s ($160) and E4300s ($160 with mobo) but then having to get a decent mobo and DDR2 and it ain't so cheap looking. And I don't think it'd just beat the hell of what I'm running now.

I keep playing this back and forth a few times a day every time I see a deal on a part. But I just can't bring myself to do it. All I do is play games, no real need for multi-tasking.

Guess I'll just stick with this rig for a while, unless some 8800x boards come down in price or a s939 X2 shows up cheap

 

[archcommus]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Wow I'm really surprised so many people are in the same boat. I'm facing this as well.

Currently have:

A64 @ 2.7Ghz (s939)
2GB DDR
7900GTO

I keep seeing deals on E6400s ($160) and E4300s ($160 with mobo) but then having to get a decent mobo and DDR2 and it ain't so cheap looking. And I don't think it'd just beat the hell of what I'm running now.

I keep playing this back and forth a few times a day every time I see a deal on a part. But I just can't bring myself to do it. All I do is play games, no real need for multi-tasking.

Guess I'll just stick with this rig for a while, unless some 8800x boards come down in price or a s939 X2 shows up cheap

I would say you're doing good because you have a good video card and plenty of RAM. Leave that rig be at least until this fall/winter.

Solema, you're probably right, the X2 shouldn't be much of a bottleneck. I guess just the fact that it's an old architecture and that it's 90 nm makes me feel hesitant to upgrade to it. One thing to consider, though, since you mentioned "on the cheap," which I definitely want to be , is that a C2D build could actually end up being the same cost, because even though I need to get a motherboard, I could maybe get a CPU that's about $30-50 less, and OC it to similar or better performance levels than the more expensive X2, and DDR2 memory might be cheaper than another gig of DDR, as well. Considering that, if the price would be the same in the end, it might be better to go with the newer architecture and the cooler-running C2D.

Sorry I'm so indecisive. It's hard to make any concrete decisions about these kinds of things without knowing what hardware next-gen games will require to run well, in what general timeframe these games will be released, and this far ahead of when you're actually planning to build. I was just out to get some general ideas of what I might be doing.

 

[Solema]

My one hangup with C2D is the motherboard. I myself wouldn't get anything less than an nForce 680i and they tend to run $200 or more, so it ends up not being near the same cost. That, and I'd have to get decent performance RAM as well that would have OC headroom.

 

[NicePants42]

I faced this just before the 8800s came out. I went from an Opty 144 with 1gb OCZ DDR to an Opteron 165 that does 2.95Ghz, got 2gb of Mushkin Redline, two X1900Xts and a $100 Crossfire motherboard.

So far, I'm very very happy.

What I suggest you do is find a decent dual core S939 chip on the FS/FT forums, and add a gig of RAM if you feel you need it. You should be able to do this for $250 or less, plus you sell your current CPU. Then, depending on your current needs, you either wait for ATI or buy an 8800 series.

There's a lot of talk about DX10 games, but Vista is still a pain in the ass - people are having problems with any and all components and drivers, and until an actual DX10 game is released, no one knows how current video cards will handle them, or if the difference between DX9 and DX10 will be worth it at first. Consider that game companies won't be eager to make their games DX10 only, then consider that DX9 runs faster on Windows XP, and then ask yourself if it's possible that these new DX10 games might run better under DX9/XP than DX10/Vista - at least at first. I'm not saying that will be the case, I'm saying that no one knows yet.

Until Vista cleans up it's act and DX10 games are out for review on DX10 hardware, I'm sticking with my current setup. Maybe if I didn't have two X1900s I'd think differently, but there it is. Also, all the game CPU benchmarks I've seen show Quad cores being slower than their C2D counterparts because clock speed still matters more than # of cores in today's games. There's a difference between future-proofing and leaping before you look.

 

[Solema]

There's a lot to be said for "waiting for SP1" of Vista, but I don't mind the assaches. It gives me something to mess around with, and I have this thing where once a new OS comes out, I have to run it, even if the old one is still better in some ways.

 

[archcommus]

Originally posted by: Solema
There's a lot to be said for "waiting for SP1" of Vista, but I don't mind the assaches. It gives me something to mess around with, and I have this thing where once a new OS comes out, I have to run it, even if the old one is still better in some ways.

Haha I'm the same way. I'm like that with almost any software I use frequently, always interested in what the next version holds.

Also, you're right I wouldn't want to move to C2D if a "good" motherboard was going to be anything more than like $120, but why exactly would you not want anything below 680i? I don't demand too many features, really just SATA, enough USB ports, and enough slots. I know I'll never be doing SLI/Crossfire, and I also don't need good onboard audio (unless it's good enough to replace an add-in card) or onboard video. With those loose requirements I bet there are plenty of cheaper Socket 775 motherboards available.

Originally posted by: NicePants42
I faced this just before the 8800s came out. I went from an Opty 144 with 1gb OCZ DDR to an Opteron 165 that does 2.95Ghz, got 2gb of Mushkin Redline, two X1900Xts and a $100 Crossfire motherboard.

So far, I'm very very happy.

What I suggest you do is find a decent dual core S939 chip on the FS/FT forums, and add a gig of RAM if you feel you need it. You should be able to do this for $250 or less, plus you sell your current CPU. Then, depending on your current needs, you either wait for ATI or buy an 8800 series.

There's a lot of talk about DX10 games, but Vista is still a pain in the ass - people are having problems with any and all components and drivers, and until an actual DX10 game is released, no one knows how current video cards will handle them, or if the difference between DX9 and DX10 will be worth it at first. Consider that game companies won't be eager to make their games DX10 only, then consider that DX9 runs faster on Windows XP, and then ask yourself if it's possible that these new DX10 games might run better under DX9/XP than DX10/Vista - at least at first. I'm not saying that will be the case, I'm saying that no one knows yet.

Until Vista cleans up it's act and DX10 games are out for review on DX10 hardware, I'm sticking with my current setup. Maybe if I didn't have two X1900s I'd think differently, but there it is. Also, all the game CPU benchmarks I've seen show Quad cores being slower than their C2D counterparts because clock speed still matters more than # of cores in today's games. There's a difference between future-proofing and leaping before you look.

Hmm, the prices you mention intrigue me. If I could really get a s939 X2 for well under $200, and then another gig of RAM on top of that, it could be pretty reasonable. One thing I am concerned about, though, with a 90 nm X2, 2 gigs of RAM, and a DX10 video card is if my 400W PSU will be enough. The thing is, I don't want to replace it with a 550 or 600W unit, and then next gen when I'm down to 65 or 45 nm and DDR3 memory, I won't need more than 400 again. If I went C2D right now there's a chance my 400W PSU would be enough, not sure I can say the same about the X2 config though.

 

[Riverhound777]

Kind of the same situation here. I have a 64 3200+ with 1gig ram and an X800XL but my mobo just died on me. I decided to just get a new mobo for $150(DFI LP) rather than spending 500-700 on mobo/C2D/Ram/Vid Card. I only really play Eve-online anyway along with my Wii

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

You kmow what, I wonder why some many people keep saying wait, x is just around the corner, but guess what, something is always around the corner. Just go out and get the most performance you can now that is in your budget.