Selecting an AMD Processor

[Moffat Cafe]

I,m an old AMD user who somehow got stuck with an Intell 2.53 which I have been using for a few years. Now I'm ready to get back on the right side of the fence.

I am not a gamer, my main use of a PC is Photoshop and Corel stuff also DVD backup
copies . Images are getting bigger (slide scans and SLR RAW conversions) and are really slowing me down.

My question is: how much of a speed increase can I expect going from the 2.53 to a Socket 754 Sempron 64 3400+ ($135)? Then again, for $273 I can get the Socket 939 Athlon 64 3700+ San Diego (double the bucks)...worth it in speed?

Thanks

 

[TankGuys]

The extra cahce on the Athlon 64 would be nice for your uses... so yes, you'll see a decent difference. On top of that, if you go that route and get a socket 939 motherboard, you'll be able to upgrade easier later (perhaps go dual core?). If you get a socket 754 board, you're pretty much stuck with your processor since that socket is getting phased out.

 

[o1die]

I recommend a dual core for your needs. Fry's has already had the 820 Intel priced at $279 with ecs board or the x2 3800 for $379 yesterday. The boards were free (both prices are current for cpu only). The x2 is cooler and uses less energy than the 820.

 

[marciorr]

Go with a X2, no doubt about that.

 

[Moffat Cafe]

Tank you TankGuys, but my question was related to speeding up my photo editng. I have never, ever changed CPUs without also changing the motherboard (about every 2 to 3 years) so I don't really care much about socket obsolesence. I would double the money spent for a Athlon 65 3700 over the Sempron 64 3400 ONLY if it was noticeably faster. Thanks again.

 

[Vegitto]

Originally posted by: Moffat Cafe
Tank you TankGuys, but my question was related to speeding up my photo editng. I have never, ever changed CPUs without also changing the motherboard (about every 2 to 3 years) so I don't really care much about socket obsolesence. I would double the money spent for a Athlon 65 3700 over the Sempron 64 3400 ONLY if it was noticeably faster. Thanks again.

Oh, you'll notice it, all right. You'll definately notice the difference. Go with the 3700+ SD or one of the X2's. Pentium D's are cheap here, right now. One can be had for ?250.

 

[Hacp]

It seems like you want performance but are limited in funds. If that is the case, then I would go with a 939 Venice 3000+ and with a super cheap 939 mobo, like the Chaintech Nforce 4-Ultra motherboard. Heck, if you don't need SATA-150, you should just go with regular Nforce-4 motherboards. It also seems like you won't be doing any overclocking, so a half decen't 10 dollar heatsink fan+OEm venice would do fine. If you really want the warrenty, a 150 dollar venice is good too. Personally, I would never get semprons unless I am willing to overclock the processor.

 

[aiya24]

he doesnt want to overclock and i dont think anyone who doesnt oc would get a venice 3000+. most would get the 3500+ venice or the 3700+ diego cause they want speed for the price. but since he does photoshop/photo editing, i suggest the 3700+ diego w/ chaintech vnf4 ultra since he's not gonna upgrade in another 2-3 years.

 

[Markfw]

X2 3800+ no doubt. Find the money, they are only $360 shipped at Tankguys. and get a cheap 939 pin motherboard. Since you are not OC'ing, the ULI S1689 that I got for $67 will do fine.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: aiya24
he doesnt want to overclock and i dont think anyone who doesnt oc would get a venice 3000+. most would get the 3500+ venice or the 3700+ diego cause they want speed for the price. but since he does photoshop/photo editing, i suggest the 3700+ diego w/ chaintech vnf4 ultra since he's not gonna upgrade in another 2-3 years.

The Venice 3000+ is No slouch IMO. YOu don't need to overclock to get performance of out AMDs..

 

[kirbymixmasta]

Well the Venice 3000+ isn't a slouch, but if you could save up the money and get an X2 I would definitely recommend it. For video and photo editing, an X2 is the best thing around.

 

[stevty2889]

I also recomend the X2 3800+ if you can squeeze it in to your budget, a dual core will give you much greater improvement with those types of applications than a faster single core will. Even a Pentium-D would be an improvement, but I still can't recomend one, as it's hard enough to keep 1 prescott cool, let alone 2 in a single package.

 

[Moffat Cafe]

Well--you guys are making me think. It was my understanding that dual core helped speed multitasking which I thought meant running two programs at once. Please fill my head with wisdom.

 

[Furen]

Originally posted by: Moffat Cafe
Well--you guys are making me think. It was my understanding that dual core helped speed multitasking which I thought meant running two programs at once. Please fill my head with wisdom.

That's true, but there are also programs that are designed to be multithreaded (use two CPU cores or more at once). Example of multithreaded programs are some video encoders (most of the decent ones, with the notable exception of virtualdub), photoshop, 3d renderers... basically any workstation-class app may be multithreaded. If you use a 3800+ with TMPEGENC, for example, you can experience close to 2x the performance of a single-cored a64 at 2.0GHz. The performance boost in photoshop, however, would only be like 30% (which would not be bad, basically like fx-55 equivalent performance, by my very rough estimates).

 

[Duvie]

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=28&threadid=1637764&enterthread=y

check out my thread here moffat cafe...it shows results of dual core versus single core....

 

[silentvois]

Get the x2 3800+, it's not worth getting the 3700+ for what you do and especially the price difference between them isn't that much.

 

[aiya24]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: aiya24
he doesnt want to overclock and i dont think anyone who doesnt oc would get a venice 3000+. most would get the 3500+ venice or the 3700+ diego cause they want speed for the price. but since he does photoshop/photo editing, i suggest the 3700+ diego w/ chaintech vnf4 ultra since he's not gonna upgrade in another 2-3 years.

The Venice 3000+ is No slouch IMO. YOu don't need to overclock to get performance of out AMDs..

im not saying it isnt cause i have one

when i first got it i was amazed of the speed it had over my 2500+ barton@3200+ running on the stock 1.8.

after thinking it over and reading the replies i would have to change my suggestion to the 3800+ X2 for like a $100 bucks more you get dual core and you always win with that.

 

[Moffat Cafe]

OK, looks like the winner is: 3800+X2-- 3 cheers for you guys!!

 

[HamidFULL]

for select best look This :
http://www.amdcompare.com/us-en/desktop/Default.aspx
from AMD

 

[Shenkoa]

A venice would do you fine.

 

[Crescent13]

3800+ X2 is the way to go!