Should I jump on Opteron 165?

[pctwo]

I'm not going to be ready to build til after Xmas or new year. I'm just afraid like many people they'll all be gone. I'm pretty sure I'm near the botrtom of dave's queue.

Or am I going to feel stupid when they'll be all over the place in a month and going for $265 retail? Wish I knew what's going on with AMD.

BTW, when you buy an OEM does it come w/ a cert. of authenticity (FWIW). How do you know it's not opened/used/whatever?

 

[Avalon]

OEM's will not come with a certificate. Monarch is good for their word, this will be a brand new processor. It will just simply come in a plastic tray without a heatsink, box, or 3 year warranty. For $299, I'd probably grab it. You won't be seeing it for $260 retail.

 

[Ricemarine]

I suggest you go on the socket m2 bandwagon.

 

[cw42]

i suggest u jump on the dual core Opteron bandwagon like me

btw that $265 price is what AMD charges for top-tier distributers... these distrubuters are the ones that supply places like NewEgg, and ZZF (info taken from the owner of TankGuys). So, before you even get near it the price will be jacked up above that... thus you can bet your pants you WON'T be seeing that $265 price tag.

 

[Puffnstuff]

If you do buy an oem cpu from monarch you can also opt for the 3 year extended warranty for $15 which I just did on the opteron 175 I ordered from them. This way you can mount whatever hsf you desire.

 

[Leper Messiah]

I dunno how well the 165s are OCing compared to the 3800's, but X2 3800+ retails are only like 325 ish.

 

[bwall04]

Originally posted by: Leper Messiah
I dunno how well the 165s are OCing compared to the 3800's, but X2 3800+ retails are only like 325 ish.

The 165's come with an extra 512k of cache per core than the 3800's.

 

[TankGuys]

Originally posted by: cw42
i suggest u jump on the dual core Opteron bandwagon like me

btw that $265 price is what AMD charges for top-tier distributers... these distrubuters are the ones that supply places like NewEgg, and ZZF (info taken from the owner of TankGuys). So, before you even get near it the price will be jacked up above that... thus you can bet your pants you WON'T be seeing that $265 price tag.

:beer:

Finally, a voice of reason

 

[Leper Messiah]

Originally posted by: bwall04

Originally posted by: Leper Messiah
I dunno how well the 165s are OCing compared to the 3800's, but X2 3800+ retails are only like 325 ish.

The 165's come with an extra 512k of cache per core than the 3800's.

5% difference in performance tops. I'd take my X2@ 2.6 over a 165 at 2.5.

 

[masher2]

5% difference in performance tops. I'd take my X2@ 2.6 over a 165 at 2.5.

As hard as you might find this to believe, different people use computers for different purposes. For many applications, a larger cache more than outweighs an extra 100 mhz in clock speed.

 

[NeezyDeezy]

I jumped on the 165. Why? Because it's the cheapest dual-core amd pcu I could buy. Never count on overclocking results.

 

[Leper Messiah]

Originally posted by: masher2

5% difference in performance tops. I'd take my X2@ 2.6 over a 165 at 2.5.

As hard as you might find this to believe, different people use computers for different purposes. For many applications, a larger cache more than outweighs an extra 100 mhz in clock speed.

I can't think of a single real world app where cache matters more than games, and like I said, 5% tops. Give me some links that say otherwise.

 

[masher2]

I can't think of a single real world app where cache matters more than games, and like I said, 5% tops. Give me some links that say otherwise...

There is more to computing than first-person shooters. And cache *size* doesn't matter as much to games as does cache *speed*. Bandwidth/Latency. Games are admittedly benefitted more by a large cache than an office app, but that isn't saying much.

Most server apps, however, are influenced highly by cache size. Here's a link to a SQL Server benchmark showing a massive increase in performance due to cache size, among equallly-clocked cores:

> "The third system has the Northwood core with 512K L2 cache. The fourth system has
> the Gallatin core with 1M L3 cache in addition to the 512K L2 cache. There is a 16.7%
> performance increase between these two systems differing primarily in the cache size
> and configuration..."


http://www.sql-server-performance.com/jc_processor_performance_update.asp

 

[kamranziadar]

Who says X2 3800 is better than Opteron 165?

 

[Mucker]

They're both good cpu's....jeesh guys, roll up your e-penis's and put them back in their storage containers....

m

 

[Lasthitlarry]

We all know that Opterons are built to last more torture. So I myself would rather get an Opteron than a 64, but a 64 is pretty damn reasonable.

At this point I suggest either a 64 3200+ or Opteron 165

 

[Stoneburner]

AMD is backordered everywhere. maybe the INQ is right about them stockpiling for dell the fonkyrobosapiens.