Should I upgrade from a 146 to 170

[Taz777]

I currently have a 146 running very comfortably at 3050 with 1.55v (48+ hrs prime stable) in a WC setup, and have a an opportunity to get a 170 (retail package, unopended, don't have the stepping ) from a friend for ~$300. My 146 has the IHS removed so I probably will not be able to get much for it.


Should I upgrade? Any suggestions? The system is mostly used for gaming.

 

[Absolute0]

Keep the 146. There isn't much difference... honestly the thing my 170 is best for is Rosetta. 3.05 Ghz on a 146 is pretty nice anyway, and if you dont know the stepping on the 170.... well if it topped out at 2.75 Ghz with high volts i just dont think you'd be happy, as most benchmarks would go down.

 

[compgeek89]

If you knew the stepping and it was 0546XPMW/0550UPMW/0550VPMW I'd definitly say yes.

 

[Fallengod]

This is the reason I havnt upgraded to dual-core yet. I just dont see that much support yet in games and such to justify me spending double the cash. Im happy with my opty 144 @ 2.7ghz. Id just keep your 146. 3GHZ is really fast. Ive used a dual-core, it didnt seem like having 2 cores made a huge difference. Its definitely the future, but for now, I just cant justify it.

 

[Shimmishim]

Originally posted by: Taz777
I currently have a 146 running very comfortably at 3050 with 1.55v (48+ hrs prime stable) in a WC setup, and have a an opportunity to get a 170 (retail package, unopended, don't have the stepping ) from a friend for ~$300. My 146 has the IHS removed so I probably will not be able to get much for it.


Should I upgrade? Any suggestions? The system is mostly used for gaming.

this was my dilemma too...

either keep a 146 @ 3 ghz or keep a 170 @ 2.8 ghz.

well... i decided to keep the 146 and sell off the 170. the main use i was getting out of the dual core was dual folding@home... other than that... there was no need for that much power...

but if you do decide to sell the 146, don't worry about the IHS being taken off. there are many places like ebay which people will buy cpu's without the IHS for a decent price if the chip can overclock pretty well.

 

[Fallengod]

Obviously its my opinion but, thats the best route at this current time. Theres just not enough support/compatilbility with dual-cores right now. I know they are great and does cut down on certain things. But I mean, I use maya, photoshop, do alot of mpeg2/dvd encoding with CCE, gaming etc... My Opty 144 @ 2.7ghz with 2GB of memory runs them all flawlessly. Even encoding is really fast. I did actually have a x2 3800 for a while, and I compared the differences in the apps I use, and I just didnt see it....Thus I dont see the reason to spend $300 yet. Especially when I got my opty 144 for $140 shipped heh.

 

[compgeek89]

Contrary to you guys, I saw quite a large boost with my Opteron 165 @ 2.7, multitasking was definitly a lot better than with my 144 @ 2.8. Gaming with nvidia drivers also gave me an fps boost due to dual core optimization. AND Benchmark scores went up D)!

I dunno, it'd definitly be worth losing 200mhz and having dual core, but if the 170 didnt go over 2.7 that'd kinda suck as you might start to notice single threaded apps run a tad slower.

 

[LittleNemoNES]

Keep the single core, man. Thats a great OC.

 

[darkdemyze]

Originally posted by: gersson
Keep the single core, man. Thats a great OC.

 

[Taz777]

Thank you everyone for the advice, I'll go with the majority and stick with the 146. Seems that hitting 3 gig or even 2.8 with the 170 isn't as easy as I had initially thought. I'd be willing to fork over the ~$150 difference if there was more of a guarantee that it'd hit 3Gig, just for bragging rights