Single Core CPU Differences

[hotel77]

I was looking at processors and was trying to figure out the significant differences differences between them.

Assumptions:
That this Athlon 64 and Opteron have been Oc'd to 2.6ghz

I know originally athlon 64's only had a single channel memory controller, but that's no longer the case. In this example they all have the same size Cache, same operating frequency. What is the significant differnece between them that would warrant such large price differences?

Athlon 64 (2.4)

Athlon 64 FX (2.6)

Opteron 150(2.4)

Edit: Changed text to 150...link was to 150.

 

[TheRyuu]

Let me point out some differences.

First off the Opteron you selected is a sck940 which means it won't run in a normal nforce4 board. I belive the Opteron you might be looking for is the 148 to be OCed to 2.6ghz.

Second the FX55 is nothing more then a A64 with an unlocked multiplyer that costs a sh!t ton of money and isn't worth it.

Third the A64 is the standard A64.

MY SUGGESTION to you would be to get an Opteron 165. It costs around $300 (probably a little more) and is DUAL CORE. With the 165 you are ALMOST garunteed to hit 2.6ghz with it.

 

[hotel77]

Originally posted by: wizboy11
Second the FX55 is nothing more then a A64 with an unlocked multiplyer that costs a sh!t ton of money and isn't worth it.

Wow, you have to pay 2.5x the price and all you get is unlocked multiplier? Logic says there has to be something else going on there...but I'll take your word for it.

You probably knew this was coming...but this gives me a follow up question:

If this Opteron 165 is overclocked to 2.2ghz, what is the differnece between it and the X2 4400+ with 2x1mb cache...price only?

 

[fighterpilot]

Originally posted by: hotel77

Originally posted by: wizboy11
Second the FX55 is nothing more then a A64 with an unlocked multiplyer that costs a sh!t ton of money and isn't worth it.

Wow, you have to pay 2.5x the price and all you get is unlocked multiplier? Logic says there has to be something else going on there...but I'll take your word for it.

You probably knew this was coming...but this gives me a follow up question:

If this Opteron 165 is overclocked to 2.2ghz, what is the differnece between it and the X2 4400+ with 2x1mb cache...price only?

Price is pretty much it. Opty's overclock fairly well.

I went from a NewCastle Athlon 3500+ to an Opteron 175 (both 2.2GHz), but the Opty 175 was easily overclockable to 2.7GHz/1.46V, so it was a worthwhile upgrade. In hindsight I should have saved the money and gone with the 165 because most people are able to get theirs up to 2.5 or 2.6 with no problem.

 

[hotel77]

well I have a single Winchester 3000+ at 2.25 ghz right now...not sure if I should upgrade right now or not. Thanks for the info, it's much appreciated.

 

[TheRyuu]

Originally posted by: fighterpilot

Originally posted by: hotel77

Originally posted by: wizboy11
Second the FX55 is nothing more then a A64 with an unlocked multiplyer that costs a sh!t ton of money and isn't worth it.

Wow, you have to pay 2.5x the price and all you get is unlocked multiplier? Logic says there has to be something else going on there...but I'll take your word for it.

You probably knew this was coming...but this gives me a follow up question:

If this Opteron 165 is overclocked to 2.2ghz, what is the differnece between it and the X2 4400+ with 2x1mb cache...price only?

Price is pretty much it. Opty's overclock fairly well.

I went from a NewCastle Athlon 3500+ to an Opteron 175 (both 2.2GHz), but the Opty 175 was easily overclockable to 2.7GHz/1.46V, so it was a worthwhile upgrade. In hindsight I should have saved the money and gone with the 165 because most people are able to get theirs up to 2.5 or 2.6 with no problem.

There is NO difference between the 165 and the 4400+ except the 165's are stress tested so that they are already the "cream of the crop".

Which is why the OC nicely.