So is the x2 3800+ better than Opteron 165 without overclocking?

[DL402]

I can get an Opteron 165 or x2 3800+ with a combo of an ASUS A8N5X for about the same price at monarch, but I don't intend to overclock, so would the x2 3800+ be better for me?

 

[dug777]

probably marginally faster, since the 200mhz faster clock speed would outweigh it only having 1/2 the L2 cache of the opty in most apps...

 

[Doctorweir]

Yep, but on the other hand not overclocking a 165 (at least a bit) is a sin...

 

[lopri]

At stock setting 200MHz clock advantage will always beat the 512KB L2 cache advantage. But like Doctorweir said, I can't imagine anyone buying Socket 939 Opteron without the intention of OC'ing.

 

[F1shF4t]

Originally posted by: lopri
At stock setting 200MHz clock advantage will always beat the 512KB L2 cache advantage. But like Doctorweir said, I can't imagine anyone buying Socket 939 Opteron without the intention of OC'ing.

Except maybe buying it for single cpu servers.

 

[Sunrise089]

Originally posted by: Dark Cupcake

Originally posted by: lopri
At stock setting 200MHz clock advantage will always beat the 512KB L2 cache advantage. But like Doctorweir said, I can't imagine anyone buying Socket 939 Opteron without the intention of OC'ing.

Except maybe buying it for single cpu servers.

I know next to nothing about servers in general, but would there be any truth to me thinking that a user who wanted the extra potential reliability of an Opteron over a basically identical 3800+ would then also want the reliability of a more server oriented s940 board?

 

[gobucks]

i agree with most people here - 3800+ is better at stock, but it OC's lower. I just got mine, and it seems to be stuck around 2.47GHz. Most 165's seem to be able to hit around 2.7GHz, so that's definitely the way to go for OCing, although it requires a higher FSB and faster memory (or a divider).

If you just want to run everything at stock, you may want to search the forums here for an X2 4200+ or 4400+. I've seen some that are close to $325, and those will perform much better than a 3800 or opty 165, and for about the same price you'd pay retail for one of the slower models.

 

[robertk2012]

Is it retail or oem? The 165 comes with a longer warranty and a much better HSF. An X2 4200 will not perform "much" better than a 3800. It will be marginally better. Also monarch has some good coupons on 165s if you watch.

 

[openwheelformula1]

not overclocking X2 3800+ is a sin as well.

 

[JSFLY]

Originally posted by: openwheelformula1
not overclocking X2 3800+ is a sin as well.

No.

Not overclocking is a sin period. Even if its with a Pentium 3 500 for a 10 mhz increase.
;-p

 

[Bobthelost]

Saying the opteron is more "reliable" at stock settings is a bit misleading. Other than the CPU dying at stock settings there shouldn't be any stability problems in a desktop style PC with either, and by the time the CPU exceeds the manufacturer's warranty of 3 years it won't cost that much to replace it with a faster model.

Get the 3800X2. Opterons are not for you.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Bobthelost
Saying the opteron is more "reliable" at stock settings is a bit misleading. Other than the CPU dying at stock settings there shouldn't be any stability problems in a desktop style PC with either, and by the time the CPU exceeds the manufacturer's warranty of 3 years it won't cost that much to replace it with a faster model.

Get the 3800X2. Opterons are not for you.

that's a bit misleading as well

iirc optys are QCd to a higher level (as they should be, operating in environments where a fuckup can mean big dollars)...

 

[TrevorRC]

OCs LOWER?

Have any of you guys SEEN the recent X2 3800+ chips?

They've been hitting 2.4/2.5 undervolted, CONSISTENTLY, running cooler than 165s (because of the reduced L2 cache).

Many can hit 2.7/2.8

While the 165s may have been better originally, the SSOI finally hit the mainstream chips (X2s) as well, so the results have been identical (if not better, because of heat reduction) recently.

 

[Shimmishim]

i'm gonna have to agree with trevorRC here...

the newer 2006 X2's have been known to hit 3.0 ghz on air now.

but, if anything the opterons are a little more consistent at hitting higher overclocks.

my vote is for the 3800+ X2. extra 200 mhz > extra 512 kB L2 per core

 

[DrMrLordX]

x2-3800+ is looking better than the Opteron 165 thanks to the 2006 chips.

 

[Childs]

I bought a X2 3800+ on Friday and a 165 Sunday. Both hit 2.4Ghz on stock volts. The 165 hit 2.5 as well, while the X2 didn't on stock settings. I didn't tweak any further, as all I wanted was 2.4 on stock settings. According to the simple Sandra sisoft benchmarks, the 165 at 2.4Ghz was faster than the X2. Temps were lower on the X2 by like 5-8C. I would have stuck with the X2, but it was a hassle to return the 165 as it was purchased online, where as the X2 was easily returnable at Frys.

If its retail X2 vs OEM 165 at the same price, go X2. They seem to run cooler, and OC well enough on stock volts should you chose to give yourself a free speed increase in the future. Adding the heatsink and fan, and possibly more fans for cooling make the 165 exspensive for basically the same performance.