What to get? Out of the loop so need help.

imported_tsniff

Junior Member
Jan 28, 2006
21
0
0
Ok, so I haven't really been following the processor and motherboard technology but I am planning on upgrading my main system.

Basically I do a lot of graphics, audio and video, and programming. For graphics, mostly photoshop. For audio, a lot of recording, converting. For video, just about everything from recording, editing, rendering, converting. I work with a lot of archive files such as rar and zip so I need performance for compressing and uncompressing. A lot of multitasking for sure.

I'm wondering if I should go dual processor or dual core. Intel or AMD? Any suggestions would be great.

I was looking at the Opteron 165 as a good choice. Can this be ran dual processor and if so what good board is there?
 

Aluvus

Platinum Member
Apr 27, 2006
2,913
1
0
The Opteron 165 can only be run in single-processor configurations (though it is dual-core). The same is true of any 1xx Opteron. 2xx and 8xx would support dual-processor setups.
 

imported_tsniff

Junior Member
Jan 28, 2006
21
0
0
Ok so I read the 165 is not dual processor capable. The 265 is. Is there any performance difference between a single 165 and a single 265 or is the only difference the scalability. The 265 is almost twice the cost so wondering if it is worth the extra cost.
 

BassBomb

Diamond Member
Nov 25, 2005
8,390
1
81
i think single dual core will suit you well enough... this about it .. (i dont know prices so im guessing here)

250 vs 1000 for cpus? not to mention the amount of ram u need when u buy a 940 set plus its gotta be ECC
 

imported_tsniff

Junior Member
Jan 28, 2006
21
0
0
I was considering the price difference in all of it. Memory, Motherboard, etc.

Really I think a single dual core would do it. I was just thinking if I bought a single 265, I could add a second one later for an upgrade but most likely that is not cost effective by the time I spend the money on the required pieces and parts.
 

imported_tsniff

Junior Member
Jan 28, 2006
21
0
0
One last thing, does a single dual core processor perform as well (or close to) as two single core processors. I haven't read up on the dual core technology so I wouldn't know. Any good articles you suggest for reading up on it?
 

BassBomb

Diamond Member
Nov 25, 2005
8,390
1
81
there was a toms hardware article on this... but the thing is the cpus arent very identical so its not exactly fair

but id say the single dual core would outperform the other, beacuse of the reduced latency .. HTT VS being stuck together... and dual proc might be better for rams sake thats all i can think
 

Viditor

Diamond Member
Oct 25, 1999
3,290
0
0
Originally posted by: tsniff
Ok so I read the 165 is not dual processor capable. The 265 is. Is there any performance difference between a single 165 and a single 265 or is the only difference the scalability. The 265 is almost twice the cost so wondering if it is worth the extra cost.

1. The difference is that the 265 has an extra cHT link on it (to allow comunication between the 2 dual core caches).
2. Dual core is usually ~3-5% faster than a 2P setup, sometimes it's the same, but it's never slower.
3. A 2P setup will require ECC Ram as well (they are socket 940 only).