• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

would I notice much of a difference between an x2 or opteron dual core vs one of the newer, c2d chips?

A

aidanjm

Lifer
I understand the c2d are superior, but I'm not doing 3D gaming so I wonder if it is worth forking out the $$.

Basically I am wondering if it is worth upgrading my socket 939 mobo (having to buy new mobo, memory, and chip).

I am using Kubuntu linux.

I don't play games. the most cpu-intensive task I do would be encoding dvds or ripping dvds.

basically I just want to know if I would get a faster, snappier desktop by upgrading.

I do multitask heavily. the main time I notice my computer stalling or pausing is when I am doing heavy file copying tasks (copying lots of files or large files). I don't know if this issue would be influenced by CPU speed anyway.


 
Generally, I'd say no. It truly depends on how much you are going to spend. Getting an X2 3800 will set you back $120 bucks and you won't have to upgrade anything at all (with the possible exception of the BIOS). If you plan on spending over $500, though, going for a mid-range Core 2 with a new motherboard and RAM is worth it, since X2s aren't that competitive over the $250-300 mark. If you plan on overclocking significantly then going Core is also a better way to go, since these CPUs have a lot of clock headroom.

Personally, being the cheap person that I am, I'd just spend $120 bucks for an X2, even if overclocking. Intel is having some very tasty price cuts in the second half of the year and AMD will be releasing it's long-awaited Barcelona core, so the choices will be even better then if you find that you need more than an X2.
 
If that's what you're gonna be doing with your computer then i would suggest not doing the move to C2D.

I have a C2D and i think its great but it would b a waste with the stuff that you do with it.

If you're getting pauses from copying files its probably cause of your hard drive and not the cpu.

If you REALLY want an upgrade. I don't know what cpu u have but i'd suggest you just getting an Opteron 165 if you don't have one already. It can overclock it to 2.8ghz easily.

Also ram is always great to upgrade if you don't already have at least 2gb. But like i said before i dunno wut u have already.

 
it is a low spec computer, an amd 64 3000, and 1 gig of memory. altho under Kubuntu it seems speedy enough for things like watching tv, listening to music, working on documents and web browsing so I haven't really needed to upgrade.
 
I think you will get a big kick off with X2 upgrade. That dual core will work nicely for your DVD encoding and multitasking. But an all out C2D probably is too expensive to justify the gain. However that said if you OC then the difference might be large especially in areas like Media encoding where C2D is as much as 25% fast on the same clock speed. However, I think in your case, upgrade to a nice and cheap X2 939 will be the most bang for the buck choice and believe me I am running a 754 single core and is saving up for either X2 or C2D build since 754 can't go dual core. This is also due to my frequent encoding of DVD/other recorded shows I wish to keep. It just takes forever to do it on this single core rig now.
 
I had a QX until i sold it not to long ago.

I currently went back to my MC as my main rig until the new 45nm die's come out.


I'll tell you exactly how it feels.

The Intel is fast. I have to admit it. SuperPI times unbelieveble. Fast media conversions, and it even gives that extra 4-5 fps on games. Thats a lot from a CPU standpoint btw.

However, my opty... its fast too, superpi times are almost double... but.. i dont do anything that would require me to run superpi extremely fast over and over.

Media Conversions- ummm i dont think i honestly mind the extra 3-5 min it will take to encode something... should i ever have to..

4-5fps on games.... mmmmmm i think anything above 60fps yours eyes dont notice... so getting 64fps over 60fps.. ummmm okey...


So its basically all in your standpoint and how long you intend to keep the machine. The intel machine will of course be kept up in technology. DDR ram is slowly starting to get phased out like SDRAM did.

The Intel machine will probably handle everything Vista throws at it, and is more future proof then the AMD.

So i say whatever fits your budget more. If its tight, get the AMD. Its honestly not that much slower. Having Raptors in Raid will probably be a better investment on a AMD, then non raptors on Intel.

If you wanna splurge, get the Intel.
 
Originally posted by: aidanjm
I do multitask heavily. the main time I notice my computer stalling or pausing is when I am doing heavy file copying tasks (copying lots of files or large files). I don't know if this issue would be influenced by CPU speed anyway.
Click to expand...
While the guys above me are correct, you're also correct in your assumption. The only way to eliminate slow hard drive access while transferring large files is to go RAID. Realize, though, that even with RAID 0, your hard drive will still be much, much slower while transferring files, than it will be when you aren't transferring files. That's just a limitation of file transfers, no matter how fast your hard drive(s) are.
 
If u are going to upgrade to a Core2 then go with the low ones. They OC nicely and can get you the power that you are looking for and also save you some money rather than buying a midrange or highend C2D.
 
If you're encoding straight off DVDs, you'll find that a lot of good CPUs (including X2s) can encode faster than drives can rip. More CPU power won't really speed things up for you in that department.
 
upgrading from single core to dual core won't make any performance gain so I heard but it runs smooth noticely when running mutli tasking other apps.
 
BTW if you didn't realize the X2 and opteron's are pretty much the same. The only real difference is that opterons have twice the cache and tend to overclock better than the X2's. I used to have an opteron 165 and i loved it. If you're willing to spend a bit of extra cash over the x2 3800 i would definitely suggest the opteron's over the X2's.
 
if you want to stay with AMD, opteron 165 is best option as of now. If you plan to rebuild a new computer, go C2D of course
 
Originally posted by: ineedaname
BTW if you didn't realize the X2 and opteron's are pretty much the same. The only real difference is that opterons have twice the cache and tend to overclock better than the X2's. I used to have an opteron 165 and i loved it. If you're willing to spend a bit of extra cash over the x2 3800 i would definitely suggest the opteron's over the X2's.
Click to expand...

i might have to get an opteron 165 anyways, as I can't seem to find a new socket 939 x2, I guess they are more or less phased out
 
Originally posted by: myocardia
Originally posted by: aidanjm
I do multitask heavily. the main time I notice my computer stalling or pausing is when I am doing heavy file copying tasks (copying lots of files or large files). I don't know if this issue would be influenced by CPU speed anyway.
Click to expand...
While the guys above me are correct, you're also correct in your assumption. The only way to eliminate slow hard drive access while transferring large files is to go RAID. Realize, though, that even with RAID 0, your hard drive will still be much, much slower while transferring files, than it will be when you aren't transferring files. That's just a limitation of file transfers, no matter how fast your hard drive(s) are.
Click to expand...

My Opteron overclocked to 2.7GHz is very nice. But, I have noticed while transferring large files to an external drive via USB, it bogs me down even while just web browsing at the same time. I don't have a raid set up. Just have one large drive right now. Would a raid speed things up? It's not a CPU problem, since CPU usage is very low while doing this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top