• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD X2 4400 and 4800 Socket 939 1MB Cache CPU's - NEW LOW PRICES!!

frankmcg said:
Sorry should have said - it is the old Newcastle core.
Click to expand...
Yes then there should be a noticeable difference - that is the same upgrade as what i have just done, id recommend it and say go for it - definately a big improvement
 
goody_106 said:
Yes then there should be a noticeable difference - that is the same upgrade as what i have just done, id recommend it and say go for it - definately a big improvement
Click to expand...

I'll probably do it anyway despite the benchmarks showing no improvement for single core apps/games. I guess the benefit will come further down the line or where did you see the most improvement?
 
That makes me happy. Plan on getting a 4400+ tomorrow and ideally would like to aim for 2.7 as well. Will be using it with a Big Typhoon so I just wanted to make sure you were under air and not using water :)
 
I know most people seem to favour the 4400+ but what about the 4600+? It is only a few quid more for as standard a higher clock speed, I know that there is less cache per core but wondered what people thought.

I really want the 4800+ but can't quite justify the extra £130 or so to get that, and I would be happy with a machine running at comparable performance to that processor.

For cooling either of these processors I thought of the Akasa AK-920 EVO 120 what are peoples opinions of that?

Thanks in advance for your help.
 
frankmcg said:
I'll probably do it anyway despite the benchmarks showing no improvement for single core apps/games. I guess the benefit will come further down the line or where did you see the most improvement?
Click to expand...
Overall performance i cant realy state because i haven't had the time to test it just yet that will be a weekend thing - but in windows flicking around it is a lot more responsive and burning cd's there has been a definite improvement

Like i mentioned before though the main difference is the temps and lower voltage it runs at - my 3500+ required 1.55v to get it stable at 2.6 whereas this is perfectly stable at 2.5 running at just under 1.4v - and the stock voltage of the 3500 was 1.5v anyway

when i get chance to test it more over the weekend i'l get back to you but i think there a good investment as im sure more games/apps will utilise the dual core technology in the near future
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom