Help needed, fanboy's please keep schtumm and move along

[MoD_Callidus]

Hi All,

I'm having an issue whether to keep my X2 4200+ currently at 2.9 or to move to a 2180 an run that at 3-3.2 ish apart from the slight bump in clock speed would there be any definate noticable benefit? I do the odd bit of encoding ( audio and video ) light gaming, office task's and that's about it.

The X2 does everything I need it to at the moment but like everyone here if I can get "more" I'd like "more" hence the 30% o/c on the X2

I'm using XP but can see me moving over to vista in the next 6 months so I can utilise more memory, my current setup (as per sig) limits me to 2gb max, I understand that vista would be a more comfortable experience with 4gb+. If this is true then whilst moving from a shuttle to a traditional ATX system would I be wise to move to C2D with the option of going Quad next year ?

As title I don't want this to become the same old amd/intel slagging match, I'm not tied to any company I merely want the best I get get for as little as possible.

Thanks

 

[lsg1r]

Personally I wouldn't bother, as you're thinking of a full upgrade later - assuming your cpu is s939 you would basically need motherboard, ram and cpu (plus cooler), if am2 then you just need cpu and board.

Also unless you os is a retail you will be breaking the t&c's for it, it would probably work but you might get some issues with authorisation.

You say the x2 is doing everything you need so is it worth spending the extra for a few fps or a few minutes saved here and there.

Another thing to consider is that prices are coming down all the time at the moment due to the current price battles. So come the update the money you've spent now could be put towards the new stuff and maybe get you more.

 

[manveruppd]

It's generally the case that C2Ds are better at encoding than X2s, but upgrading to a 2180@3GHz is probably only gonna give you a slight boost in performance. If you check out the charts at tomshardware.com you'll see that the performance difference in most tasks between a C2D and an AM2 at the same clockspeed (3GHz) is noticeable but still minor. Whether it's going to be worth the £120-odd that it's gonna cost is entirely dependent on how much £120 is worth to you.
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=921&model2=872&chart=432
If you feel that your next big upgrade step is going to be Quad Core, Vista, and 4GB RAM in 6 months, why not wait 6 months and jump directly to whichever quad will be best value at the time?

 

[Mattus]

I'm an Intel fan these days, but I would stick with the X2 in this case. In gaming I don't think the 3850Pro is quite quick enough to really expose the limitations of the X2. The X2 might fall behind when encoding but the advantage gained from moving to a C2D with 1MB cache is IMO not worth the cost.

If I were you I'd wait until the cheaper Penryn-core quads are out before you upgrade. The quad would make a big difference in encoding where I don't think going to a dual-core Intel is worth it.

 

[Lightnix]

Unless you find your system is really struggling, I wouldn't really bother... Lots of hassle just to change your processor which, as you say, is doing what you want it to.

Although a lower clocked Core 2 processor will normally beat an Athlon 64 that's clocked higher than it (A 2.6Ghz Core 2 E6750 vs. a 3.2 Ghz Athlon 64 6400+ usually favours the Core 2 system).

 

[MoD_Callidus]

couldn't have asked for a better response than that, all your input is much appreciated fellas, cost wasn't an issue at all. I could replace my sn25p with mobo + psu + case at no loss, X2 would have fetched £45 ish as it's a damn good clocker, I'd have made a tad on Ram as my OCZ would go for around £85 at auction. I'd have retained hdd's dvd r/w gpu. as you pointed out there is little if any real world gain I'll stay nicely where I am.

Thanks again

 

[Corasik]

If your going to upgrade at all, why not wait until next year. Your system isnt slow by todays standards.. Ok not top of the range, but still a very solid performer. Next year Intel will release Yorkfield, and the entry level quad should be a pretty good chip. By then AMD may have resolved the issues with Phenom and get the clock speeds ramped up, in which case another price war will happen.

If you can put up with the performance even longer, the Intel Nehelem based systems should start appearing near the end of 2008, and they will require new sockets/motherboards mebee DDR3... so a 'major' upgrade. So if your able to stick with this system until then you'll get a much much bigger upgrade for your money.

I was able to sit on a 3.2Ghz P4 Northwood core, skipping all the Prescott stuff, and instead of several 'smaller' upgrades (or switching to AMD), I waited and jumped straight to Core 2 Duo.. 100% improvement in performance It was an expensive upgrade... But as I avoided a lot of little upgrades in between overall it was no problem.

 

[steve258]

The X2 does everything I need it to at the moment...

Says it all really

Unless you just want something to play with over Christmas.