• 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.

Last socket 939 upgrade

Youstolemyname

Youstolemyname

Youstolemyname

Soldato
Joined
7 Mar 2005
Posts
5,231
Location
The Voice Of Football
Looking to squeeze the last out of my rig before a new motherboard etc.

I currently have a s939 dfi lanparty mobo with an A64 3500+. I have just got myself 2gb of ram and am looking to upgrade the CPU now. I am quite limited to what is available and want to know what would give me best bang for the buck?

A 4200+ x2 seems a good option but the 4400+ also appeals. However, the 4400+ seems almost double the price wherever I look. Is it worth it for the extra cache size on the 4400 or should I just go for the 4200 and see what overclocks I can get out of it?

Thanks for any advice :)

/edit .....would an opty 165 be worth considering as well?
 
Last edited:
Firstly, if you're going for a Manchester core, then go for the 3800+ X2 rather than the 4200+ X2. The recent 3800s are reaching 2.6Ghz at least on stock voltage, and up to 2.8Ghz with a little more Vcore.

The advantage with the Toledos is the extra cache size, which does provide a noticeable performance boost. The extra 512kb cache per core is supposed to equal around a 200Mhz boost in core clock, which makes the "real world" performance of a 4400+ X2 and a 4600+ X2 around the same.

Having said that, clock speed can be increased with overclocking but you can't add cache. And that cache does make a difference. But as you say, they're pretty expensive because there's not many around now. And as So939 is dead technology, you might be better off grabbing a 3800+ X2 and saving the extra cash for the next upgrade (ie. whole new system).

To sum up:
3800+ X2 Manchester: will clock at least to 2.6Ghz, cheap, but the lack of cache causes worse performance in software which uses that cache (eg. encoding, anything involving large files or the CPU moving data around).

4200+ X2 Manchester: Not worth the extra over the 3800+ X2. If you decide on a Manchester, get the 3800+ X2.

4400+ X2 Toledo: Won't clock as high as the Manchester, the extra cache holds it back. Expensive and hard to find. However, extra L2 cache makes a noticeable difference in real world performance, and the CPU will cope a lot better with cache intensive apps.

If you do a lot of gaming, remember a lot of games will still be single threaded. In this case, the highest core clocked CPU will almost always win out. Ie. A 3800+ clocked to 2.6Ghz will beat a 4400+ clocked to 2.4Ghz in terms of game performance (FPS).

Jon
 
GeForce said:
Firstly, if you're going for a Manchester core, then go for the 3800+ X2 rather than the 4200+ X2. The recent 3800s are reaching 2.6Ghz at least on stock voltage, and up to 2.8Ghz with a little more Vcore.

The advantage with the Toledos is the extra cache size, which does provide a noticeable performance boost. The extra 512kb cache per core is supposed to equal around a 200Mhz boost in core clock, which makes the "real world" performance of a 4400+ X2 and a 4600+ X2 around the same.

Having said that, clock speed can be increased with overclocking but you can't add cache. And that cache does make a difference. But as you say, they're pretty expensive because there's not many around now. And as So939 is dead technology, you might be better off grabbing a 3800+ X2 and saving the extra cash for the next upgrade (ie. whole new system).

To sum up:
3800+ X2 Manchester: will clock at least to 2.6Ghz, cheap, but the lack of cache causes worse performance in software which uses that cache (eg. encoding, anything involving large files or the CPU moving data around).

4200+ X2 Manchester: Not worth the extra over the 3800+ X2. If you decide on a Manchester, get the 3800+ X2.

4400+ X2 Toledo: Won't clock as high as the Manchester, the extra cache holds it back. Expensive and hard to find. However, extra L2 cache makes a noticeable difference in real world performance, and the CPU will cope a lot better with cache intensive apps.

If you do a lot of gaming, remember a lot of games will still be single threaded. In this case, the highest core clocked CPU will almost always win out. Ie. A 3800+ clocked to 2.6Ghz will beat a 4400+ clocked to 2.4Ghz in terms of game performance (FPS).

Jon
Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply, really helpful. What do you think about the option of an opteron 165 x2?, I can pick one up for the same price as the 4200+
 
Oops sorry, didn't see your edit there :)

Also a very good option. Again it has 2x1mb cache (Toledo style).
Advantages (as above):
Extra L2 cache makes a noticeable difference in real world performance, and will cope a lot better with cache intensive apps.

I've used a couple of these and some are absolute overclocking gems. From the 1.8Ghz stock speed, one of them managed to hit 3Ghz on 1.375v. I was rather impressed with that I must say, even if it did get a bit warm on full load :D

However, if you don't get as good a stepping, you can still expect around 2.6Ghz I would say.

The is the "price to pay", as it were, with the extra 512kb cache per core. When you overclock the CPU the frequency the cache runs at is also increased. So it can sometimes be the cache that holds back the overclock even when the core itself is capable of more. So the more cache, the more chance there is of one part of it becoming unstable at increasing speeds.

That said, I must admit I think the 165 is your best option. Being an Opty it will run cooler than its counterparts which gives you more overclocking headroom.

Jon

/Edit: FYI, that 3Ghz 165 I talked about was the LCBQE stepping.
 
Last edited:
No problems :)

Yep, sounds good to me. You should see some fantastic overclocks with that; they're great chips :D

Jon
 
Just one last question.

I currently have 2x512mb of OCZ Platinum Revision 2 running at 2-2-2-5 in dual channel @ stock 400mhz. I have just got hold of 2x1Gb of OCZ Platinum that runs at 2-3-2-5 @ stock 400mhz.

Will I be okay running the four sticks if I drop the timings to 2-3-2-5 or should I just sell the 2x512s and stick with the 2x1gbs
 
Running all four sticks at 2-3-2-5 DDR400 should (see below) be fine. That'll give you 3Gb total, and if at any time in the future you wish to upgrade to 4Gb you can sell the 2x512mb sticks and grab another pair of 1Gb sticks.

I'll just add the following: (copied and pasted from a post I wrote a few days ago).

GeForce said:
Almost all of the dual core So939 chips were E6 revisions, but there are a few E4 revision ones floating around.

The E4 revision had a problem with the onboard memory controller which meant that it couldn't run 4 sticks of RAM at DDR400 - it dropped them down do DDR333.

The E6 revision, however, will run all 4 sticks at DDR400 without a problem.

As I said though, the E4 duals are rare as anything, and you're extremely unlikely to get one, even less so if you purchase it new. I just thought I'd let you know in case you're looking at getting a second hand chip
Click to expand...
Jon
 
Went for the Opteron 165 in the end. Now just can't decide whether to sell the 1gb matched pair or not. Thanks for all your advice again :)

Not sure I really need 3gb and it could go towards a new gfx card.....

Decisions decision...
 
Good choice :)

With regards to the RAM, if you're not going to utilise the extra, I would sell it and put the cash towards a new GFX card. I think that will be of more use to you :)

Glad to be of help ;)

Jon
 
well, got the opteron 165 in and on a nice overclock @ 2.7ghz on stock volts with air cooling. Just running a divider at the moment to see how far I can push it.

However, idle temp appears to be 38 degrees and under full load (two instances of prime running) it shot up to 54 degrees quite quickly.

What are generally the 'accepted' temps for these chips, I know they will run hotter but this is HOT!

I see people mentioning the temps of both cores being different. How can I check the temps of each core? I just run ITE smart guardian to test.

I know I will get a few degrees drop when the AS5 beds in but am concerned about how hot this is.
 
60C is a good maximum. I try and keep mine under 55C, but then, I'm paranoid :D

CoreTemp is great for checking temps. If using version 0.95, make sure you install the AMD Dual Core Optimiser before you attempt to run it. If you don't it will probably cause a crash, instant power off, reboot, etc. You get the picture ;)

Jon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom