Opinions please...

[Celador]

Am finally getting closer to the big spend and swapping my 32-bit 3.2Gb rig for a bright shiny new 939 board and (hopefully) dual-core CPU.

The question I have is this: in light of the news that the AM2 boards are on their way, if the now the right time to upgrade? If so, are dual or single core chips the answer?

I have read that dual-core chips aren't necessarily what they're cracked up to be and that some single core CPUs outperform them??

Anybody got any light to shed please??

cheers,
Cel

 

[Jimbo Mahoney]

'Now' is never the right time to upgrade

What's your application?

How long do you hope to keep your CPU before replacing it? If <1 year, get a fast single core, if >1 year, get a dual core.

 

[Celador]

Cheers Jimbo - mainly gaming although I do use some fairly hefty spreadhseets for work stuff.

Have had the 3.2athlon for approx 18 months - 2 years now and have been busily upgrading everything to match so all is now cool but am starting to see some performance drop off with the recent batch of games hence the move to 64-bit.

So far, 3.8 dual core and 3.7 single core have been what I've looked at but am open to other considerations!

 

[easyrider]

I have read that dual-core chips aren't necessarily what they're cracked up to be and that some single core CPUs outperform them??

Anybody got any light to shed please??

A faster cpu eg 2.4 ghz over a 2.2ghz

Will of course run faster in a single threaded environment.

However in multi threaded environments the dual cores trounce the single core chips.

A dual core 2.2ghz will beat a single core 2.4 ghz easily

I have a dual core opteron running at 2.6 ghz and I could not go back to using a single core cpu in a month of sundays.

 

[ACESHIGH]

I would say 3.8 dual core would be the way to go.
Having tried dual core it is the way forward.
Also if keeping the CPU as long as your last one, you will see the benefit in the long run.

 

[Jimbo Mahoney]

Yup, as Aceshigh says, if you are keeping this new CPU for as long as two years, dual core is probably the right choice.

 

[Celador]

OK - Looks like the 3.8 dual core is probably the way forward then - thanks for the advice guys.

One last quickie though; I have noticed that going upwards through the 64-bit range, in both single as well as dual core, the level 2 cache memory goes up to 1mb (e.g. d/c 4400) but then the next jump upwards, the 4600 is back down to 512k cache.

Question is - I know that level 2 cache is important but how much importance would it have in this scenario? Am asking cos I may be able to bump up from the 3800 dual core and am wondering which one would be the better value re bang-per-buck..?

 

[easyrider]

The extra cache is roughly the same to a 200 mhz speed increase.
If you can afford the 4400 go for it but the

4200
4600 are a waste of money IMO.

Either the

x2 3800
x2 4400

are the chips to go for depending on budget.

the extra cache will help in games it all depends on what you have to spend.