AMD4000 single core or AMD 3800 x2 dual core!!!!

D

divemaster127

New Member
Hey guys i need a opinion i did a upgrade this weekend & im using at the moment a amd 3800 x2 dual core, i have been doing some reading & thought maybe i should go with a amd 4000 single core, im doing mostly gaming & also want to look to the future, they cost about the same, what do you guys think would be better for me. I did read where some games released patches such as COD2 & the game runs better on dual core now, im mostly playing WOW2
thanks
gary
 
well, the 3800+ is a better choice if you plan on o/cing it. make sure you have enough cooling and such, because it will definitely be a better choice with the overclock...
 
yea, try getting a nice o/cable motherboard (NOT A GIGABYTE).
try the ECS KN1 SLI extreme.. it o/ced nicely for me.
also, try the same thing i did. use the default cpu multiplier of 10, ddr divider of ddr333, and an ldt bus of 240. then, your cpu will run at 2.4ghz, your motherboard (hypertransport) will run at 1.2ghz, and your ram will run at ddr400, or default settings. and then if you want extra ram bandwidth you can just lower its timings!
 
Right now, at this point in time, the 4000 would be better, because it is a very fast single core processor. But, if you want to be able to use multiple applications, or want to think about the future too (which you said you did), then you definately want the dual core. The x2 3800+ is relatively cheap, and relatively fast, when running multiple programs, it is not uncommon for it to complete them faster than AMD's flagship FX-55 or FX-57's. So, I would say the dual core, becasue it will give you much more power with multiple applications, and every day games and programs in general are recieving larger performance benefits from having a dual core.
 
Ive read alot of stuff saying that dual cores are not the way to go for games.
Click to expand...
A lot? Really? care to share any of that with us ;)

The x2 3800+ is relatively cheap, and relatively fast,
Click to expand...
reative too.......??????

when running multiple programs, it is not uncommon for it to complete them faster than AMD's flagship FX-55 or FX-57's
Click to expand...
the fx line isn't(in past) really aimed at mulitasking, its more a gaming chip, note however future fx's will probably be dual cores

So, I would say the dual core, becasue it will give you much more power with multiple applications, and every day games and programs in general are recieving larger performance benefits from having a dual core.
Click to expand...
hehe i think you slowly changed your own mind as you prgressed through your post.

and then if you want extra ram bandwidth you can just lower its timings!
Click to expand...
??????
 
cant you still run multithreaded games on a single core. how much more will it be affected by and how much less FPS wil you get in a game.
 
ckfordy said:
cant you still run multithreaded games on a single core. how much more will it be affected by and how much less FPS wil you get in a game.
Click to expand...
Most deffinetly, you can multi-task on a single core system, just not as well as a dual-core system.
 
I also heard about the games being multithreaded. I think it is a personal opinion. With me I am gettin ready to build an fx system for games.
 
What's the difference between the normal 64, FX, and X2 CPU's? I know the X2 is dual core, but what about the FX 64 and 64?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top