When is the right time to buy the X2 4200+?

filip-matijevic said:
omg, well of course the multi is higher, all AMD's 64 have a FSB of 200 MHz.
Click to expand...
Then why are you saying that an X2 4200+ is just an OC'd 3800+, when they have the same FSB?

It's the same for practically all CPU's. Take the Pentium D for example, the only difference between the 920 and 930 is the multiplier, the 920 is 1x lower.
 
Last edited:
Ask anyone here that knows something about CPU's. THe difference between the X2 3800+ and X2 4200+ is the multiplier, they dont OC the 3800+ to get to 2.2Ghz, and then sell it.

As i said before, the same goes for almost all the CPU's out there, from Pentium 4's to Athlon 64's.
 
[-0MEGA-] said:
Ask anyone here that knows something about CPU's. THe difference between the X2 3800+ and X2 4200+ is the multiplier, they dont OC the 3800+ to get to 2.2Ghz, and then sell it.

As i said before, the same goes for almost all the CPU's out there, from Pentium 4's to Athlon 64's.
Click to expand...

I know that but it doesn't mean that it will OC higher then the one that has a lower multiplier. Enough already, 4200+ isn't worth it if you are planning to OC, as I said, either the 3800+ or the 4400+
 
filip-matijevic said:
I know that but it doesn't mean that it will OC higher then the one that has a lower multiplier. Enough already, 4200+ isn't worth it if you are planning to OC, as I said, either the 3800+ or the 4400+
Click to expand...
Granted the overclock percentage isnt as high on the 4200+ as the 3800+, however it will most likely end up being able to OC a little further than the 3800+.

But you are right, if you want to OC you might as well get the 3800+ or 4400+. If your not going to OC, then the 4200+ may be a good CPU for you.
 
[-0MEGA-] said:
Granted the overclock percentage isnt as high on the 4200+ as the 3800+, however it will most likely end up being able to OC a little further than the 3800+.

But you are right, if you want to OC you might as well get the 3800+ or 4400+. If your not going to OC, then the 4200+ may be a good CPU for you.
Click to expand...

Great how we settled it up without any major fighting. ;)
 
Well, as I stated before, I wanted to do a bit of overclocking. My goal is a 200MHz overclock, 400MHz MAX. As you can see, I am not very hardcore. :D The 4200+ looks like the best processor for me, since its right in my price range, and it has good potental at stock speeds like Omega said, and it can take light OC'ing like you guys were ranting about.
 
Dialamo said:
Well, as I stated before, I wanted to do a bit of overclocking. My goal is a 200MHz overclock, 400MHz MAX. As you can see, I am not very hardcore. :D The 4200+ looks like the best processor for me, since its right in my price range, and it has good potental at stock speeds like Omega said, and it can take light OC'ing like you guys were ranting about.
Click to expand...

I suppose you know where all of this things are, so here it goes:

* Set FSB to 236 MHz (236*11=2600)
* Set HTT multiplier to 4X (not the actual core mutliplier, 11X default)
* Set RAM divider to 166 MHz (333 MHz), your DDR won't be OC'ed, it will run at default 400 MHz
* Set the PCI syncronisation clock to 33.33 MHz (if it's Auto it's OK, it is by default, though)

That's it, if it becomes unstable, just increase the vcore a bit
 
filip-matijevic said:
I suppose you know where all of this things are, so here it goes:

* Set FSB to 236 MHz (236*11=2600)
* Set HTT multiplier to 4X (not the actual core mutliplier, 11X default)
* Set RAM divider to 166 MHz (333 MHz), your DDR won't be OC'ed, it will run at default 400 MHz
* Set the PCI syncronisation clock to 33.33 MHz (if it's Auto it's OK, it is by default, though)

That's it, if it becomes unstable, just increase the vcore a bit
Click to expand...
Thank you very much for your help. When I get my PC, I will try this when I have it all set up and all my drivers configured. And obvously, I will have to do little increments of 5-10MHz for doing this and not going directly to 2600MHz. I will test stability with Prime 95 and Super Pi. Are you sure the core multiplier on the 4200+ is 11?
 
the multiplyer on the 3800+ is 10, on the 4200+ it is 11... so when overclocking, the 4200+ will get around 200MHz higher... HA i wus right all a long...

check it out
Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2000 MHz 2 x 512 KB 1000 MHz 10x multiplyers 1.35-1.40 V 89 W Socket 939 August 1, 2005

Athlon 64 X2 4200+ 2200 MHz 2 x 512 KB 1000 MHz 11x multiplyers 1.35-1.40 V 89 W Socket 939 May 31, 2005 ADA4200DAA5BV

Athlon 64 X2 4600+ 2400 MHz 2 x 512 KB 1000 MHz 12x multiplyers 1.35-1.40 V 110 W Socket 939 May 31, 2005 ADA4600DAA5BV


want proof?!?!?!?!? click here look at the manchester dual-core processors...

SEE HA!!!!!!!!!!!

proves that my reasoning is correct...

if a good 3800+ can get to approx 2.6GHz, then a good 4200+ should get around 2.8GHz, and a 4600+ should get approx 3GHz... O YEA...

hahaha, now there will be no argument on this matter...
it isn't that they are clocked higher, they have more multipplyiers... YAY!!!

oooo i feel good about myself today...
 
Last edited:
No, it would work like an FX-60, since the 4800 is clocked at 2.4. The only difference would be the multipliers. By the way, don't you have an FX-60 like it says in your sig?
 
Encore4More said:
it isn't that they are clocked higher, they have more multipplyiers... YAY!!!
Click to expand...

I thought you knew that. :confused:

Encore4More said:
if a good 3800+ can get to approx 2.6GHz, then a good 4200+ should get around 2.8GHz, and a 4600+ should get approx 3GHz... O YEA...
Click to expand...

Mmm... NO! That doesn't mean it will be stable, well not on air cooling at least.

Let's say it like this:

There is a chance that you can OC a 3800+ to 2.8 GHz (280*10), it doesn't mean that the 4800+ will work at those speeds too.
 
Last edited:
Encore4More said:
the multiplyer on the 3800+ is 10, on the 4200+ it is 11... so when overclocking, the 4200+ will get around 200MHz higher... HA i wus right all a long...

check it out
Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2000 MHz 2 x 512 KB 1000 MHz 10x multiplyers 1.35-1.40 V 89 W Socket 939 August 1, 2005

Athlon 64 X2 4200+ 2200 MHz 2 x 512 KB 1000 MHz 11x multiplyers 1.35-1.40 V 89 W Socket 939 May 31, 2005 ADA4200DAA5BV

Athlon 64 X2 4600+ 2400 MHz 2 x 512 KB 1000 MHz 12x multiplyers 1.35-1.40 V 110 W Socket 939 May 31, 2005 ADA4600DAA5BV


want proof?!?!?!?!? click here look at the manchester dual-core processors...

SEE HA!!!!!!!!!!!

proves that my reasoning is correct...

if a good 3800+ can get to approx 2.6GHz, then a good 4200+ should get around 2.8GHz, and a 4600+ should get approx 3GHz... O YEA...

hahaha, now there will be no argument on this matter...
it isn't that they are clocked higher, they have more multipplyiers... YAY!!!

oooo i feel good about myself today...
Click to expand...
they need the same voltage to get to a certain frequency... i've seen guys with X2 3800+'s on air 3ghz easily!
its all luck of the draw, cpu's are likea box of chocolates... lol at forest gumps mama once said... wow that was weird... you never know what you'll get.
anyways, the X2 3800+, the X2 4200+, and the X2 4600+ are all the same... different multiplier. technically the X2 4600+ would be clocked the highest for the fsb that you set, but you can always implement ddr dividers and lower hypertransport multipliers. ultimately, i can get my chip to 2.6ghz at 1.5V, but other guys have gotten X2 3800+'s to 3ghz (yes, i've seen it, they were at a LAN party) on 1.5V on air just as i am.
maybe i'll get to 2.75ghz someday...
just bought some nice sandpaper and i plan on lapping my IHS and HSF to a mirrored finish :) that should clear up any extra heat within there!
200, 400, 600, 800, 1000, 1500, and 2000 grit! :P lol

most dual core procs would need a lot of voltage and probably at LEAST vapochill in order to reach 3ghz... and even then it would have to be a DAMN good quality chip! lol
the most i've seen was an fx-55 on overclock.net... it was like 3.7ghz or somethin but the guy had it running at -105C or somethin like that... the insulation he needed was ridiculous, but you know some people live for that kind of thing!
odd part was he was using a 15" LCD lol! fast computer tiny monitor! lol
 
Last edited:
fade2green514 said:
they need the same voltage to get to a certain frequency... i've seen guys with X2 3800+'s on air 3ghz easily!
its all luck of the draw, cpu's are likea box of chocolates... lol at forest gumps mama once said... wow that was weird... you never know what you'll get.
anyways, the X2 3800+, the X2 4200+, and the X2 4600+ are all the same... different multiplier. technically the X2 4600+ would be clocked the highest for the fsb that you set, but you can always implement ddr dividers and lower hypertransport multipliers. ultimately, i can get my chip to 2.6ghz at 1.5V, but other guys have gotten X2 3800+'s to 3ghz (yes, i've seen it, they were at a LAN party) on 1.5V on air just as i am.
maybe i'll get to 2.75ghz someday...
just bought some nice sandpaper and i plan on lapping my IHS and HSF to a mirrored finish :) that should clear up any extra heat within there!
200, 400, 600, 800, 1000, 1500, and 2000 grit! :P lol
Click to expand...
Encore is right in saying that the only difference is the multiplier. If you were to overclock both the 3800+ and 4200+, it most likely wont be 200Mhz higher, but generally speaking the overclock will be slightly higher.

BTW, what happened to your liquid cooling?

-Geoff
 
fade2green514 said:
the most i've seen was an fx-55 on overclock.net... it was like 3.7ghz or somethin but the guy had it running at -105C or somethin like that... the insulation he needed was ridiculous, but you know some people live for that kind of thing!
odd part
Click to expand...

-190°C
 
yea i know i have the fx-60 but i never knew that if you overclock the 4400 then you will get it working as the fx

And one more thing how could he get -190 what cooling that would be?phase?
 
filip-matijevic said:
-190°C
Click to expand...
WHOA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! is that healthy for the processor??????????????????

i always thought that they should make cases that work like refrigorators...
 
Encore4More said:
WHOA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! is that healthy for the processor??????????????????

i always thought that they should make cases that work like refrigorators...
Click to expand...
Can you say loud?

Refrigerators would be very loud, they would produce alot of condensation, and use alot of electricity.


-Geoff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top