bigpimp101
New Member
is there really a big difference b/w these two or is it not worth the 50 some odd dollars?
x2 3800 vs. 4200
- Thread starter bigpimp101
- Start date
You could look over the specifications for each right at AMD. For the 3800+ X2, http://www.amdcompare.com/us-en/desktop/details.aspx?opn=ADA3800DAA5CD and for the 4200+ X2, http://www.amdcompare.com/us-en/desktop/details.aspx?opn=ADA4200DAA5CD
fade2green514
Active Member
if you know how to overclock, the X2 3800+ is just as good.
you can get it to 2.4ghz easily with a hypertransport multiplier of 4, ddr divider of 166mhz and change the fsb to 240.
this gives results of 2.4ghz proc (normally no overvolt required), ddr400 ram, and 960mhz hypertransport vs. stock 2ghz proc, ddr400 ram, 1000mhz hypertransport (the lower hypertransport makes no difference at all)
if you do spend more on a proc, get the 4400+ instead. it's got more cache... and you can't add cache! however, you can add frequency fairly easily
to me it wasn't worth the extra like $150-$200 to upgrade... since once i get on water cooling i'll be able to hit 2.7ghz hopefully 2.8ghz
you can get it to 2.4ghz easily with a hypertransport multiplier of 4, ddr divider of 166mhz and change the fsb to 240.
this gives results of 2.4ghz proc (normally no overvolt required), ddr400 ram, and 960mhz hypertransport vs. stock 2ghz proc, ddr400 ram, 1000mhz hypertransport (the lower hypertransport makes no difference at all)
if you do spend more on a proc, get the 4400+ instead. it's got more cache... and you can't add cache! however, you can add frequency fairly easily
to me it wasn't worth the extra like $150-$200 to upgrade... since once i get on water cooling i'll be able to hit 2.7ghz hopefully 2.8ghz
When you start OCing you will want water cooling if not some other type of extra cooling to chill that puppy down. If you notice any large performance drops after a reinstall of Windows or going from a Service Pack 1 to SP2 note an article on multiple cpu boards that seems to apply to dual core cpus as well. http://support.microsoft.com/?id=896256
Dr Studly
banned
yea, basically the 4200+ is usually always able to stay 200MHz above the 3800+...
i mean it isn't like they are the same thing one is just underclocked 100MHz and the other is overclocked 100MHz... they aren't the exact same thing, just chosen to be what they are, they are different processors... and the 4200+ can always stay 200MHz faster then the 3800+
i mean it isn't like they are the same thing one is just underclocked 100MHz and the other is overclocked 100MHz... they aren't the exact same thing, just chosen to be what they are, they are different processors... and the 4200+ can always stay 200MHz faster then the 3800+
Once you have two unlocked processors with one faster then the other you also have to remember that the equal OC on both will still see the faster model running at a faster clock speed as long it has a faster fsb to begin with. Sometime back someone mentioned equaling the Atholon XP3200+'s 2.205ghz when OCing an XP2600+ out to the 2.2ghz mark. What was the big difference when the XP3200+ went only up to 2.3ghz was the front side bus of 400mhz compared to the 333mhz of the Barton 2600+. That can make all the difference there despite the small OC with the faster model.
Geoff
VIP Member
the 3800+ has more overclocking potential than the 4200+ does, meaning that the overclock percentage will generally be higher on the 3800+ than the 4200+.Encore4More said:yea, OC the 3800+ to 2.2GHz, then OC the 4200+ to 2.4GHzwe have been through this...
they aren't the same exact thing
fade2green514
Active Member
actually the 3800+ would put out just as much heat as a 4600+ as long as it isn't overvolted.PC eye said:
the overclockability depends on the stepping and when it was manufactured, not the model number... sorry to disappoint you but a 4200+ thats the same as a 3800+ is 200mhz more overclockable... theyre both just as overclockable if you know how to use memory dividers and how to lower hypertransport frequency.
Last edited:
Geoff
VIP Member
If your referring to my post, then your wrong.fade2green514 said:
Just because its 200Mhz faster stock doesnt mean that its going to be 200Mhz faster in the end. The same goes with the Pentium D, the 920 has a higher overclock percentage than the 930 does. On a hardware review site for instance, they got the 920 up to ~3.93Ghz, and they got the 930 up to ~4.0Ghz.