Jump to content

Welcome to Geeks to Go - Register now for FREE

Geeks To Go is a helpful hub, where thousands of volunteer geeks quickly serve friendly answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts. Register now to gain access to all of our features, it's FREE and only takes one minute. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more.

Create Account How it Works
Photo

AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ or Athlon 64 3700+?


  • Please log in to reply

#1
rumble291

rumble291

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 430 posts
Which processor will be better for gaming either a Athlon 64 X2 3800+ or Athlon 64 3700+?

Thanks,

Kurt
  • 0

Advertisements


#2
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
The 3700+ is the better choice all round, assuming youre talking san diego versus venice.
  • 0

#3
rumble291

rumble291

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 430 posts
Ok, thanks for that. Which would be a good AGP motherboard for that?

Thanks,

Kurt
  • 0

#4
Seven!

Seven!

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 161 posts
If you're going to be gaming, don't get an AGP motherboard, get one with a PCI-ex16 slot.

DFI motherboards are really nice, I'd buy a DFI Ultimate if I had the money.
  • 0

#5
The Colonel

The Colonel

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 232 posts
The 3700+ is going to be better at the moment, but an X2 3800+ is going to be better soon when dual core is utilized in games.
  • 0

#6
rumble291

rumble291

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 430 posts
Yeah ive already got an ok AGP card so i'm gonna upgrade to an ATI Radeon X1800XT in winter so im hanging onto my X700 a bit longer. So which do you reckon I should get? The games im playing atm are: COD2, BF2, CS:S, DOD:S I heard that CS:S has got 64 bit and dual core support but im not sure which processor to go for. I mainly use my pc for gaming but I also use it for: MSN Messenger, Microsoft office, WinRAR etc.

Thanks,

Kurt
  • 0

#7
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
What are you talking here 3700+ i san diego but the 3800+ are you talking the venice single or the manchester dual.

CSS has 64 bit support yes, the dx10 cards will be out by winter so i wouldnt get an x1800.
  • 0

#8
The Colonel

The Colonel

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 232 posts
Since he said X2, you can assume it is dual core.
  • 0

#9
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
*warriorscot never noticed is always in hurry these days, too much stress, too many exams and too little time.
  • 0

#10
JourneyMan

JourneyMan

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 86 posts
3700+

Duel core only gives the most minor of improvements if any at all. It is doubtful if games will take real advantage of duel core in the next 2 years or so. Remember that their primary purpose is to make money, and it wouldn't make financial sense to make a game that would signifigantly better on a duel core. Graphics are another story entirely, so don't confuse the two.

DX10 will signifigantly reduce the load on cpus, so a 3700+ will last you at least a year or so and still scream. Heck, you could probably get 2 years out of it with overclocking.
  • 0

Advertisements


#11
rumble291

rumble291

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 430 posts
Sorry, Im talking about the Athlon 64 3700+ San Diego and the Athlon X2 3800+ Manchester yes dual core. How much are the DX10 GFX cards gonna cost around?

Thanks,

Kurt
  • 0

#12
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
I dunno given that i would go dual core its the newer technology and is going to be the standard game developers are making games to make use of two cores now and its only going to be more common as time passes and the 3800+ is still fast enough single core to do the job.

Until they modify the GPUs to handle physics operations the second core can be a useful thing to have for games these days as games that make use of it will do very well. I would wait a little till the AM2 socket comes out prices will go down and you might be able to afford a new am2 chip.

Prices for dx10, how long is a piece of string? It will be the usual full range release(for some reason think they are only going to release one uber expensivre card for dx10).
  • 0

#13
The Colonel

The Colonel

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 232 posts
Actually, quite a few games are getting dual core patches. Dual Core is going to be coming in full force not in 2 years but more around November. Once all the DX10 games come out such as the new FarCry and CryTek, they will support dual-core. Dual-core is faster than single core (usually). A 3700+ is not going to beat 2 3200+s together. 3800+ = 2.2 GHz x 2 3700+ = 2.2 GHz (more powerful than a 3200+ 2.2 GHz though). The 3800+ will beat a 3700+ with ease and will last longer. I, though, would wait until AM2 and Conroe. I know AMD has the advantage now, but Intel is looking to agressively price the Conroe as to make it more appealing. Also, they look to be very powerful processors as well.
  • 0

#14
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
Well actually because of the single threaded nature of the games out now and most in the future wont be truly dual core they will just make better use of it. A 3700+ will beat a 3800+x2 in a few things especially single thread apps, but the x2 has the advantage when using threaded apps and allows for a truer form of multi tasking.

Conroe cores look to be pretty expensive from what ive read, in the $500+ range which is usual for such a new CPU, the huge chache size makes them quite expensive to produce.
  • 0

#15
jrm20

jrm20

    System building expert

  • Retired Staff
  • 2,394 posts

Well actually because of the single threaded nature of the games out now and most in the future wont be truly dual core they will just make better use of it. A 3700+ will beat a 3800+x2 in a few things especially single thread apps, but the x2 has the advantage when using threaded apps and allows for a truer form of multi tasking.

Conroe cores look to be pretty expensive from what ive read, in the $500+ range which is usual for such a new CPU, the huge chache size makes them quite expensive to produce.



Well only the top conroe dual core at 2.66ghz will be in the $500 range, not counting the extreme edition..


E6700: 2.66 GHz / FSB 1066/ 4 MB shared L2 cache
E6600: 2.40 GHz / FSB 1066/ 4 MB shared L2 cache
E6400: 2.13 GHz / FSB 1066/ 2 MB shared L2 cache
E6300: 1.86 GHz / FSB 1066/ 2 MB shared L2 cache
E4200: 1.60 GHz / FSB 800/ 2 MB shared L2 cache
Conroe Extreme Edition (XE): Specifications unknown

The E6600: 2.40 GHz / FSB 1066/ 4 MB shared L2 cache will be $316 which is really cheap for the performance of the chip. The 2.40 Ghz conroe version could still beat an amd fx-60 after looking at the 2.66ghz conroe vs an overclocked fx-60 at 2.8ghz benchmarks..

Overall the 2.40ghz conroe cpu is the best price to performance ratio right now..
  • 0






Similar Topics

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

As Featured On:

Microsoft Yahoo BBC MSN PC Magazine Washington Post HP