Opteron (939) Upgrade Thoughts

[The Codfather]

Thought I'd chuck this query out to the forum.

With Vista up and coming (and having tested it since Beta 2 and looking to move) I think it's about time for me to switch to something Dual Core, but not wanting to change out my entire mobo, CPU and RAM I was thinking of a (relatively) cheap and cheerful upgrade to a Dual Core Opteron.

I've been running an overclocked Opteron 148 for about.. 8 months or so now and it's been perfectly happy and rock solid stable at 3GHz all the time, so as I noticed that Scan have started stocking the Opteron 165-180's for pretty cheap I thought it may be a good time to take the plunge.

I ideally want to change to something that'll get me a lil bit more performance due to the Dual Core but I don't want to lose out over my current chip as it's still got a fair bit of grunt in it.

Worth it, not worth it?

Cheers

[Curly]

Just to throw in to the mix, you could probably (if you shop around) get an E6300+Asrock 775DUAL-VSTA allowing you to use your existing DDR ram, bits...etc for around the price of a dualcore Opteron.

Curly

[excalibur2]

***I've been running an overclocked Opteron 148 for about.. 8 months or so now and it's been perfectly happy and rock solid stable at 3GHz all the time***

Why waste your money (erm well unless you have plenty) on a possible small overall performance increase.....keep your system for another 18 months and go quad core, or spend your money on the new generation of graphic cards.

[The Codfather]

Mm. Core 2 is definitely in the back of my mind. But if I went through with that I'd make sure it was a proper upgrade.

I think you're right (and pretty much confirmed what I was thinking), if there would be no noticeable performance gain then I'll probably just wait a while, see what ATI have to offer in the DX10 race and then do a full proper upgrade.

Cheers for the input people

[chuckskull]

I'd just save the money and go for Core 2 in a few months. the difference between your opty and a dual core one wont be massive, unless you're doing something that has dual core support like high end 3D etc.

[excalibur2]

Mm. Core 2 is definitely in the back of my mind. But if I went through with that I'd make sure it was a proper upgrade.

Tbh, if there would be no noticeable performance gain then I'll probably just wait a while, see what ATI have to offer in the DX10 race and then do a full proper upgrade.

Cheers for the input though

Well if your computer is a hobby, or you have the upgrade bug, loadsa money, or need to upgrade for a specific reason, then why do it if you already have a decent system.
Even some of the guys here have said their new dual core systems don't seem much faster in quite a few applications.

For me I'm upgrading cos I have an xp1600 overclocked to xp2000 and have a knackered AGP circuit on the motherboard...........I don't think many members here would say don't upgrade.

[Zak33]

I recently got lucky (read: borrowed of DR) enough to try a twin core A64, and it WAS worth trying.

My Opteron runs at 2.5 rock solid, and going to a 4800+ cpu was a superb move.

The reason I didn't keep it was simple and sad the game I play most (Lineage2) uses an Unreal Engine and the cpu messes with the game clock and crashes it

But in stuff like Q4 and IL-2 it DID make a difference AND on stuff when you Alt/Tab out, having all that horse power waiting to boot skype, or run Paintshop Pro (for screen shots etc) made it lovely.

I's say "get a twin core A64 of some sort, it's a helluva an upgrade for little dough"

[Mad-Max]

If you have the money then get a Dual core cpu as you will see an improvement

oh and don't listen to the people that say go for C2D just for the sake of it

[MSIC]

Am in a similar boat - frustrating to know what to do. I wish the dual core 939 chips were cheaper... anyone spot any great bargains?

[The Codfather]

So the showdown of the Dual Core 939's then..

It'd be a choice between the Opteron 180 and the X2 4800+, I notice they're both 2.4GHz, with 2MB cache each, but the Opteron runs a different core (Denmark) compared to the X2 4800+ (Toledo)

Does anyone know how the core's fair overclocking wise? there's only £10 between the two chips, but if the Opty will clock higher then it may be worth the extra £10 in the long run.

[Supershanks]

I had the same opteron for around 13 months. must admit i was tempted by the cheap dual core option. But u can see my decision in my siggy If u do decide to go 939 dual core i'd stick with the Opteron & denmark. Try serching on xtreme systems site for oc results.

Luck

[NightshadowUK]

I went from an AMD64 3700+ at 2.8GHz to an Opteron 170 at 2.65GHz (will be at least 2.8GHz by the end of next week, I have a cunning plan...) and I can say there was certainly a noticeable improvement from single to dual core. As Zak33's explained, general to-and-froing is a lot nippier, I'd recommend it.

[Zak33]

general to-and-froing is a lot nippier, I'd recommend it.

perfect description

to-ing-and-froing is uber faster.

plus its a cheap upgrade, AND the old cpu will sell ok

Dont fret about getting Opteron. A standard 4800 will make you smile.

BUT...what heatsink you got? I gotta say, the vanilla heatsink from AMD for the Retail version of a 4800 is very nice, and very quiet.

There's not a lot of need for overclocking it either. Trust me, it's like taking a high revving Honda engine out and dumping a bleedin great V8 truck engine in.....it's got torque, forget the revs

[The Codfather]

Info's all in my profile.

Running Arctic Cooling Freezer 64 Pro, so I hope it'd be able to handle a Dual Core just as nicely as it's doing with my current Opty 148. It's not let me down yet though

I think all signs are pointing to the Opty 175 here.

[MSIC]

When it came to it, it's a question of price.
I bought an Athlon X2 4200 (2.2Ghz, 512 cache each core) to replace my current Opteron 146 (which only ever ran stably at 2.5 Ghz on this motherboard - stupid motherboard).
Cost - £92 inc Vat and delivery from overclockers (yeah yeah, they are not scan and stuff but i have used them and it's a question of price).
I am hoping that i can easily get 2.5Ghz with this new chip, and of course now have the 'to-ing and fro-ing' improvements

The major issue for me is not having to re-install windows etc, partly due to having an overly complicated partition setup with games, apps, docs, video and music each with their own partition
Also the cost of going C2D (which, let's face it, would be the number 1 choice in an ideal world) would be prohibitive - new chip, new motherboard and new RAM isn't going to cost me much less than £400. This new Athlon was £92, and i can sell my Opteron (any takers ?)

I'll post back my thoughts when it arrives & installed

[MSIC]

Ok, it's all been up & running for about a week, so here are my thoughts:

First of all, i like the fact that i'm running dual core. It makes me feel, well, up-to-date, even if it's on a 939.

Windows? Yeah, kind of snappier, although not 100% as much as i thought. To be honest, although of the general lag in windows isnt to do with CPU's, its accessing hard drives etc.
I'm dual core, 2 Gig of RAM, but still if i open Outlook and iTunes together they each take a few seconds, iTunes particularly (but my library is pretty big) which comes up with a 'loading' box.

Games all work ok, but they were never an issue.
And i havent actually done any editing stuff yet...

There is one thing however, that is definitely better. For some wierd reason, streaming Xvids over to my wifi netgear doo-dad works better, the picture is displayed smoother on my TV than when i was single core. Oddly, my PC was never hard worked when it was doing it though (CPU idled at around 4%)!!! Very strange.

So, do i regret it? No.
Did I need it? No.