1. TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users. Ask a question and give support. Join the community here.
    TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users.
    Ask a question and give support.
    Join the community here, it only takes a minute.
    Dismiss Notice

What to get? AMD64 4000, 64 X2 3800 or an X2 4000?

By Diomedes1 ยท 9 replies
Sep 5, 2005
  1. Hi,

    i'm begining to get togeather specs for my new pc, and i'm not sure which processor to get value and performance wise. It's mostly between the single core 64 4000 and the dual core 3800, though if the x2 4000 has somthing special to offer (which im not aware of) i might fork out the extra cash.

    What i'd like to know is that does having a dual core processor boast much of an advantage over a single core. The two CPU's are pretty much the same price, but i heard the X2 3800 overclocks really well, so maybe i could get it to 4200 or 4400 on a decent mobo with an ok cooler? If this is true, then the 3800 will definately be my choise.

    However, i dont know the overclocking capablilites of the single core 4000, so can anyone give me their opinion on what they think would be the best purchase?

    (i would be using my system for pretty intensive gaming)

    Also, i'd like your opinion on this cooler; is it a good one for the price, will it let me overclock much and is it worth getting?


  2. howard_hopkinso

    howard_hopkinso TS Rookie Posts: 24,177   +19

    Based on THIS I`d go for the AMD Athlon X2 3800+

    If you intend to oc to the max then maybe liquid cooling is the way to go.

    Regards Howard :) :)
  3. Diomedes1

    Diomedes1 TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 25

    Never seen the point in liquid cooling, sure it will push your processor to the max, but for the price you pay for the liquid cooling, you may aswell just buy a more expensive and faster processor!, I'd only be planning on giving it a 400-600 megahurt boost
  4. RealBlackStuff

    RealBlackStuff TS Rookie Posts: 6,503

    If you want to waste so much money, you might as well go for the best: AMD64 FX-57
    Very overclockable (what on earth for?)

    Alternatively, using common sense, get the AMD64 3500 Venice now.
    In a year or so, when the prices have come down, upgrade to a dual-core.
  5. nein

    nein Banned Posts: 109

    We have much in common, I'm an engineer and prefer efficiency, maximal returns for the amount of effort and the resources put in.

    Would you like some factual considerations for queries in your previous post? Unless you actually wanted them, I'll not post them as other members often found them not simple.
  6. Diomedes1

    Diomedes1 TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 25

    Yup i'd have your 'factual considerations'

    To realblackstuff, theres a difference in 'wasting' 270 quid on a 3800 than to wasting over 620 on an FX57, i wish i could go for the best, but when its double the price, its not that simple. Plus, im fed up of waiting; there is never a right time to buy things anymore. AtI and Nvidia are either just about to bring out new cards, new operating systems are on the horizion, or theres a big case format overhaul looming, you can never win.
  7. nein

    nein Banned Posts: 109

    Every application as of current in order to be optimized had to fit within the performance profiles below from TechReport...


    Applications which didn't fit within the performance profiles above are rare special-custom applications or written by a wannabe programmer.

    Intel's 2MB cache (equivalent to AMD's 1MB cache) is a recent feature for consumer level CPUs, very very few consumer level applications actually are optimized for (who would optimize applications for hardware which didn't exist?) nor can really use it.

    But sooner rather than later, there will be applications which are re-written (all brand new re-written software to enable less than 10% performance gain for Intel) to move with Intel's latest hardware optimum performance peaks - "the x2 4000 has somthing special to offer" => 1MB cache (equivalent to Intel's 2MB cache) which will handle them but CPUs with 512KB cache will choke and spit. Just as AthlonXP with 256KB cache are now no longer optimal when applications are optimized for Intel's 1MB cache (equivalent to AMD's 512KB cache).

    You should expect those kind applications to come as there are actually but few real programmers sprinkled in with multitude of wannabe programmers.

    However the 512KB versions will handle all older generation and current generation applications with aplomb. The one below is extremely future-proof for Intel oriented Single-Tasking optimized applications.

    "AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ Dual-Core Processor
    (2.4GHz, 2MB (equivalent to Intel's 4MB cache in theory but not in factual performance profile), 2000MHz FSB, Socket 939 - SKU: ADA4800CDBOX)
    Price Range: $884.00 - $1,190.02 from 28 Sellers "
  8. Tedster

    Tedster Techspot old timer..... Posts: 6,000   +15

    interesting point about overclocking. Why spend the $ on watercooling if the next higher up processer would cost less?
  9. SornyPanafonic

    SornyPanafonic TS Rookie Posts: 129

    thats why ive been waiting for over a year now and just when i was set on the x2 3800 and on the evga 7800gtx ko card i hear about amds new chips coming out and a possible drop in price (im assuming its like a $50 - 100) drop, so now im back to square one. what to do???!!! aahhhh!!
  10. Tedster

    Tedster Techspot old timer..... Posts: 6,000   +15

    that's why the prices drop. New technology is coming out.
    If you HAVE to have the latest stuff, then you have to spend the money!
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.

Similar Topics

Add New Comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...