1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Is there really that mutch real world difference

Discussion in 'General Hardware' started by trt740, Dec 24, 2006.

  1. trt740

    trt740

    Joined:
    May 12, 2006
    Messages:
    10,935 (3.58/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,113
    between the say a conroe e6300 or e6400 and a opty 175 180 185 / 4400x2 4800x2 and fx 60x2 and is it worth the upgrade for 939 users.
     
  2. DOM

    DOM

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    7,552 (2.49/day)
    Thanks Received:
    828
    Location:
    TX, USA
    :confused: from AMD to Intel ?

    or upgrading to a better CPU from AMD ?
     
  3. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.36/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    Depends on whether or not you want to overclock, how much you wanna spend, etc., etc. If you have the cash to do a full upgrade, and you plan to overclock, I would say go E63/6400. They regularly hit over 3GHz in the right mobo, which is much, much faster than the AMD's you mentioned, even if you overclocked them. But remember, you would have to buy new ram to see the benefits.
     
  4. trt740

    trt740

    Joined:
    May 12, 2006
    Messages:
    10,935 (3.58/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,113
    some of the optys do hit 2.8 ghz and higher but mine won't just wondering is it really going to make that big a difference since I haven't even had the second core on my opty 175 used. It seems very fast already I can't imagine what it would be like with both cores working. Im just wondering with both cores working would I see any real world avantage to a conroe chip, not bechmarks but real world difference, and image what even a new video card would do with a dual core chip of any kind with both cores pumping.
     
  5. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.36/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    First, What do you mean by the second core isn't used. Like most programs don't use it yet, or it's just not working?

    Second, assuming you mean the second is just not utilized much, if you're concerned mostly with gaming, you might be better off saving your money, and buying a DX10 card when DX10 finally releases. If, however, you plan on overclocking, and you also do things such as video rendering/encoding, or anything else cpu intensive, the Core2s show a huge performance increase given similar clock speeds. If I remember correctly the performance delta starts at 25% higher and goes all the way up to 70% higher(depends on the task) in almost everything except gaming(which does show an improvement, just not as much as other tasks.)
     
  6. trt740

    trt740

    Joined:
    May 12, 2006
    Messages:
    10,935 (3.58/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,113
    well im still not sure

    in most benches for encoding the conroes are like 14 to 30 seconds faster for video encoding. That doesn't seem to justify the upgrade . Also my second core works but nothing ever seems to use it. Also I have been told in really graphic intense games there is very little difference. Also I have a x1900xt in my machine won't be upgrading anytime soon.
     
  7. pt

    pt not a suicide-bomber

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    Messages:
    8,982 (2.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    208
    Location:
    Portugal
    if it's for gamming is not worth the upgrade;)
     
  8. AshenSugar

    AshenSugar New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,998 (0.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Location:
    ashentech.com
    really for gaming ur not gonna see the diffrance between a stock 3500+ and e6800 as long as you have a decent video card.

    my adivce, 2gb ram, x1950pro/x1900gt(same thing) if you dont have them already and then any current cpu will do!!!
     
  9. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.36/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    It's a small difference on short encodes. On large encodes they save many minutes. I saw a real application test, not a benchmark, where they were rendering special effects in a movie. It took the comparible Athlon X2 35 more minutes to achieve the same task. But as it has already been stated, if gaming is your only concern, your money is better spent on graphics. I would even wait till DX10 actually releases and pick up a DX10 card when they're more common. But if any processor intensive stuff is high on your list of concerns, the Core2 will perform better, period. And considering the bottom model is only $180 and overclocks to over 3GHz on air in most instances, it's a great value. It's the DDR2 ram that will kill you. A quality 2GB kit will run you almost as much as the CPU and Mobo combined.
     
    Last edited: Dec 25, 2006
  10. trt740

    trt740

    Joined:
    May 12, 2006
    Messages:
    10,935 (3.58/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,113
    thx

    thats kinda what I thought
     
  11. trt740

    trt740

    Joined:
    May 12, 2006
    Messages:
    10,935 (3.58/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,113
    yes your right my ram is DDR500 and is near DDR2 specs so it might not be worth it. Also I would have to believe my Opteron overclocked to 2.7ghz would compare atleast to a E6300.
     
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2007
  12. pt

    pt not a suicide-bomber

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    Messages:
    8,982 (2.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    208
    Location:
    Portugal
    TO A E6300 at 2500mhz ;)
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page