AMD X2 4200+ question

  • Thread starter Thread starter ABS
  • Start date Start date
A

ABS

Does anyone know much about the AMD X2 4200+ vs other cpus? It is comming in
my new pc and I'm curious to read reviews on that card, but I've only seen
reviews for the 4800+ model of the X2. I'm curious how it will compare to my
current pc which has an AMD 64 3500+ and other comparable Intel chips dual
core and single core. I know the 4200+ X2 is using the same 3500+ cpu in a
dual core design, I'm not sure though if it has anymore advantages like it's
not just 2 3500+ cpus in dual core or if it's a bit more.
 
Does anyone know much about the AMD X2 4200+ vs other cpus? It is comming in
my new pc and I'm curious to read reviews on that card, but I've only seen
reviews for the 4800+ model of the X2. I'm curious how it will compare to my
current pc which has an AMD 64 3500+ and other comparable Intel chips dual
core and single core. I know the 4200+ X2 is using the same 3500+ cpu in a
dual core design, I'm not sure though if it has anymore advantages like it's
not just 2 3500+ cpus in dual core or if it's a bit more.
Click to expand...

It's basically two 3500s. The 4200+ only has 1/2M caches, the same as the
3500+. I just got a 4400+, I also have a 3400+ and a 3800+. Here are some
benchmarks running NCVerilog. The simulation was run with recordvars off
(No IO) and on (Hi IO). Both the 4400+ and 3400+ have 1M caches, the 3800+
has a 1/2M cache. With Recordvars off there is a huge difference between
the 1M cache machines and the 1/2M cache machine, 2X in the case of the
4400+ vs the 3800+. With Recordvars on main memory bandwidth dominates, in
which case the 4400+ is only slightly faster then the 3800+ and the 3400+
(which has only one memory channel but twice the cache) is exactly the
same speed.

Machine CPU NCVerilog NCVerilog Relative to Wasp
No IO Hi IO
Wasp 3800+ 56.48 204.65 1 1
Ranger 3400+ 35.3 195.03 1.6 1.04
Nimitz 4400+ 27.78 179.7 2.03 1.13
 
I've o/c'd my 4200+ to 2.6ghz and it benches higher than a stock 4800+ with
sisoft sandra.
 
General Schvantzkoph said:
It's basically two 3500s. The 4200+ only has 1/2M caches, the same as the
3500+. I just got a 4400+, I also have a 3400+ and a 3800+. Here are some
benchmarks running NCVerilog. The simulation was run with recordvars off
(No IO) and on (Hi IO). Both the 4400+ and 3400+ have 1M caches, the 3800+
has a 1/2M cache. With Recordvars off there is a huge difference between
the 1M cache machines and the 1/2M cache machine, 2X in the case of the
4400+ vs the 3800+. With Recordvars on main memory bandwidth dominates, in
which case the 4400+ is only slightly faster then the 3800+ and the 3400+
(which has only one memory channel but twice the cache) is exactly the
same speed.

Machine CPU NCVerilog NCVerilog Relative to Wasp
No IO Hi IO
Wasp 3800+ 56.48 204.65 1 1
Ranger 3400+ 35.3 195.03 1.6 1.04
Nimitz 4400+ 27.78 179.7 2.03 1.13
Click to expand...

Well I read some reviews and they all said the 4200+ pretty much blows the
pants off most Intel chips and even the AMD FX in a lot of cases, and not
just multitasking either. Gaming was better in the FX, but not much. So I'm
feeling failry good about having my new pc come with the AMD X2 4200+.
However I don't think I'll see much improovement in performance since right
now this pc is already running a 3500+. The only boost I might see is with
multitasking.

I remember though in mac os x and my dual G4/450 i used to have long ago
that even general use was better then a single cpu, so that makes me think
it's possible in general use I might notice a tiny bit of boost. I doubt it
though. I for one wish it'd help the windows xp pc boot time.
 
Back
Top