Athlon 64 4000 OR X2 Dual-Core 4200+

  • Thread starter Thread starter KD
  • Start date Start date
K

KD

Athlon 64 4000 OR X2 Dual-Core 4200+


been offered these at almost the same price. Which should I go for ?
 
Athlon 64 4000 OR X2 Dual-Core 4200+


been offered these at almost the same price. Which should I go for ?
Click to expand...

Spend a little more and get a 4400+. The 4200+ only has 1/2M caches, the
4400+ has 1M caches as does the 4000+.
 
To answer your question, the 4200+ is superior. It is also 64-bit but it has
two cores.

--
Scotter
Tyan Thunder K8WE
Dual Opteron 252s (2.6ghz)
6 gig DDR400 RAM
XFX 7800 GTX 256 w/VGAsilencerV3
500 gig SATA2 Hitachi
Dual 24" Dell LCDs
550W power supply
-
 
That depends on what program you're running,with ones not that aren't made
for dual core,including present games,the 4000+ performs much better.
 
That depends on what program you're running,with ones not that aren't made
for dual core,including present games,the 4000+ performs much better.
Click to expand...


Not much better, a little better. The difference in clock speed between an
X2 4200 and a 4000+ is only 200MHz. Th cache size difference can make a
big difference in a few applications, that's why I suggested the 4400+
instead, but for most programs the difference due to the cache will be
small.
 
General Schvantzkoph said:
Not much better, a little better. The difference in clock speed between an
X2 4200 and a 4000+ is only 200MHz. Th cache size difference can make a
big difference in a few applications, that's why I suggested the 4400+
instead, but for most programs the difference due to the cache will be
small.
Click to expand...
From the comparisons I've seen,the 4400+ comes close to the 4000+ in single
core applications like games.It's probably the best choice,performance and
price wise.
 
Get the 4200X2. Its $100 cheaper and you can put the money you save into an
extra gig of ram that will make your computer perform a lot better than that
lowly 512k of cache would on the 4400X2.

--
XP2600@171 [email protected]
PC3200 Samsung 512mb, SB Live OEM
AIW9600XT, A7N8X-X
WD120gb + 80gb HD 8mb buffers
Plextor PX-712A, Liteon 1693S 16X Dual Layer
Pioneer DVR-110D 16X - 4X Dual Layer
Thermaltake Lanfire, 420 Watt PS
ViewSonic 19" A91f+ CRT
Micrsoft Sidewinder Precision 2 Joystick

Overall Score-2066, cpu_score-2926
in 3DMark2005 basic 1078X768, No AA
 
VanShania said:
Get the 4200X2. Its $100 cheaper and you can put the money you save into
an
extra gig of ram that will make your computer perform a lot better than
that
lowly 512k of cache would on the 4400X2.
Click to expand...

I came to the same conclusion on the new system I built last week. The
4200+ seems to be at the sweet spot of price/performance right now. When I
ordered, the 4400+ was $100 more, the 4600+ was $200 more, and the 4800+ was
$300 more. From what I've read, most people have no problem clocking the
4200+ @ 2.6Ghz with air cooling (the 4600+ defaults to 2.4Ghz and has the
same cache size).

I paid about $360 for the 4200+, the 4800+ would have been over $660. For
me it seemed to make more sense to put the difference into more RAM and a
better vid card.


(*>
 
Back
Top