Which do you think is better Price/Performance?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Larry Roberts
  • Start date Start date
L

Larry Roberts

Fixing to purchase an AMD Socket939 CPU for the system I've
been building. (I have a very limited budget, and it would be stupid
to scrap the mainboard, & memory for a Socket AM2. Too long to return
$85.00 mainboard, and $85.00 memory now) I see that the AMD 64 3800+
(2.4Ghz with 512KB L2) cost $150.00. The next CPU up on the price list
is the Opteron 144 (1.8Ghz 1MB L2) at $170.00, and the Athlon 64 3700+
(2.2Ghz 1MB L2) at $208.00.
I hear the Opteron can easily reach 2.4Ghz OC, but my
mainboard, Biostar NF4UL-A9, doesn't have many reviews, and the
reviews I've seen don't show how well it overclocks. I'd hate to get
it, and be stuck at 3000+ level clock if I can't OC it. The Athlon 64
3800+ has the highest clockspeed of the 3, but only 512KB L2 cache,
and it's $20.00 cheaper than the Opty, and $50.00 cheaper than the
Athlon 64 3700+ with 1MB L2 cache.
Which would be better for the price/performance ratio. Go
cheap with fast clock, but lower L2 cache, go $50.00 higher with
slightly lower clock & 1MB L2, or go middle of the road price & get
1MB L2 cache, and the slowest clockspeed, and maybe no OC potential?

To give an idea of what I use my PC for... It's mostly games,
and interweb stuff, but I do sometimes encode movie, and music stuff,
but not alot. I don't program, or do 3D rendering with 3DS Max, Maya,
or such.
 
FWIW, I recently upgraded to a Athlon 64 system, and I opted for more L2
cache. I don't know if that was vanity/folly, but I am satisfied with
my purchase.
 
Fixing to purchase an AMD Socket939 CPU for the system I've
been building. (I have a very limited budget, and it would be stupid
to scrap the mainboard, & memory for a Socket AM2. Too long to return
$85.00 mainboard, and $85.00 memory now) I see that the AMD 64 3800+
(2.4Ghz with 512KB L2) cost $150.00. The next CPU up on the price list
is the Opteron 144 (1.8Ghz 1MB L2) at $170.00, and the Athlon 64 3700+
(2.2Ghz 1MB L2) at $208.00.
I hear the Opteron can easily reach 2.4Ghz OC, but my
mainboard, Biostar NF4UL-A9, doesn't have many reviews, and the
reviews I've seen don't show how well it overclocks. I'd hate to get
it, and be stuck at 3000+ level clock if I can't OC it. The Athlon 64
3800+ has the highest clockspeed of the 3, but only 512KB L2 cache,
and it's $20.00 cheaper than the Opty, and $50.00 cheaper than the
Athlon 64 3700+ with 1MB L2 cache.
Which would be better for the price/performance ratio. Go
cheap with fast clock, but lower L2 cache, go $50.00 higher with
slightly lower clock & 1MB L2, or go middle of the road price & get
1MB L2 cache, and the slowest clockspeed, and maybe no OC potential?

To give an idea of what I use my PC for... It's mostly games,
and interweb stuff, but I do sometimes encode movie, and music stuff,
but not alot. I don't program, or do 3D rendering with 3DS Max, Maya,
or such.
Click to expand...

I don't know the tradeoffs, but I have an AMD system that I use for
the same kinds of things. It has a lesser CPU than any of the ones
you are considering (athlon 64 3000+), and it does a great job, so if
money is tight, I think you can save the $50 and be satisfied.

Charlie
 
Larry Roberts said:
I see that the AMD 64 3800+
(2.4Ghz with 512KB L2) cost $150.00. The next CPU up on the price list
is the Opteron 144 (1.8Ghz 1MB L2) at $170.00, and the Athlon 64 3700+
(2.2Ghz 1MB L2) at $208.00.
I hear the Opteron can easily reach 2.4Ghz OC, but my
mainboard, Biostar NF4UL-A9, doesn't have many reviews, and the
reviews I've seen don't show how well it overclocks.
Click to expand...
.. . .
To give an idea of what I use my PC for... It's mostly games,
and interweb stuff, but I do sometimes encode movie, and music stuff,
but not alot.
Click to expand...

Even if the Opteron OC's to 2.4 GHz, you'll have a rough equivalent of the
3800 with heating and reliability concerns for the higher price, so I'd
throw out that option right away.

I suspect the 10% clock speed increase will help more than the cache --
that's why AMD sez it's 3800, compared to the 3700...
 
Thanks to those who replied. I think I'll go for the cheaper
priced 3800+. It will save me $50.00 to go towards the videocard I
want.
 
Back
Top