CPU/Mobo Is this config good enough for a futureproof gaming rig??

Status
Not open for further replies.
DeathDemon89 said:
u said a 3200+ would be equivalent to a 3.2 Ghz processor right? So would an X2 3800+ mean it has the power of a 3.8 Ghz processor?? If so,would that be the power of a single core or of both cores combined?
Click to expand...

Well frankly speaking when it comes to gaming, the 3200+ is much much more than a 3.2Ghz Intel proc :P . Some of these lower-end Athlon64 processors can even give Intel's over-priced Extreme Edition processors a real thrashing !

The PR Rating of the X2 3800+ is taking into account the power of both the cores combined, which is why in single-threaded apps you will see its performance less than a single-core A64 3800+. However from the benchmarks in the link Aces has given, it seems to be almost around a single-core 3500+ rating , which is good considering I theoretically estimated it to have a single-thread performance equivalent to only a 3200+ rating.

The only setback is that the X2 3800+ is very hard to come by in India. The only one somewhat easily available is the X2 4200+ that costs around 26.5K. Since its out of your 20K budget, would be best to settle for a single-core A64. The 1MB L2 cache on the A64 shows a very minimal difference from the 512KB L2 cache.
 
Please correct me everyone!!:)
@DD89- wot C_E is saying is so true!!:hap2:
The AMD64s are real gems, i think so at least!!:clap:

The size of L2 cache and Dual channel DDR are big things when it comes to pentiums at least!!:)
Or they are just marketing gimmicks- overhypes certain features or slight performance increse- making a mountain out of a mole hill!! :@
You'll know better!!:)

First, the AMD64 architecture does not get a major boost from Dual cahannel DDR mode!! Even in Athlon XPs, the max boost was around 3% approx!!
So even socket754 64s were almost onpar with 939s!!

And in the the 512vs1MB cache thing, the boost is only around 1-5%!!

These i have most probably read in CHIP!! Some 2004 issue!!:)

So a Winnie was still VFM than a Clawhammer!!

You need to think well and not evaluate an AMD on bechmarks for Pentiums!!
All the best!!
 
X2 4400 is the least id go for as it has 2 * 1 MB L2 Cache, while the X2 3800 4200 and 4600 have 2 * 512KB L2 Cache. .
Click to expand...

L2 cache has very small boost in performance in the A64's as Bike mentioned earlier. Also incase if you are unaware about the latest X1800Xt improvement, thats the best bet now.
 
Well, improvement was fine but it was 7800GTX 256 vs. X1800XT 512.

And still the 7800GTX Won. So imagine to 512MB. Itll give a good 5 - 10 FPS more in all games Surely.
 
Well, improvement was fine but it was 7800GTX 256 vs. X1800XT 512.

And still the 7800GTX Won. So imagine to 512MB. Itll give a good 5 - 10 FPS more in all games Surely.
Click to expand...

LOL you are surely outta touch, do you even know that this is the first time ATI's card is faster in doom 3 since its release !!! And Opengl is Nvidia's advantage....
 
Bikenstein said:
The size of L2 cache and Dual channel DDR are big things when it comes to pentiums at least!
Click to expand...

Absolutely ! The Pentium4 procs are bandwidth hungry creatures, more the available memory bandwidth - higher their performance. Thats why they shifted to DDR2 much earlier on. And Intel seems to keep heaping L2 cache onto their P4's in a desperate hope that it'll improve performance :P

Athlon64's are a different creature. No need for too much mem bandwidth, its more about tight timings here. 512KB to 1MB L2 cache does produce a boost, but as I mentioned its very minimal. 256KB L2 cache to 512KB L2 cache on the other hand does produce noticeable gains.

The reason for the A64 not depending too much on L2 cache is, the integrated memory controller reduces memory latency tremendously. The Main purpose of the L2 cache is to have data available for the processor as fast as possible. With a low-latency integrated memory controller, it is possible to speed up data availability from your main memory itself .

But unlike the AthlonXP, Dual-channel for A64 does provide a decent performance boost. The reason single-channel Socket 754 was on-par and in some cases actually faster(!) was owing to their clock speed. A Socket 939 A64 3000+ runs at 1.8Ghz, while a Socket 754 A64 3000+ runs at 2.0Ghz - i.e. Socket 754 counterparts have 200Mhz more clock speed !

@goldenfrag: You splattered the X1800 performance gain thread with all your comments, how could you not know the X1800 XT had overtaken the 7800GTX ?! :P
 
Well I asked my vendor to check if he could get his hands on an X2 3800+ and he said it isnt available as of yet,but he would try importing it.As long as it fits within my 20k budget,Im fine with that :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom