What is the best "core"?

Ok, I'm not much of an OCer (see: noobie that has never done it) That aside. What is the best "core" both, in general, and for OCing. (i.e. Clawhammer, San Diego, Venice, etc) I'm looking to get a new CPU in a couple months. Just curious what the thought is abotu what "cores" are good and what ones I should avoid. I may or may not OC it, that's why I ask for both the best ones for OCing, and just in general. What are the major differences between cores?? Thanks all!

well that depends on so many things. platform? price/performance ratio? dual core/single core? overall, if youre looking for ocing potential, Venice/San Diego are the best OCing cores, (San Diego slightly better than venice due to larger cache, and generally oc a little better), best platform youd be looking at s939 (socket A is outdated, s754 is single channel with lower HT bus speed, s940 is for servers and requires registered ECC ram which costs an arm and a leg, and generally isnt as fast).. as for budget cores with good price/performance, youd be after the venice E6 revision sempron.. as for dual core, sorry im not too sure, but possibly the toledo cored X2 is the best.. hope this helps

Careface*

ocing

go with a opteron 170!!!

Yeah, there are different "cores" for different CPUs. The Opterons currently have been shown to get some great clocks and great performance, especially since they all have more cache then the A64s and X2s.

The Opteron dual cores, 165, 170, 175, and 180, all have 2x1MB of L2 Cache, and OCs pretty well, ranging from 2.6ghz-2.9ghz, some higher.

The Opteron single cores, 144, 146, 148, 150, all have 1MB of L2 Cache, and OCs really well, some get has high as 3.3ghz stable.

Thanks for the input guys, and the link. That link is interesting, I saved it for later.

Well, I use it mostly for gaming, I want a good machine, but it doesn't have to be TOP of the line.. better than most is fine with me. I don't have a ton of cash to spend, so I'm looking for a good deal as well. I have a couple months to learn as much as I can and make a good decision.

I doubt I will OC the CPU that I'll be buying, however, I may try to play with my current one, an AMD 64 3000+ (unsure which core, in fact, how do I check that out exactly?) I would rather learn on an "older" machine that to **** up the one I plan to game with and use everyday!

Thanks again for the input guys! More links and/or comments welcome!! I'll be reading this site a lot and trying to catch up on all the stickies and the like.

Oh, also, for some reason, I thought Sempron was similar to Intel's Celron in that they are "budget" processors. I know that the Opteron ones that's not the case, but that's what I have in my head for Sempron. Is that a correct line of thinking, or am I way off? I'm not looking for anything budget, but a good quality, high performance CPU that I can afford.

Sempron is the budget CPU, Opteron is a server CPU.

New Semprons are AMD64 enabled, overclock just great and you can buy a Sempron 64 and a motherboard for it and it would be cheaper than buying a Socket 939 CPU just by itself.

Opterons used to be made for Socket 940 Server motherboards but now there are Socket 939 variants that go into Socket 939 motherboards.

Those Socket 939 Opterons are San Diego core CPUs and can overclock more than others because they are more rigorously tested due to them supposedly having to run servers.

So we buy Socket 939 Opterons because they tend to overclock the most.


Your choices, depending on your budget and availability may be:
-Socket 754 Sempron
-Socket 939 Venice Athlon 64 3200+
-Socket 939 single core or dual core Opteron

You current setup is quite honestly rather a dead end. A Sempron makes no sense over an A64 3000+. Maybe a couple hundred MHz more, negated by the lack of cache...and some cash spent pointlessly. All that talk of Opterons, Venices etc, doesn't apply to you, as you have a Socket 754 motherboard.

This is the most cost-effective processor you can buy for your current setup. Another 3000+ you say? This one happens to have 1 MB of L2 cache, your current has 512KB, which in itself is like a 200MHz deficit. This is a mobile, and overclocks extremely well. In fact, I paired this exact CPU with your exact motherboard and got some great results. You really will need to overclock this CPU to reap its benefits though. Unfortunately, however, you will probably need to get a new heatsink to go with it. The Zalman CNPS series are pretty much the only compatible ones worth mentioning if you choose this route.

Otherwise, you would have to start considering a new motherboard, which would also entail a new video card and power supply; might as well wait a few months more until you've got enough money for a new system build. (How much are you willing to spend for this upgrade anyways?)

San Diego

c627627 said:

http://www.c627627.com/AMD/Athlon64/

Click to expand...

You think its worth the wait to get those socket AM2 processors or just get a opteron DC now?

socket am2 = new mobo = new chipset = new bugs

I would not wait for (A)M2. As for what to buy now:

overclockers front page said: AMD, IBM and 65nm Looks like 65nm SOI isn't quite cooked yet, and AMD is going to have to play guinea pig to get it cooked, but ironically enough, that could mean better Hammers real soon.

http://www.overclockers.com/tips00885/
"Maybe these new techniques will prove to be pretty cooked. They are designed to increase speed, so maybe the guinea pigs will run faster. Just, just just maybe, those overachieving Opterons and/or (more likely) those upcoming "CG" stepping A64s will be the guinea pigs. After all, they are supposed to be made in Fab 30, and if they have any hope of keeping to a 2H 2006, they would need to start the trials sooner rather than later."

Also:
http://www.overclockers.com/tips00886/

As for (A)M2, I'd say it looks like they'll be here in March 2006, rather than April 2006 (that needs to be updated) so it may be a three month wait but the question is for what?

First revision new socket motherboards, probably more expensive DDR 2. I'd say, instead of jumping on the (A)M2 straight away, wait for things to sort themselves out in the beginning, because you can always sell the Socket 939 mobo & Opteron you buy today.

So I'd say go Socket 939, and see if single core or dual core 939 Opteron is right for you or if this story about "CG" stepping A64s possibly overclocking more is true...

Well, I just can't get over the fact that A64's with DDRII are going to absolutely fly. 400MHz+ 1:1 with tight timings + on-die memory controller + multiple cores = ...me wanty...

SteveLord said:

socket am2 = new mobo = new chipset = new bugs

Click to expand...

Not sure about the new bugs part, but for sure its gonna cost a lot for a little boost in performance at least at first, maybe this time next year that will be a different story.

Gautam said:

Well, I just can't get over the fact that A64's with DDRII are going to absolutely fly. 400MHz+ 1:1 with tight timings + on-die memory controller + multiple cores = ...me wanty...

Click to expand...

You'll probably gety in March-y then

Tell us how it does, then a year after that, when I make a switch from Socket A to DDR III, I'll tell you how it does.

Nah, don't think I'm going to be able to do so this time around. If you've noticed, I don't even have a computer, nor do I really need one anymore. If anything, maybe something low-profile in September.

When 754 first came out, everyone shied away because of "stability problems" and "bugs" when in reality there were few. I don't think anyone that joined me back then in adopting them in the early stages regretted it. In fact, things ironically only began to get messy once 939 came out. Instead of getting more refined, they only got a little bit faster, and lost a lot stability for a few months. I think that the (A)M2's will do a great job, and will probably be priced pretty competitively too considering they will be released almost immediately after Intel's new round of updates. We've already got several setups of A64's capable of 400MHz+ HTT's; this is an indicator of what the on-die controllers are already prepared to handle. DDR2 is of much higher density than DDR1, so the strain placed on the controllers should actually be less than what they're encountering now. (Read: Increase in stability.) Very large amounts of memory with very high speeds and low latencies should be a reality. LGA775 breathed new life even into netburst. I'll say it again, DDR2 will make the A64's fly like nothing else.

All right, that makes sense. We'll start telling people to wait then (unless they're on a budget).

Operating system is the real reason why I didn't jump to 754/939 yet.
I Drive Image every few days / every few weeks, depending.

It takes me a loong time to tweak everything installed just like I like it, I dread doing it for the new platform and then again for another one... but I've been using Windows Me on my other partition less & less ever since the XP service packs came out.

It'll probably make sense to make the jump when I do the Vista install. Yeah, Vista/XP dual boot is probably when I'm going to do it.


I haven't seen much talk about Ed's "CG Stepping Athlon 64 may overclock more" suggestion, anyone know if they do, I mean they're out, aren't they?

Gautam said:

I'll say it again, DDR2 will make the A64's fly like nothing else.

Click to expand...

Bravo. People have no idea what DDR2 is capable of (this is first hand experience). People can scoff it all they like but mark my words AM2 will blow people away. Ive seen what the ram industry has planned for DDR2 and it should go nicely with its launch.

As much as I like Intel I fully expect AM2 to be an even larger blow to Intel in the coming weeks. The damage of course will depend on how early they can get the platform to market.

There is no doubt in my mind that we will see atleast 500 FSB on AM2, possibly as high as 700 (but the ram wont hold). Most importantally there are low cost 1ghz capable ram coming to a store near you. (with good timings) Im testing a pair as we speak and it will go retail very soon.

Intel on the other hand is going to be multiplier limited and will not be able to keep up, both in raw peformance, and scaling that AM2 will do. Eventho I will buy Cedar Mill, I fully expect to switch to AM2 upon release.

500 would be DDR II 1000 unofficially, right? take a look at this http://www.c627627.com/RAM/
and tell me
1. Will there be unoficcial DDR II sticks faster than 1000?
2. Did anyone come across any future DDR III specs?


P.S. (unrelated) I thought I've been running my mobile XP for far to long at 1.85 Volts because my temps were getting high but I just took off a nice layer or two of dust off my heatsink to get a 10° C drop in temp.


_____________________
AMD Athlon XP 2500+ AXMH 2500 FQQ4C
IQYHA 0348 SPMW
2 x 512MB Centon PC3200 (Samsung chips) @ 9 4 4 3
[200] FSB x 12 = 2400 MHz @ 1.85 Vcore with memory frequency at 100% [200 FSB] @ 2.90 Vdimm and 1.8 Vdd
Epox 8RDA3+ v2.1, BIOS 07/29/2004
Thermalright SLK-900A with variable speed 80x25mm Thermaltake Smart Fan 2
AIW 9600XT 128MB; Antec SX-835II case ; 380W Antec TruePower TP380
Four 80x25mm Case Fans + 1 Variable speed 80x25mm Fan YS-Tech FD1281259B-2F