- Joined
- Mar 13, 2006
165/3700+/4200+ X2
I am building a new pc and choosing a CPU is difficult.
I haven't really overclocked before, but I have read a few guides from the interweb and it doesn't seem terribly complicated.
So everyone tells me to get a 165, lots of people get 2.6 Ghz out of them happily. But I am not too familiar with the whole overclocking thing and I am a little worried i'll fry my chip or just end up with a dud.
For around the same price as the 165 I could get the 4200+ X2, still with dual core goodness and running stock at 2.2 Ghz. I would think the 165 has to overclock 3-400 Mhz just to run at the same speed as a 4200. However just how much the two 512kb L2 caches on the 4200 will slow it down, I have no idea.
Finally the single core option, the 3700+. $200 cheaper than dual cores and apparently they overclock quite nicely.
I'm thinking with a 4200 or 3700 anything I get over the standard clock speed is a bonus. 2.2 is enough for anything I really want and if it doesn't go much faster than that it'll be ok. However 1.8 Ghz (for the 165) does suck some balls and I wouldn't be happy if my 165 couldn't at least get to the 2.2 Ghz of the other two processors. Then it would be sweet, a 2.2 Ghz dual core with 1 Mb L2 cache.
You think I could learn to overclock in the next few days well enough to get the best possible chance of getting 2.2 Ghz out of a 165?
I am just wanting to play games. New ones, really fast
Do i even need dual core anyway?
I am building a new pc and choosing a CPU is difficult.
I haven't really overclocked before, but I have read a few guides from the interweb and it doesn't seem terribly complicated.
So everyone tells me to get a 165, lots of people get 2.6 Ghz out of them happily. But I am not too familiar with the whole overclocking thing and I am a little worried i'll fry my chip or just end up with a dud.
For around the same price as the 165 I could get the 4200+ X2, still with dual core goodness and running stock at 2.2 Ghz. I would think the 165 has to overclock 3-400 Mhz just to run at the same speed as a 4200. However just how much the two 512kb L2 caches on the 4200 will slow it down, I have no idea.
Finally the single core option, the 3700+. $200 cheaper than dual cores and apparently they overclock quite nicely.
I'm thinking with a 4200 or 3700 anything I get over the standard clock speed is a bonus. 2.2 is enough for anything I really want and if it doesn't go much faster than that it'll be ok. However 1.8 Ghz (for the 165) does suck some balls and I wouldn't be happy if my 165 couldn't at least get to the 2.2 Ghz of the other two processors. Then it would be sweet, a 2.2 Ghz dual core with 1 Mb L2 cache.
You think I could learn to overclock in the next few days well enough to get the best possible chance of getting 2.2 Ghz out of a 165?
I am just wanting to play games. New ones, really fast
Do i even need dual core anyway?
Last edited:
