AMD Processors
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Opteron 170 or X2 4400+?
Topic Summary:
Created On: 02/13/2006 09:43 PM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Previous Next Last unread
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 02/13/2006 11:28 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
zeppelinrox
Senior Member

Posts: 8484
Joined: 11/30/2005

well.. the operative word in oxymoronic is... moronic
it was a pretty ridiculous thing to say that recommending one of the 2 options presented was "completely different than what was asked for."
i found it to be a moronic statement.. hence.. oxymoronic..

i recommended something that will fit his need for today AND tomorrow for a better price.

how is that bad?

stop it yer killing me with these statements with absolutely no backing.

so tell us again WHY the X2 4400+ is better.. i seemed to have missed your reasoning behind that recommendation

-------------------------


Overclocking Help and Links . Why DRM, BluRay and HD-DVD Blow Great tools-> OC Bible v1.52 and Guidemania v1.2
 02/13/2006 11:30 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
chubbyfatazn
Senior Member

Posts: 265
Joined: 01/30/2006

Hes got a fair point...

it boils down to this: it seems that the basis of this discussion is turning to ocing so if you dont wanna oc MUCH pick up the x2. if you wanna oc then pick up the opty. either way their both great cpus and its sort of based on preference.

-------------------------
Athlon 64 3700+ @ 2.75GHz, 1.47v
DFI LanParty CFX-3200 (BIOS 4/25/06)
2x1gb Crucial Ballistix PC4000 RAM @ PC3500
WD Raptor 74GB (boot), Seagate Barracuda SATAII 250GB (storage)
Radeon X1900XT Xfire Edition @ 732/865 @ 1.475v/2.094v
Cors
 02/13/2006 11:38 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
ici
Member

Posts: 107
Joined: 06/19/2005

You still need to learn to read and the could take some grammar lessons, but let me explain it better since you still fail to grasp it.

"I don't plan on overclocking it out of the box, maybe a couple months or maybe a year. But when I do OC it it will not be a whole lot."

Reading this line means he will not push the chip to the extreme as many here have done. He will probably raise the FSB no more than 50 total.

The x2 4400 will provide higher performance for the months to year when he has no intention of overclocking compared to a non overclocked Opteron 170.

When he does choose to overclock "not a lot" will go further than on an opteron 170.

What you might consider not a lot (pushing 2.7ghz) is considering a lot to others, btw.

-------------------------
Larry N. Stevens
President
Xanadu Servers, Inc.
XSI Hosting - Plesk Hosting
 02/13/2006 11:40 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
zeppelinrox
Senior Member

Posts: 8484
Joined: 11/30/2005

i say get the 170 for $352 and overclock out of the box!

EDIT: yeah.. just bump that fsb 20mhz and you get a free 200mhz ($100)

-------------------------


Overclocking Help and Links . Why DRM, BluRay and HD-DVD Blow Great tools-> OC Bible v1.52 and Guidemania v1.2
 02/13/2006 11:41 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
fszone
Junior Member

Posts: 16
Joined: 01/16/2006

I would rather keep the 3800, thanks for the offer though.


You know, memories.
 02/13/2006 11:42 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
chubbyfatazn
Senior Member

Posts: 265
Joined: 01/30/2006

quote:

Originally posted by: ici
You still need to learn to read and the could take some grammar lessons, but let me explain it better since you still fail to grasp it.

"I don't plan on overclocking it out of the box, maybe a couple months or maybe a year. But when I do OC it it will not be a whole lot."

Reading this line means he will not push the chip to the extreme as many here have done. He will probably raise the FSB no more than 50 total.

The x2 4400 will provide higher performance for the months to year when he has no intention of overclocking compared to a non overclocked Opteron 170.

When he does choose to overclock "not a lot" will go further than on an opteron 170.

What you might consider not a lot (pushing 2.7ghz) is considering a lot to others, btw.



i know my grammar im just too lazy to use it in mytyping and my space bar is sticky so sometimes 2 words or more stick together.

anyhoo i said that the x2 4400 would provide better performance for his CURRENT needs.

50 fsb is a lot for me; im running budget board and can squeeze out 27 xtra.

i never said anything about 2.7 ghz did i? i dont remember. but 2.7 is pretty high and i never said that it was an easy feat. ok?

-------------------------
Athlon 64 3700+ @ 2.75GHz, 1.47v
DFI LanParty CFX-3200 (BIOS 4/25/06)
2x1gb Crucial Ballistix PC4000 RAM @ PC3500
WD Raptor 74GB (boot), Seagate Barracuda SATAII 250GB (storage)
Radeon X1900XT Xfire Edition @ 732/865 @ 1.475v/2.094v
Cors
 02/13/2006 11:45 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
ici
Member

Posts: 107
Joined: 06/19/2005

Bob. T. Builder - LOL that wasn't aimed at you.

And one more thing. fszone may be wanting to not overclock for as long as possible in order to hold onto the warranty.

Many people are like that. Personally I would rather not overclock a processor brand new. A few months to make sure there are no problems so that you know that the warranty is still active is always nice.


-------------------------
Larry N. Stevens
President
Xanadu Servers, Inc.
XSI Hosting - Plesk Hosting
 02/13/2006 11:49 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
chubbyfatazn
Senior Member

Posts: 265
Joined: 01/30/2006

oops sorry to talk to u like that then.

i oced my 3700 straight outta box. if it does die how can amd tel anyways? unless they can get it working again theyll never know.. rite?

-------------------------
Athlon 64 3700+ @ 2.75GHz, 1.47v
DFI LanParty CFX-3200 (BIOS 4/25/06)
2x1gb Crucial Ballistix PC4000 RAM @ PC3500
WD Raptor 74GB (boot), Seagate Barracuda SATAII 250GB (storage)
Radeon X1900XT Xfire Edition @ 732/865 @ 1.475v/2.094v
Cors
 02/13/2006 11:55 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
ici
Member

Posts: 107
Joined: 06/19/2005

I don't have access to the full design schematics for the AMD 64 so I do not know. I do know that there are ways in some chips to tell what settings the chip was run at. Whether AMD has instigated anything like this I don't know.

I'm not sure anyone does.

And AMD has access to the clean rooms and the equipment to fully disassemble a processor if they so choose which means they could learn a lot even from a non-running processor.

-------------------------
Larry N. Stevens
President
Xanadu Servers, Inc.
XSI Hosting - Plesk Hosting
 02/14/2006 03:52 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Hexagon
Junior Member

Posts: 11
Joined: 02/08/2006

Its all gonna really boil down to how much the OP wants to spend. From what benchmarks I've seen, I can't see where the extra 200mhz is that much of a benefit, at least not for an extra $60-100 (judging by toms hardware latest cpu comparisons). You save with an Opteron and will likely have a better overclockable chip in the future. But then, I think a 4200 would be just as fine as a 4400 unless you absolutely must have the extra cache for gaming since they run at the same speed. A 170 is a better buy than a 4200 I think though.
 02/14/2006 05:18 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Xajel
Case Modder

Posts: 1554
Joined: 10/08/2003

well...

If you want more performance for your money... you have to oc wether you are going to to 4400 or 170...
and if you do oc.. go for 170...

Opterons are made to be more solid and stable than normal Athlon's as they are targeted for workstations/servers...

while you can oc both the 170 or 4400, I think the 4400 will go faster as it's original freq. is heigher... but because Opterons are made from more solid and stable production proccess.. you can expect both will go for same level.. I can't guess.. we have to see real tests...

but in general.. I'll go for Opteron and save some money for other things ( lower latency, faster ram for example )
I'm like you.. working on Photoshop, InDesign, Illustartor and shooting UT or crashing in NFS. and even do some PHP/MySQL with WAMP ( hah multifunction ).. I'll go Opteron for sure...
 02/14/2006 12:40 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
ninjastyle
Senior Member

Posts: 15287
Joined: 03/26/2004

quote:

Originally posted by: Hexagon
Its all gonna really boil down to how much the OP wants to spend. From what benchmarks I've seen, I can't see where the extra 200mhz is that much of a benefit, at least not for an extra $60-100 (judging by toms hardware latest cpu comparisons). You save with an Opteron and will likely have a better overclockable chip in the future. But then, I think a 4200 would be just as fine as a 4400 unless you absolutely must have the extra cache for gaming since they run at the same speed. A 170 is a better buy than a 4200 I think though.



I kind of agree here. I mean, all of the X2's and the Opterons are GREAT chips. That's a fact. I do think a few hundred Mhz is worth 60 - 100 bucks too.

*(calculates it in English pounds and it isn't much a all)

Compare the 4800+ to the FX-60. Is that difference worth 500 bucks? No way. But 60 - 100 isn't bad...

 02/14/2006 02:51 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Hexagon
Junior Member

Posts: 11
Joined: 02/08/2006

quote:

Originally posted by: ninjastyle
I kind of agree here. I mean, all of the X2's and the Opterons are GREAT chips. That's a fact. I do think a few hundred Mhz is worth 60 - 100 bucks too.

*(calculates it in English pounds and it isn't much a all)

Compare the 4800+ to the FX-60. Is that difference worth 500 bucks? No way. But 60 - 100 isn't bad...



I suppose its worth it if you never ever have any intention of overclocking. From what I've seen, the 4400 is on avg. $100 more than the 4200 for just the cache increase (they both run at 2.2ghz). To me, thats not worth it, even if you play mostly games. That 2-5% bonus (well maybe 10% in a very few games) is weak and the money can be better spent in higher quality ram or a faster video card. I could see choosing the 165 over the 3800 given current US market prices.

I think it boils down to this IMHO. If you want to overclock at all? 165 or 170. Most seem to have the best luck with the opterons vs the x2 series. Budget and need to squeeze every last dollar but maybe overclock a little? Go 3800. Need raw power and no overclock ever? 4400 and up.
 02/14/2006 02:58 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
ici
Member

Posts: 107
Joined: 06/19/2005

quote:

Originally posted by: Hexagon
I suppose its worth it if you never ever have any intention of overclocking. From what I've seen, the 4400 is on avg. $100 more than the 4200 for just the cache increase (they both run at 2.2ghz). To me, thats not worth it, even if you play mostly games. That 2-5% bonus (well maybe 10% in a very few games) is weak and the money can be better spent in higher quality ram or a faster video card. I could see choosing the 165 over the 3800 given current US market prices.

I think it boils down to this IMHO. If you want to overclock at all? 165 or 170. Most seem to have the best luck with the opterons vs the x2 series. Budget and need to squeeze every last dollar but maybe overclock a little? Go 3800. Need raw power and no overclock ever? 4400 and up.



It also matters how much they want to overclock and how long before they want to overclock. And what the OP posted wasn't as much games. Most of the programs he mentioned are more CPU intensive than graphics intensive.

-------------------------
Larry N. Stevens
President
Xanadu Servers, Inc.
XSI Hosting - Plesk Hosting
 02/14/2006 03:05 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Hexagon
Junior Member

Posts: 11
Joined: 02/08/2006

quote:

Originally posted by: ici
It also matters how much they want to overclock and how long before they want to overclock. And what the OP posted wasn't as much games. Most of the programs he mentioned are more CPU intensive than graphics intensive.



I can agree. Personally though, I just don't like that idea anymore. I tried it with my current system.. waiting to OC. Turned out to be a hassle and I ended up not bothering much with overclocking.
 02/15/2006 12:38 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
DeejMaster
Member

Posts: 186
Joined: 09/30/2005

From what I gathered about the Opteron and 64X2, the Opteron is primarily designed to work with Operating Systems because it is a Server Processor. The 64X2 is designed to work with 32/64 bit software, therefore, being compatible with more programs that are out there already. I have a bum-load of programs that I am not willing to risk losing access to if I go with Opteron. But some of the Gurus out there probably have found a way of making them work...I'm not a Guru by any means

-------------------------
Deej

WinXP Pro - Athlon 64X2 4200 - AsRock 939 Dual-SATA Mobo - Arctic Cooling Freezer Pro
 02/15/2006 01:13 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
ici
Member

Posts: 107
Joined: 06/19/2005

Any application that will run on an "AMD 64" will run on either an X2 or an Opteron.

-------------------------
Larry N. Stevens
President
Xanadu Servers, Inc.
XSI Hosting - Plesk Hosting
 02/15/2006 09:18 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
JesterOnYEr6
Senior Member

Posts: 5537
Joined: 01/21/2004

Take it from somebody who has one get the 4400 it rocks man.

-------------------------
Phenom 9600 BE @ 2.5 ghz | Ati HD2900XT | OCZ Titanium XTC DDR800 4Gigs | MSI K9A2 Platinum | XFi Xtreme | Zalman 9700 | Enermax 620W | Dell 2405 | G7 | G15
 02/15/2006 10:05 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
TheReturnOfAZ
Senior Member

Posts: 13327
Joined: 06/10/2005

take it from somebody who has had both
stick with the opteron

-------------------------
The opinions expressed above exactly represent those of the Intel Corporation and all of its affiliates.
Official Intel™ Propaganda Spreader
"Bringing you the benchmarks that everyone knows are fake" ~ SINCE 2006 ~<!--
 02/15/2006 01:27 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
JesterOnYEr6
Senior Member

Posts: 5537
Joined: 01/21/2004

quote:

Originally posted by: TheReturnOfAZ
take it from somebody who has had both
stick with the opteron



REad his post dude "I AM NOT OVERCLOCKING" see it is pretty clear that the 4400 is his best choice because of higher "STOCK" clockspeeds.

-------------------------
Phenom 9600 BE @ 2.5 ghz | Ati HD2900XT | OCZ Titanium XTC DDR800 4Gigs | MSI K9A2 Platinum | XFi Xtreme | Zalman 9700 | Enermax 620W | Dell 2405 | G7 | G15
AMD Processors » AMD Enthusiast Community » Desktop Specs & Component Recommendations » Opteron 170 or X2 4400+?

<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Previous Next Last unread
Topic Tools Topic Tools
Statistics
112018 users are registered to the AMD Processors forum.
There are currently 0 users logged in.

FuseTalk Hosting Executive Plan v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.



Contact AMD Terms and Conditions ©2007 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Privacy Trademark information