Please register or login. There are 0 registered and 504494 anonymous users currently online. Current bandwidth usage: 326.30 kbit/s May 24 - 12:57pm EDT 
Hardware Analysis
      
Forums Product Prices
  Contents 
 
 

  Latest Topics 
 

More >>
 

    
 
 

  You Are Here: 
 
/ Forums / Processors /
 

  X2 3800+ vs X2 4200+ vs 4000+ rev E 
 
 Author 
 Date Written 
 Tools 
Continue Reading on Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, Next >>
guru Shane Dec 09, 2005, 01:46am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Dec 09, 2005, 01:49am EST

 
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
"Games can only run at a peak of the clock speed. If the application was multithreaded, it will peak out at 2.4 GHz. When you got two CPUs with the program itself distributing the load, the result is 2 x 2.4 GHz or 4.8 cumulative."

If that's the case, then the same would apply to dual cores, which we know doesn't happen... 2 x 2.4GHz cores are just as fast as 2 x 2.4GHz cores... I don't see why you think that, because they are separate, that makes them different. Do you think that double the pins makes a difference? You're forgetting that the amount of memory is the same, and so is the amount of memory use... The same amount of work is being processed. If core 0 is running 1 thread and core 1 is running 1 thread, that will go the same speed as CPU 0 running 1 thread and CPU 1 running 1 thread... The bottleneck is the FSB or HTT, not the processing power...

"Games are on the file where various parts must be synchronized to make it happen. Multithreading is extremely hard to code and thus, very rare in games."

Multithreading isn't hard to code. It's just new to the public market and will take time to phase in. People are still using AGP, even though PCI-E is here. The same applies to multithreaded programs. It will change over to multithreaded apps, but it takes time for the desire to grow.

"There is no latency with software configured for multiple CPU's because which threads the software puts on each CPU is predetermined."

It amazes me that you think this software can only do that for multiple CPU's and not dual core CPU's... I thought you were a programmer.

"There is no hardware calculations telling it to redistribute to keep things level. That's why a lot of dual CPU systems end up only using one core on typical tasks and then use both on software designed to use both."

Obviously, programs created to make dual CPU's operate efficiently are already in place. You should realize that the drivers for a dual core would be different and are being developed right now.

"The only gains you'll see with a 4800+ over a 4000+ in gaming is if something happens in the background. A 4800+ could balance the load so you won't feel the performance hit at all where a 4000+ will take the hit. If there are no disruptions, the 4000+ gets higher FPS than the 4800+. I'm not talking a whole lot faster but one one or two FPS"

In games that are multithreaded, the 4000+ place is going to take a back seat. The latency caused by communication between the cores will definitely have an impact when single threaded apps are being ran. As more threads are added to future games, that latency will be made up for and the dual core will have the capacity to become even faster. Compare SLI to a single card in a game that doesn't handle SLI. The SLI setup will most likely give you poorer results. Compare them in a game that does support SLI, and, well, you know the results of that... The same theory can easily be applied to dual cores vs single cores, RAID vs non-RAID, etc... Driver and software efficiency must grow in order to realize this, but the potential is there and will continue to materialize into reality.

Want to enjoy less advertisements and more features? Click here to become a Hardware Analysis registered user.
Shadow_Ops_Airman1 Dec 09, 2005, 02:32am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
well jonasty the motherboard makes the difference then.

AMD Athlon XP-M 2500+ (133x14= 1867MHz) (209x11= 2299MHz)
DFI LP NF2 Ultra-B (Hellfire 3EG Rev2)
Antec SX800, Neo HE 500, 4 Antec 8CM Fans
Thermalright SI-97 1 Antec Tricool 12CM Fan
CL SB XFi Xtreme Music
2x Barracuda HDs (250/400)
2x Samsung Write
FordGT90Concept Dec 09, 2005, 10:04am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
It's simple, on dual core machines, the load is decided by the processor. You can't access CPU[0] CORE[0] and CORE[1]. Your only options are CPU[0] and CPU[1]. The only way programmers can make dual cores more efficient is buy using multiple threads. The gains you'll see with multiple threads will be minimal on a dual core machine because the software can't tell it that it wants this much on one core and this much on another core. The processor itself makes that decision. Now, when you introduce a CPU[1], the programmer can choose to tell that specific processor to handle all physics calculations and tell CPU[0] to handle all unit status feeds for instance. On a dual core machine, those two things could very well end up on the same core which yields no gains. On top of that, it still can't exceed the peak speed of 2.4 GHz. The ultimate solutions, of course, would be two dual core processors on a dual cpu motherboard. This would be pricey but fast.

________________________
If I remember what I forgot, I have not forgotten it.
Adam Kolak Dec 09, 2005, 10:10am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
Apple has a Dual-Core Dual CPU PowerMac G5. Its got 2x Dual Core G5 2.7Ghz cpus, and i bet AMD and maybe even Intel's latest completely destroy it in everything but Quicktime.

Adam Kolak
Moderator, Hardware Analysis
adam@hardwareanalysis.com
DFI LP P35-T2RS | Xeon Quad @ 3.2Ghz | 4GB DDR2-1000 | 8800GT 512MB | See Profile
Willy Jonasty Dec 09, 2005, 10:15am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Dec 09, 2005, 10:18am EST

 
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
If you cannot access different cores? I find that very hard to believe. In fact, I don't know how that is possible. If there are programs out there that can monitor each core separately, then we already have programs that can access each core. If you could shine some light on the topic that would be great.

Also, when you run 2 cpu's, (for example 2 2.0 ghz cpu's), and the software is coded correctly, then it effectively makes it a 4 ghz machine.

Thanks,
-Will

eVGA GeForce 7800GT 256MB @ 471/1120
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ @ 2.2 ghz
2 gigs (2 X 1024gb) OCZ Platinum
eVGA 133-K8-NF41 Motherboard
Creative Sound Blaster Audigy2 ZS
1X WD SATA2 160gb
1x Seagate Barracuda 300gb SATA150
Enermax Liberty 620 Watt PSU
PCGEEK Dec 09, 2005, 10:16am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
this keybord of mine has the LCD desplay for memory and each CPU. It shows that each of my cores are used equal. X2 hot patch is what does that.

Sebastian Rivas Dec 09, 2005, 10:17am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
If you plan to game only, the FX series no doubt.
if you plan to game and dont have that much money, the best bang for the buck is the 3800+x2, as its super-overclockable and it has less cache, which makes less heat. also, its kind of future proof because its dually.

:)

______________________

Build:
Asus P6X58D motherboard
GeForce GTX 260
Intel i7-920 @ 3.4GHz
6GB DDR3 Corsair cas7 memory
Creative Soundblaster X-Fi Xtrememusic
Thermaltake Kandalf Black case
FordGT90Concept Dec 09, 2005, 10:24am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
>> If you cannot access different cores? I find that very hard to believe. In fact, I don't know how that is possible. If there are programs out there that can monitor each core separately, then we already have programs that can access each core. If you could shine some light on the topic that would be great.

Those are read only attributes that are reported to Windows so that if something is going wrong, Windows can act. You just can't address a single core as all those decisions are made on the hardware level.


The 3800+ X2 is probably the best processor out there performance/price wise. It's best for all except hard core gamers.

________________________
If I remember what I forgot, I have not forgotten it.
PCGEEK Dec 09, 2005, 10:33am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
The 3800+ X2 is probably the best processor out there performance/price wise. It's best for all except hard core gamers.

Odd stament . my 3800+ X2 wipes the floor with almost every FX 57 i have even came across in scores and in game FPS.

As for how X2 works .

With all the updates . Each core on my X2 is used 50 - 50 split 100% of the time . I can watch this on my keyboard LCD or in windows or in everest home or in pcwizard . This alows for faster addressing and 0 lockups. never once had a lock up sence i whent X2. Thats kuz there are 2 cores works full time. X2 are killer gaming CPU,s with amazing speeds and offer amazing FPS. I dont think you have a clue about duel core or how they work or that Multi threading is already being used . updates and advancments in duel cores have already come far.

FordGT90Concept Dec 09, 2005, 10:40am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
Leave it at 2.0 GHz and it will perform almost identically to a 3200+ Venice, give or take ~3 FPS. An FX-57 would produce higher FPS in games than your overclocked processor because it runs slightly faster. It also isn't straining at those speeds.

________________________
If I remember what I forgot, I have not forgotten it.
PCGEEK Dec 09, 2005, 10:44am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Dec 09, 2005, 10:55am EST

 
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
GT90 it dont . as we have seen from every test and benchmark . X2,s pull far far ahead of the FX57 in gaming.

You still thinking suport for duel core isnt out yet and you wrong. Duel core suport is out by nvidia , microsoft and X2 has showen it to be far great even in gaming then single CPU option.

Now let me settle this.

when i first got the X2 back before real 80 drivers and before i saw X2 hot patch . It did perform like a 3200+.

If you do the updates and use the right drivers X2 started to shine. Even at a light overclock 242 FSB = to 4800+ is passed my 3500+ venice @ 2.7 Ghz by a mile. The point here is there is suport for X2 to make them work like a duel core. you just have to use them.

Shadow_Ops_Airman1 Dec 09, 2005, 11:16am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
the only reason macs run so well with lame hardware is because they design the software soley for that computer, where MS and linux have a pletora of hardware to write code for.

AMD Athlon XP-M 2500+ (133x14= 1867MHz) (209x11= 2299MHz)
DFI LP NF2 Ultra-B (Hellfire 3EG Rev2)
Antec SX800, Neo HE 500, 4 Antec 8CM Fans
Thermalright SI-97 1 Antec Tricool 12CM Fan
CL SB XFi Xtreme Music
2x Barracuda HDs (250/400)
2x Samsung Write
FordGT90Concept Dec 09, 2005, 11:39am EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Dec 09, 2005, 11:45am EST

 
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
>> GT90 it dont . as we have seen from every test and benchmark . X2,s pull far far ahead of the FX57 in gaming.

X2 and FX, clock for clock, perform almost identically in gaming. If you could isolate the game from the OS, the FX will take the lead because there is no balancing decisions to be had. If you throw the OS in with all your drivers and other junk, the X2 pulls ahead as it is better prepared to handle multitasking where the FX will take a light performance hit.

You don't have to look very far to see the 4000+ beating the 4800+ X2 in gaming (of course, only looking at games where the FPS isn't capped). Here's such an example:

Wolfenstein: http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/the_mother_of_all_cpu_c...age24.html
Quake III: http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/the_mother_of_all_cpu_c...age25.html
Doom 3: http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/the_mother_of_all_cpu_c...age27.html
UT 2004: http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/the_mother_of_all_cpu_c...age28.html
FarCry: http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/the_mother_of_all_cpu_c...age29.html
3D Mark '05: http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/the_mother_of_all_cpu_c...age30.html
etc.

The areas the X2 shines is in everything but gaming:
Xvid: http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/the_mother_of_all_cpu_c...age32.html
Windows Media Encoder: http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/the_mother_of_all_cpu_c...age33.html
Mainconcept Encoder: http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/the_mother_of_all_cpu_c...age34.html
DivX: http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/the_mother_of_all_cpu_c...age35.html
etc.




>> You still thinking suport for duel core isnt out yet and you wrong. Duel core suport is out by nvidia , microsoft and X2 has showen it to be far great even in gaming then single CPU option.

Dual core support has been around since it was released. Once programs start going multithreaded (if it ever happens), you'll see more performance from a dual CPU than a dual core. Dual core is just a stepping stone from single CPU to dual CPU in the home/office environment. Sort of like how AMD64 is the stepping stone between 32-bit and 64-bit support.


>> If you do the updates and use the right drivers X2 started to shine. Even at a light overclock 242 FSB = to 4800+ is passed my 3500+ venice @ 2.7 Ghz by a mile. The point here is there is suport for X2 to make them work like a duel core. you just have to use them.

You're comparing sticks to stones (overclocked versus not). You ought to be comparing your 3500+ to your 3800+ X2 at stock. Obviously, the 3800+ X2 should be slightly faster as the model number states but in gaming, I am certain that the 3500+ will pull slightly higher FPS because it has a higher clock speed while the 3800+ X2 will do better everywhere else.

________________________
If I remember what I forgot, I have not forgotten it.
PCGEEK Dec 09, 2005, 12:10pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
If your comparing stock for stock with all X2 updates the 3500+ venice was dead match to 3800+ X2 . Overclocked the X2 passed it by a good deal. But as we have seen GPU,s tech has come ahead of CPU tech. you have to overclock no matter what to get full performance out of 7800 class in SLI. not even 4800+ X2 has the power stock.

FordGT90Concept Dec 09, 2005, 12:26pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Dec 09, 2005, 12:29pm EST

 
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
>> If your comparing stock for stock with all X2 updates the 3500+ venice was dead match to 3800+ X2. Overclocked the X2 passed it by a good deal.

Stock is all that matters. Less than 1% of PC owners ever overclock their PCs. Dual core technology isn't all it's cut out to be. It's a merely a decent bridge to multi CPU support.


>> But as we have seen GPU,s tech has come ahead of CPU tech. you have to overclock no matter what to get full performance out of 7800 class in SLI. not even 4800+ X2 has the power stock.

The only gains you are seeing is because CPU intensive games will naturally benefit from a faster CPU. The 7800 will perform almost (give or take an FPS or two) identical regardless of the CPU (so long as it is somewhat modern; i.e. a 1600+ Athlon XP isn't going to cut it) in graphic adaptor intensive games (i.e. Doom 3).

Doom 3 1024x768: http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/the_mother_of_all_cpu_c...age25.html
Doom 3 1280x1024: http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/the_mother_of_all_cpu_c...age26.html

________________________
If I remember what I forgot, I have not forgotten it.
PCGEEK Dec 09, 2005, 12:38pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
Less then 1% hu ?

They say all forums on line are put together by less then 1% of the population.

Bet you might find it closer to .5% overclock.

Even then i do see your point. being a X2 owner i know thats its not 100% true. Lot of benifits to X2 in games. but only if you kow how to set them up right.

Shadow_Ops_Airman1 Dec 09, 2005, 01:04pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
WHOA! im now starting to get scared, my Mobility Radeon 9800 (M18) 256 vid card is now at 464 Mhz Core and 430 Mhz Ram.

AMD Athlon XP-M 2500+ (133x14= 1867MHz) (209x11= 2299MHz)
DFI LP NF2 Ultra-B (Hellfire 3EG Rev2)
Antec SX800, Neo HE 500, 4 Antec 8CM Fans
Thermalright SI-97 1 Antec Tricool 12CM Fan
CL SB XFi Xtreme Music
2x Barracuda HDs (250/400)
2x Samsung Write
FordGT90Concept Dec 09, 2005, 01:17pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Dec 09, 2005, 01:23pm EST

 
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
What does that have to do with anything, flyman?


>> Even then i do see your point. being a X2 owner i know thats its not 100% true. Lot of benifits to X2 in games. but only if you kow how to set them up right.

Yes, I agree. That's why only hard core gamers, like myself, that play games 99% of the time on their computer would rather have an 4000+ instead of a 4800+ X2. Otherwise, if the price difference isn't an issue between an X2 and a plain A64, the X2 is the better choice.

________________________
If I remember what I forgot, I have not forgotten it.
Shadow_Ops_Airman1 Dec 09, 2005, 01:25pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
just remember the 4800 operates like a standard FX 53 atm until we get the drivers and fixes and when s/w takes advantage of the new arch.

AMD Athlon XP-M 2500+ (133x14= 1867MHz) (209x11= 2299MHz)
DFI LP NF2 Ultra-B (Hellfire 3EG Rev2)
Antec SX800, Neo HE 500, 4 Antec 8CM Fans
Thermalright SI-97 1 Antec Tricool 12CM Fan
CL SB XFi Xtreme Music
2x Barracuda HDs (250/400)
2x Samsung Write
FordGT90Concept Dec 09, 2005, 03:39pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Dec 09, 2005, 03:40pm EST

 
>> Re: X2 3800 vs X2 4200 vs 4000 rev E
No, it operates like two 4000+ cores on a single die. And I mean exactly like two 4000+ cores meaning the multipliers are the same, the performance on single threaded applications is the same, etc. Even the price is doubled to reflect this.

________________________
If I remember what I forgot, I have not forgotten it.

Write a Reply >>

Continue Reading on Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, Next >>

 

    
 
 

  Topic Tools 
 
RSS UpdatesRSS Updates
 

  Related Articles 
 
 

  Newsletter 
 
A weekly newsletter featuring an editorial and a roundup of the latest articles, news and other interesting topics.

Please enter your email address below and click Subscribe.