Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
OG Overclocker
Joined
·
875 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I saw the article about the extremely overclockable Pentium D 805 on THG, and I'm really tempted to go to the dark side.<br><br><a href="http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/05/10/dual_41_ghz_cores/page3.html" target="_blank">http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/05/...res/page3.html</a><br><br>
How can anyone argue with dual cores, 2 x 1M L2, DDR2, and practically guaranteed 3.6GHz+ overclocking for a whopping $90 (latest price on newegg)?<br><br>
Anyway, I'm at the point where AGP has got my gfx upgrade path up against the wall, my ram sux (which it has for years, literally...). And, as cool as an overclocked XP-M running on an nForce2 was in the past, it just doesn't really cut it anymore.<br><br>
I've been kind of absent from the whole overclocking scene for awhile, so my question is: is there an easy-overclocking AMD chip that could possibly equal a Pentium D 805 for the same money? I pretty much have to upgrade everything all at once, so I could go either way. The Pentium D seems to offer a whole lot of performance and overclocking fun for the money, though... <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/images/smilies/devil.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="Devil">
 

·
Goodbye
Joined
·
10,269 Posts
An athlon X2 3800 would be a good AMD match against that. Both are amazing overclockers as 3800's have been doing 1Ghz overclocks. Both are fabulous products but if you can manage the cash you'll have a much nicer experience with a conroe or AM2 system. (I'd opt for the conroe E6300)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,599 Posts
Look at getting a Intel Core 2 Duo system. All of the components are going to run you about the same except for the cpu, especially with DDR matching the expensive prices of DDR2 now. The E6300 will cost you 2x as much but it will smoke the Pentium D even if you got it to above 4GHz. I would recommend getting the E6400 though, from what I have read they overclock a little better and have an easier multiplier to work with.<br><br>
If you have to buy now I would go with Intel and if you can wait then AMD will be hitting back soon and hopefully regaining the performance title. Time will tell I guess.
 

·
OG Overclocker
Joined
·
875 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
The $90 price on the Pentium D is kind of important, since i've got to get a PCI express gfx card worth playing on (thinking of a 7600GT), some good ram, and a halfway decent mobo for basically as little as possible. I probably won't actually be doing it for a while, as I can't spare the $$$ right now, but I like to investigate ahead of time. But maybe the core 2 duo will get cheaper by then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,599 Posts
The price to performance is great really, and the cheap prices on the Core Duo's has brought the price of AMD's cpu's down. Maybe when AMD gets going full strength on their 65nm and their expenses go down there might be a price battle once again. We can only hope, <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/images/smilies/tongue.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="Stick Out Tongue">.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
404 Posts
A 3.6GHz Pentium D is equivalent to a 2.4GHz Athlon 64. I used SoaDMTGguy's CPU speed converter to find that. I'm no expert on Intel products, but as far as I know, only the Core 2 is worth getting over an AMD. I just got a $95 Athlon 64 3700+ San Diego KACAE stepping that is more or less guaranteed to exceed 3GHz on air cooling. This would be equivalent to a 4.5GHz Intel P4/PD, assuming the intel also has 1152KB on-die L2 cache like my San Diego.<br />
<a href="http://www.overclock.net/faqs/93126-info-what-megahertz-myth.html" target="_blank">http://www.overclock.net/faqs/93126-...ertz-myth.html</a>
 

·
OG Overclocker
Joined
·
875 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
<div style="margin:20px; margin-top:5px; ">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px">Quote:</div>
<table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="99%">
<tr>
<td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset">

<div>
Originally Posted by <strong>indignation</strong>

</div>
<div style="font-style:italic">A 3.6GHz Pentium D is equivalent to a 2.4GHz Athlon 64. I used SoaDMTGguy's CPU speed converter to find that. I'm no expert on Intel products, but as far as I know, only the Core 2 is worth getting over an AMD. I just got a $95 Athlon 64 3700+ San Diego KACAE stepping that is more or less guaranteed to exceed 3GHz on air cooling. This would be equivalent to a 4.5GHz Intel P4/PD, assuming the intel also has 1152KB on-die L2 cache like my San Diego.<br />
<a href="http://www.overclock.net/faqs/93126-info-what-megahertz-myth.html" target="_blank">http://www.overclock.net/faqs/93126-...ertz-myth.html</a></div>

</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>When you say a 3.6 GHz Pentium D is faster, are you taking into consideration that the 805 is dual core, 1M L2 x 2? <br />
Also, I forget, is core 2 the same as dual core, or is it dual dual cores?<br />
<br />
And, <u>does dual core really make any usefull difference these days </u> over a good single core like an A64 @ 3GHz?<br />
<br />
BTW, what mobo/ram do you have for your oc'd SD, and what is everything running at?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
825 Posts
lets see,a dual core CPU lets you multi-task like mad,youll be able to run 50 procce's + without any hold downs<br />
your GAMES will be MUCH more smoother and playable,everything will be better believe me <img src="/images/smilies/tongue.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Stick out tounge caps" class="inlineimg" /><br />
its because with 2 cores a single program can utilize a WHOLE core instead of sharing it with windows and its massive arrey of stupid mghz consuming service's<br />
<br />
edit:<br />
get a duel core 3800+ if you are looking to stick with amd<br />
a more powerfull choice of course would be the core2dou<br />
but thats kinda more expensive atm + its not the dark side its the gay side imo
 

·
OG Overclocker
Joined
·
875 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
<div style="margin:20px; margin-top:5px; ">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px">Quote:</div>
<table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="99%">
<tr>
<td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset">

<div>
Originally Posted by <strong>Marager</strong>

</div>
<div style="font-style:italic">lets see,a dual core CPU lets you multi-task like mad,youll be able to run 50 procce's + without any hold downs<br />
your GAMES will be MUCH more smoother and playable,everything will be better believe me <img src="/images/smilies/tongue.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Stick out tounge caps" class="inlineimg" /><br />
its because with 2 cores a single program can utilize a WHOLE core instead of sharing it with windows and its massive arrey of stupid mghz consuming service's<br />
<br />
edit:<br />
get a duel core 3800+ if you are looking to stick with amd<br />
a more powerfull choice of course would be the core2dou<br />
but thats kinda more expensive atm + its not the dark side its the gay side imo</div>

</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>But $$$ is the big problem. It's got to be cheap, like < $100. My big question is, will an oc'd single A64 SD at like 2.8-3GHz beat an oc'd P D dual core805 at 3.6-3.8GHz? Dual core AMDs are too much now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,823 Posts
Bassically a single core will not beat a dual core atm, DC's are fast!<br />
<br />
Just get a 805 if you want they are very good chips, jsut maek sure you baord supports Core Duo so you can upgrade
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
825 Posts
a duel core pentium D will give you better performance in everything,duel core is just BETTER as for a single core will be shared by windwos with its service's + the programs your running<br />
and a duel core proc will be shared and devided,to active and inactive procces's<br />
meaning that a duel core will run the thing you run at your screen CURRENTLY much faster then a single core could ever run it<br />
<br />
for example with a dual core people are getting 3 times more the FPS in CSS they get then with a single core<br />
its because CSS (counter strike source) use's a whole core,and use's ALL those 3ghz (if its on intel) on it self,while the other core supports everything else <img src="/images/smilies/tongue.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Stick out tounge caps" class="inlineimg" />
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
404 Posts
<div style="margin:20px; margin-top:5px; ">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px">Quote:</div>
<table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="99%">
<tr>
<td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset">

<div>
Originally Posted by <strong>RADEON</strong>

</div>
<div style="font-style:italic">When you say a 3.6 GHz Pentium D is faster, are you taking into consideration that the 805 is dual core, 1M L2 x 2? <br />
Also, I forget, is core 2 the same as dual core, or is it dual dual cores?<br />
<br />
And, <u>does dual core really make any usefull difference these days </u> over a good single core like an A64 @ 3GHz?<br />
<br />
BTW, what mobo/ram do you have for your oc'd SD, and what is everything running at?</div>

</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>I think you may have misinterpreted what I was saying. I meant to say that AMD's perform better than Intels (excluding the new Core 2) clock-for-clock. In other words, if you took a 3GHz AMD and a 3GHz Intel, the AMD would perform as if it were approximately a 4.5GHz Intel. This comparison excludes other variables such as instruction sets, cache, pipelines, etc. It's just comparing how many calculations an AMD chip does per clock cycle versus how many an Intel does. If you haven't read that faq link I posted, I highly suggest doing so. <br />
<br />
You should download this clock speed converter and play around with some numbers. It's a good reference, but as I said, it only takes clock speed into account, not cache or instruction sets or other variables that affect performance. <a href="http://www.overclock.net/attachments/faqs/31612-info-what-megahertz-myth-31544-add-downloads-section-cpu-speed?d=1158277480" target="_blank">http://www.overclock.net/attachments...d?d=1158277480</a><br />
<br />
The Core 2 is dual core. It is also better than anything AMD has out right now. Intel has not released a quad core as of yet. The Core 2 is faster than the Pentium 4 and Pentium D because it can calculate more per clock cycle at lower GHz... kinda like what AMD has been doing for years.<br />
<br />
My setup includes an ASUS A8N-E motherboard and 512MB Corsair XMS (I need more). I haven't started really overclocking it yet... right now I'm running at 2270MHz.
 

·
OG Overclocker
Joined
·
875 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
<div style="margin:20px; margin-top:5px; ">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px">Quote:</div>
<table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="99%">
<tr>
<td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset">

<div>
Originally Posted by <strong>indignation</strong>

</div>
<div style="font-style:italic">I think you may have misinterpreted what I was saying. I meant to say that AMD's perform better than Intels (excluding the new Core 2) clock-for-clock. In other words, if you took a 3GHz AMD and a 3GHz Intel, the AMD would perform as if it were approximately a 4.5GHz Intel. This comparison excludes other variables such as instruction sets, cache, pipelines, etc. It's just comparing how many calculations an AMD chip does per clock cycle versus how many an Intel does. If you haven't read that faq link I posted, I highly suggest doing so. As far as getting a dual-core, they cost more for the same performance. You'd only have increased performance for multitasking... like if you want to burn a DVD and play a game at the same time or something because each process can utilize its own core. I'm sure you probably know this already....<br />
<br />
<br />
...The Core 2 is dual core. It is also better than anything AMD has out right now. Intel has not released a quad core as of yet. The Core 2 is faster than the Pentium 4 and Pentium D because it can calculate more per clock cycle at lower GHz... kinda like what AMD has been doing for years. ...</div>

</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div><br />
<br />
I know... but <u>all</u> i'm asking is if the pentium D 805 (which IS dual core), overclocked to 3.6-3.8GHz is going to be overall better than a regular A64 San Diego overclocked to 2.8-3GHz? <br />
In other words, will the dual cores make up for the fact that the A64 will kick a single 3.6GHz Pentium D butt?<br />
<br />
I've seen some benches that say yes, and some that say no... I'm looking for opinions based on real-world experience based mostly on games and stuff like 3DMark.<br />
I dont really care about burning DVD's and playing whatever at the same time... just what's going to make FEAR and UT2007 and that kind of stuff faster.
 

·
Old school
Joined
·
14,377 Posts
Have you checked the price of an X2 3600+ over there? It's a bit cheaper as the X2 3800+ and should come with a price tag a little over $100. This is of course an AM2 chip I'm speaking of. A good AM2 mobo doesn't cost that much either, a DFI NF4 for AM2 goes for under 100$!
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: cmass

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,525 Posts
Tweakify windows down to 14 processes, and overclock a 3700+ SD to 3.0ghz, and the single core will probably beat the dual-core for games.<br />
<br />
Well...unless you overclock the dual-core massively. <img src="/images/smilies/tongue.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Stick Out Tongue" class="inlineimg" /><br />
<br />
3700+ 3.0ghz vs 3.6ghz PD, I'd place my bets on the 3700+.<br />
3700+ 3.0ghz vs 2.6ghz X2 3800+, I'd place my bets on the X2.
 

·
OG Overclocker
Joined
·
875 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Well, THG got theirs to 3.3 on the stock cooler, 3.8 on the Zalman, and 4.1 on water...<br />
I was saying 3.6 conservatively. I'd say if the SD is compared at 3GHz, it should be compared to a more equivalent 4GHz for the 805.<br />
<br />
The nice thing about the SD 3700 is that I can do it in more steps, since my current rig would be glad to have some good DDR in the mean time. That'll only be true for a s939 SD, though...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,145 Posts
dont go!
 

·
OG Overclocker
Joined
·
875 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
I think i'll go with the intel, but to keep the initial price down, i'm going to get a Celeron D to fill the socket until i can spring for the P D 805. That was a major pride-swallowing decision, but I hope it oc's well.<br />
<br />
Darn car steals my computer money!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
470 Posts
Why not pick up the Opty 165 you can get for around $150 right now and get the best of both worlds?
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top