Overclock.net banner

21 - 40 of 59 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,431 Posts
I got my x2 3800 for $150 and overclocked to 2.5ghz its faster than the 4400x2 in all areas (my friend has a 4400).. if you arent going to massively overclock just save a few bucks and OC an x2 3800 far past x2 4400 speeds. 2.76ghz 24/7 here...
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
64,300 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>TheEddie</strong>
<a href="showthread.php?s=fb118d83aa0ea05832d812d721028acf&p=1381900#post1381900" rel="nofollow"><img class="inlineimg" src="http://static.overclock.net//img/forum/go_quote.gif" border="0" alt="View Post" /></a>
</div>
<div style="font-style:italic">I got my x2 3800 for $150 and overclocked to 2.5ghz its faster than the 4400x2 in all areas (my friend has a 4400).. if you arent going to massively overclock just save a few bucks and OC an x2 3800 far past x2 4400 speeds. 2.76ghz 24/7 here...</div>

</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>The Opteron 165 is 10 Dollars more and would be better than that 3800 in an overclock.
 

·
Filthy Casual
Joined
·
8,653 Posts
Opty 165s can reach 3 GHz on a good stepping. Once mine arrives (who knows when that will be) I'm hoping for 2.75, as I've gotten my 3200+ to 2.75 on a suicide shot on stock cooling.
 

·
Totally New to OCN
Joined
·
10,627 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
well i know i want 2x 1 mb cache, thats a must for me<br><br>
monarch computers look liek it has soem good prices for these optys, and of course the performance for my gameing wqill be fine right?<br><br>
i wont be going oem, even though the price drop is nice, but i am a fan of 3 year warrenty =)<br><br>
hmmm whast the multi's on the 65 70 and 75? im thinking il end up going opty =)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,580 Posts
165= 9x<br>
170=10x<br>
175=11x<br>
180=12x
 

·
Filthy Casual
Joined
·
8,653 Posts
It'd be nice to have a 180, but I don't think it's worth the price.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,580 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>pow3rtr1p</strong> <a href="showthread.php?s=fb118d83aa0ea05832d812d721028acf&p=1382236#post1382236"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="http://static.overclock.net//img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">It'd be nice to have a 180, but I don't think it's worth the price.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
No, it's not. The only people that could <i>really</i> use the 180's 12x multi are <i>maybe</i> the phase change crowd. Across the board, all the Optys top out at just about the same Mhz, regardless of multi, and that's with some of the best OCers doing the tweaking.
 

·
Totally New to OCN
Joined
·
10,627 Posts
Discussion Starter #29
hmmm im thinking either the 170 or 175, otherwise if everyones saying i can easily get the oc of the 165 to 2,4-2.6 that would be happy enough for me, but i dotn ever run a mem devider, so im skeptical, my thought is that, iif i have the x9 multi, that i will top my mem out before i get to 2.4 =/
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,372 Posts
Go for the 170. The 165 will hurt your memory (unless you have some good ol' tccd RAM). My 165 is at 2.7 right now with 1.5V and does not seem to want to do much above that (It gets really hot too, even with a BT). I'm going to try switching the MB with the old DFI I have laying around since it allows me the same OC but with slightly less volts (more of a pain in the memory department, but I can deal with that). I'm begining to regret my purchase and wish I would have goten the 170 just for the x10 multiplier.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,509 Posts
What about the FX55 or FX57 the prices are low for those aren't they?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,372 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>USFORCES</strong>
<a href="showthread.php?s=fb118d83aa0ea05832d812d721028acf&p=1382558#post1382558" rel="nofollow"><img class="inlineimg" src="http://static.overclock.net//img/forum/go_quote.gif" border="0" alt="View Post" /></a>
</div>
<div style="font-style:italic">What about the FX55 or FX57 the prices are low for those aren't they?</div>

</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div> <br />
Prices for the 55 are really low right now, but honestly I wouldn't even bother. Why get a single core chip when for the same price (or a little more) you can get a comparable dual core?
 

·
Totally New to OCN
Joined
·
10,627 Posts
Discussion Starter #34
seeing as though i have my 3700 clocked at 3.8 daily... fx singl c9ores is just something i dont care about right now
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
64,300 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>USFORCES</strong> <a href="showthread.php?s=fb118d83aa0ea05832d812d721028acf&p=1382558#post1382558"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="http://static.overclock.net//img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">What about the FX55 or FX57 the prices are low for those aren't they?</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Not Dual core. There not worth it in the long run.
 

·
Totally New to OCN
Joined
·
10,627 Posts
Discussion Starter #36
this post, i made it because i was weighing the different DUAL CORES to replace my SINGLE CORE! lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
481 Posts
I personally have Opty 165. It is running at 290x9 (2.6Ghz) on stock voltage. I tried 310x9 but the heat was the problem, not the CPU. If you are looking for a decent speed, such as 2.6~2.7, or even 3.0 with better cooling, Go for opty 165, i think i saw monarch selling them for 170 or so. It is a good chip i think, it is cool (i think i mounted my BT wrong, or my ambient is just too warm), overclocks easily with stock voltage, and comes with 2Mb L2 cache. If you just want a processor for few months until you get a new setup for the DX 10 setup with either the new AMD chip or the conroes, get the 165. Save money and its dual core. But if you want to keep a computer for a long time.. i say you save it and get core 2 due =/
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
64,300 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Chaogod87</strong> <a href="showthread.php?s=fb118d83aa0ea05832d812d721028acf&p=1384197#post1384197"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="http://static.overclock.net//img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">I personally have Opty 165. It is running at 290x9 (2.6Ghz) on stock voltage. I tried 310x9 but the heat was the problem, not the CPU. If you are looking for a decent speed, such as 2.6~2.7, or even 3.0 with better cooling, Go for opty 165, i think i saw monarch selling them for 170 or so. It is a good chip i think, it is cool (i think i mounted my BT wrong, or my ambient is just too warm), overclocks easily with stock voltage, and comes with 2Mb L2 cache. If you just want a processor for few months until you get a new setup for the DX 10 setup with either the new AMD chip or the conroes, get the 165. Save money and its dual core. But if you want to keep a computer for a long time.. i say you save it and get core 2 due =/</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
I Agree with this in its full if i where to be honest. The 170-175 are great CPU'S aswel so dont get me wrong. However ive noticed in benchmarks they dont always do aswel as the 165.
 

·
Totally New to OCN
Joined
·
10,627 Posts
Discussion Starter #39
indeed, i knew this was going to be a harsh decision..<br />
as this needs to be capable of playing my games, and doing other everyday things, i realli just odnt liek the idea of HAVEING to oc, to make it decent =/ and tyhe low multiplier deffinitely makes me think that id have to underclock my memory inorder to get a decent OC
 
21 - 40 of 59 Posts
Top