Processor Upgrade

Which Processor would you pick and why?


  • Total voters
    10
Status
Not open for further replies.

Gareth Hale

Member
Joined
11 Jun 2005
Messages
941
Hi all, I've decided, its time to change processors, the sempron had a good run, but it isnt very quick. I am going to Socket 939 and I have been wondering, which processor would you reccomend me getting out of the

AMD Athlon 64 x2 3800+ or the AMD Athlon 64 x2 4200+

Im a power mad person, and I've never really had a high performance CPU, ever... Ive had the Celeron, Sempron and Sempron64.

If anybody has used a PC with either of the two processors in it, can you please tell me how it is and whether it would be good to upgrade to.

Thanks :hello1: :hello1: :hello1: :hello1: :hello1:
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

The Gricer

Member
Joined
11 Aug 2005
Messages
269
Location
MP 34½ SWML
Either of these dual core devices will of course be faster than your Sempron but you probably won't notice much difference between the two of them for most tasks. However if money is no object then go for a system with the faster one in.

Frank
 

David

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2005
Messages
5,104
Location
Scunthorpe
Do you really need to get a new processor? If memory serves me correctly, you haven't had that one for very long.
 

Gareth Hale

Member
Joined
11 Jun 2005
Messages
941
Harry Potter said:
Do you really need to get a new processor? If memory serves me correctly, you haven't had that one for very long.
That is very true, I would'nt be replacing everything, just the motherboard and the processor. I had higher expectations from the processor but it is simply too slow on some tasks.

Im not planning to upgrade till August, im waiting for the prices to drop dramatically because of introduction of the M2 board. :hello1::hello1::hello1::hello1::hello1:
Edited (by doublepost prevention system):
Ive decided to go with the AMD Athlon 64 x2 3800+, It seems to have more than enough power for me and after testing a PC with that processor in, it made my mind up. Thanks for the help :)
 

Guinness

Established Member
Joined
13 Jun 2005
Messages
3,737
I chose both because....

a) They are similar speeds
b) Why do you need another processor when you got a new one not long ago?
c) I really don't care
 

The Gricer

Member
Joined
11 Aug 2005
Messages
269
Location
MP 34½ SWML
tubechallenger said:
You should get neither, all you're getting is 0.7GHz more of 1GHz clock. Not that much.
It's not quite that simple. Firstly AMD processor numbers don't really reflect the clock speed. Secondly an Athlon is a better processor than a Sempron of the same clock speed, (in the same way as Pentium/Celeron) Finally, and most importantly, with a dual core processor you could liken it more to having two processors running in parallel at clock speed. So the improvement is going to be somewhat better than 700Mhz more clock.

After years of increasing processor speeds the limits seem to have been reached for now and so the only way forward is to put two processers in the same chip.

Frank
 

HSTfan!!!

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2005
Messages
1,966
tbh the only difference you're going to have is cache size, and obviously 2 lots of 64bit power if you're sempron is only a 32bit. Ok thats good but I personally don't believe that you're sempron isn't enough, my ancient 1Ghz duron with miniscule cache in my pc is still fully capable of running win xp and some games and programs that my brand new celeron 1.40Ghz can't run for ****. AMD's are capable of anything over Intels.
Plus as everyone else has said, why bother if you've only had the sempron for 5mins, you're as bad as my cousin always having to have the new top spec processor when the one you've currently got is perfectly good for the job.
Waste of money mate
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top