X2 3800 vs 3700 San Diego

[espn2829]

I play a lot of games and I want a processor that will be fast and able to keep up with a nvidia 7800GT. I have narrowed it down to 2 possible choices: the x2 3800 and the 3700 Sandiego.

 

I also surf the web and watch movies and do other stuff on my computer. So performance on other things besides games is also important to me.

 

I have heard that the X2 dual core processors aren't good for gaming and may reduce performance. Is this true? Are there any benchmarks to prove this?

 

How does a 3700 San Diego compare to a X2 in terms of gaming? assuming both are at stock speed. Also, does a X2 completely beat the 3700 San Diego in multi-tasking?

 

I appreciate any help

[sn_85]

i would say go for the x2. at stock the x2 is only 2ghz and SD 2.4ghz so the sd will perform better since games are still only single threaded. but try burning a dvd and play a game with the sd and you'll notice the difference. this is a dfi forum so i assume you'll be overclocking some? in all likelyhood you can reach at least 2.4ghz on the x2 and i'd rather have 2 cores at 2.4ghz then say a single sandy at 2.7 or 2.8ghz. at those speeds it will be plenty enough for your 7800GT.

[My Ugly PC]

i would say go for the x2. at stock the x2 is only 2ghz and SD 2.4ghz so the sd will perform better since games are still only single threaded. but try burning a dvd and play a game with the sd and you'll notice the difference. this is a dfi forum so i assume you'll be overclocking some? in all likelyhood you can reach at least 2.4ghz on the x2 and i'd rather have 2 cores at 2.4ghz then say a single sandy at 2.7 or 2.8ghz. at those speeds it will be plenty enough for your 7800GT.

 

This guy had a type-o, the 3700 sandy is 2.2Ghz. I got one. The dual cores have not clocked as well as the singles. So for now the sandy will be better for gaming. The future is anyone guess.

 

Many new technologies have floundered because programmers don't write for it. This guy said games are only single threaded. Intel came out with Hyper Threading quite some time ago. It stalled. Many programs, not just games are still single threaded. Don't let some one tell you that anything is inevitable. Its not. History shows it.

[sn_85]

glad you caught me

[Contrariedad]

If you're mostly gaming only at this point, go with the San Diego 3700. It'll likely clock up to the 2.6 to 2.8 range whereas an X2-3800 will likely overclock to the 2.4 to 2.6 range. This is not always true however. My Venice 3000+ runs stable at 2.7 whereas my X2-3800 runs stable at 2.8.

 

There are also a few headaches that come along with the dual cores right now. Sometimes games exhibit odd behavior with dual cores unless you apply the right patches.

 

If I were buying a new processor today I'd probably be picking between a Venice 3000+ and a X2-3800. The Venices are highly overclockable and represent awesome bang-for-the-buck and overclocking performance. The dual cores are the future but the question is are you better off waiting a year when hopefully you can buy an X2-6000+ for $400

[My Ugly PC]

Venice is value. Value is venice.

 

I would however be wary of the 3000+. Some people have probs with the 9x multi, or maybe its just because its binned lower. Get a 3200+, and see if that frees up enough budget to get a 7800 GTX. VGA's are a damn sight more important than cpu when it comes to gaming.

 

Or if you have done your research, don't let me talk you out of an X2. Neither option is wrong.

[Liquidfire]

my ugly pc

 

alot of new reviews are showing comps of the extreme end of video game processing can be cpu limited by using a 7800's. when u start gettin into high resolutions, ur cpu can end up being a limiting factor.

 

or so i have been reading...any can feel free to correct me if i am wrong

[tweak50]

the way hyper threading and the way dual core works are completly different. Hyper threading is not cappable of running a muli threaded application, it simply can run singles a lot faster and more stable. SO there is not a lot of multi threaded games or apps out because there trulley has not been a cpu that can support it until dual core.

[Squid1]

Difficult call. As I just described in the other thread, games making actual use of SMP will be a good way off, by that time you will need a new CPU either way.

 

I have seen many 3800+ X2 reach better overclocks that San Diegos, but of course they start from 200 MHz less, so it's a gamble. The bigger cache is mostly useless.

 

Personally I think the best way to get a cheap gaming CPU right now is buying a used known good overclocker Venice from somebody who promises you a certain overclock. Do that a few times, keep the best, sell the others on epray.

[My Ugly PC]

my ugly pc

 

alot of new reviews are showing comps of the extreme end of video game processing can be cpu limited by using a 7800's. when u start gettin into high resolutions, ur cpu can end up being a limiting factor.

 

or so i have been reading...any can feel free to correct me if i am wrong

 

To avoid the stated, a venice will get higher clocks( a majority of the time). Notice that is what I reccomended with the 7800 gtx. If your worried about that dude, the X2 should scare you. You would be completely in the hands of programmers and developers. Maybe it pays off, but enough to make up 200mhz, I sure don't know.

[My Ugly PC]

the way hyper threading and the way dual core works are completly different. Hyper threading is not cappable of running a muli threaded application, it simply can run singles a lot faster and more stable. SO there is not a lot of multi threaded games or apps out because there trulley has not been a cpu that can support it until dual core.

 

Might I ask were you got your info. I would love to read that, it would seem I have been misinformed about HT.

 

Edit: ah here we go, to take full advantage of hyper a app must be multithreaded...

 

http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu...erthreading.ars

 

second paragraph

[tweak50]

Pretty much everything i know on HT and Dual Core was givin to me directly from an Intel Rep so off hand i have no liturature to back my claims on. But you are a man that can prove his point i have to give you that. The only argument I can make on this article is, if you look on the third page.

 

"However, all four instructions must come from the same thread. In effect, then, each executing thread is still confined to a single "time slice," but that time slice is now one CPU clock cycle. So instead of system memory containing multiple running threads that the OS swaps in and out of the CPU each time slice, the CPU's front end now contains multiple executing threads and its issuing logic switches back and forth between them on each clock cycle as it sends instructions into the execution core."

 

The main word in that chunk would be "switches". A HT enabled processor is till only capable of executing one instruction at a time, so it is not executing both threads of a multi-threaded app at the same time, a dual core is. I am going to do some more research to back my claims, i will post them as soon as i can.