Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Athlon 64 X2 4800+ Toledo Vs. Opteron 280 Italy


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 RDReavis1

RDReavis1

    New Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 24 November 2005 - 02:39 PM

http://www.newegg.co...SubCategory=343

I'm looking for a processor that will give me multi-tasking performance along with good gaming performance. What is the major difference and which would be the best for the next generation of dual core processors? Is it too early to be thinking of dual cores as they are now? I'm also hearing that the 940 socket will be a dead end for any current processors.

Thanks!
Richard

#2 sYstEmATiC

sYstEmATiC

    [�Ć-R]Tenacious_G

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2764 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Middletown, OH

Posted 24 November 2005 - 02:43 PM

well, i can say that the opteron that you selected is meant for servers aka not for everyday home use.

the x2 would be a better choice but right now there isnt very many aplications that use both cores. if i were you, i would get an FX-57 since it seems you are looking at the 1k+ price range.

Desktop Gaming Rig-----------------------------------Laptop Sager NP 8170-S1
Intel i5 2500K---------------------------------------------Intel i7-2720QM
Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD3H-----------------------------12gb ddr3 1333mhz 3x4gb
2x Sapphire 6970's CrossfireX----------------------nVidia GTX 485M 2gb
16gb (4x4gb) G.Skill RipJaws X 1600-------------128gb Samsung 470 SSD
128gb Crucial M4 SSD---------------------------------500gb 7200rpm
2tb Hitachi HDD------------------------------------------17.3in 1920x1080 LED screen
Corsair 850TX PSU
Corsair Carbide 400R Case
NZXT Havik 140


#3 fire_storm

fire_storm

    Total Nerd

  • Folding Member
  • 3977 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 November 2005 - 02:44 PM

Well the x2 is for desktops and italy is for servers. I would say get the 4800+ because if you get the italy you will have to buy ecc ram and that cost a lot of cash.

#4 RDReavis1

RDReavis1

    New Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 24 November 2005 - 02:46 PM

Ah, okay...I'll keep looking around.

Thanks!

-----------
Okay, I have yet again another question:
Compare these two:
http://www.newegg.co...SubCategory=343
As I am not positive as to if the FX57 is a dual core (I believe that it is not). I will be doing alot of multi-tasking and, of course, gaming. The FX is 0.4Ghz faster, but yet, it only has 1MB L2 as compared to 2MB in the X2. Which would be a better choice, considering that I will probably match one of these with a 7800 GTX.

Thanks once again.

Edited by RDReavis1, 24 November 2005 - 03:23 PM.


#5 Nagash

Nagash

    The Ultra Heavy Beat

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 842 posts

Posted 24 November 2005 - 03:34 PM

Why not look into the s939 Opteron line for your dual core needs?
Lian Li PC-75B with OCZ 520w Powerstream
DFI RDX200
AMD Opteron 148 cooled by Swiftech Storm
2 X 1024 Mb Mushkin Redline PC 4000
ATi X1800XT cooled by Danger Den Maze 4 and OCZ ramsinks

Antec 1080 AMG case with True 430 PSU
Barton 2500+ @ 2334 Mhz with SLK900A Abit NF7-S v 2.0
1024 Mb Mushkin lvl 2 PC 3500
ATi 9700 Pro @ 392 core 315 mem with Zalman VF700Cu

#6 RDReavis1

RDReavis1

    New Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 24 November 2005 - 03:44 PM

Such as:
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819103581
Is this what you mean?

In this case, here's my comparison, since I see that the X2 outperforms the FX57 even though the FX is .4Ghz faster...and it adds the aspect of dual core.
http://www.newegg.co...SubCategory=343
Which looks better? The reviews for the Opteron 180 didn't look too good, but what's your guys' input?

Thanks!

Edited by RDReavis1, 24 November 2005 - 03:58 PM.


#7 hardnrg

hardnrg

    Overclocking the i7... finally

  • Honorary Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16487 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester, UK

Posted 24 November 2005 - 04:52 PM

i'd personally choose a dual core opteron cos i feel pretty confident i could get both cores near 3ghz if not over... i've seen people get the 165 (stock 1.8) to 3.0ghz each core...

i don't think you'd be disappointed with an x2 either... i'd say x2 if you don't feel up to the task of heavy overclocking

( How To Ask A Question ) · ( [email protected] Sigpics ) · ( Rules ) · ( USB Bootdrive ) · ( Modding & Computer Stores ) · ( OCC facebook.png )
i7 920 D0 @ 21x196=4116, HT on · D-Tek Fuzion v1 · 3x2GB Corsair XMS3 PC3-10666 @ DDR1176, 8-8-8-22-1T
BFG/XFX GTX260 Maxcore SLI @ 756/1512/1188 (Swiftech MCW60-R + Swiftech GTX200) · Asus P6T Deluxe V2
X-Fi XtremeMusic (Hotrodded) · PCP&C Silencer 750

Athlon II X4 635 @ 2900 · 2x 2GB PC2-6400 · HD5550 1GB · Asus M4A77D · Antec Neopower 480

EeePC 1000H @ 12x164=1965 · 1x 2GB Corsair VS PC2-5300 · Gigabyte Aircruiser N300 GN-WI06N

 


#8 bigred

bigred

    Don't even get me started

  • Folding Member
  • 9685 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 November 2005 - 05:01 PM

in all honesty there is no difference between venus (the 939 opteron core) and san diego. they're both the same core but meant for different markets.


also toledo is nothing more than a pair of venice (512k per core) or san diego (1mb per core) cores slapped together. Manchester is a pair of whinchester cores together.
Some people are like Slinkies. Totally useless, but you just can't help but laugh when you push them down the stairs.

#9 RDReavis1

RDReavis1

    New Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 24 November 2005 - 05:23 PM

So if you were to choose between the two, which would be your choice not considering price (such a small difference anyway).

http://www.newegg.co...SubCategory=343

Thanks!

The only difference spec-wise I see is the L2: one is 2MB while the other is 1MBx2. Is this just like RAM in the sense that one is whole while the other is 2x? Does the 2x mean that there is more efficiency because of double input into the different modules if that is indeed what that means? Please excuse my blind stabs into the darkness :) .

#10 bigred

bigred

    Don't even get me started

  • Folding Member
  • 9685 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 November 2005 - 05:37 PM

2mb is not per core that's total. they're the same darn core. this is a new marketing (pardon the slur against AMD here guys, but it's true) scam to have 2 identical products with identical specs, carrying 2 different names for 2 different markets.
Some people are like Slinkies. Totally useless, but you just can't help but laugh when you push them down the stairs.

#11 IUMaestro

IUMaestro

    Cooling Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1574 posts
  • Location:Houston, TX

Posted 24 November 2005 - 05:42 PM

I believe with no tweaking that they'd be VERY close if not indistinguishable, it depends if you are looking for a sloid performer such that you don't feel the need to squeeze every little MHZ out of it, or if you are looking for a chip to OC the hell out of it...

My choice would be the Athlon, it would be best for gaming as opteron's instruction codes are prolly more mathematical based, even though their gonna be so close anyway.

moreover - not like it'll probably come into play, but the 4800+ has a 3 yr warranty vs. the opti's 1 yr.
Posted Image
|::- AMD Athlon64 3700+ San Diego @ 2600 MHz -::|
|::- MSI K8N Neo2-F nForce3 Ultra -::|
|::- PC Power & Cooling 510 Deluxe -::|
|::- 2GB (4x512mb) OCZ Platinum 2-3-2-5 -::|
|::- eVGA GeForce 6800GT 256mb @ 435/1100 Mhz -::|
|::- Custom Danger Den Water-Cooling -::|
|::- XP Pro x64 (slipped to 100mb) + Ubuntu dual boot -::|

#12 RDReavis1

RDReavis1

    New Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 24 November 2005 - 05:43 PM

So I would go with the X2 because it includes the fan and heat sink. What do you think?

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819103544