is an opteron worth it - Page 3

meat_helmet · 06-28-2007, 04:13 AM

Wouldnt a 6000+ be a better option to the FX-60. Arent they cheaper? I havent checked.

Get the opty, its a cheap solution to keep you going for a while before your next build - does anyone really think NOW is a good time to buy and FX-60...?

baron5 · 06-28-2007, 06:37 AM

no, the fx's are not as good as the c2q's and are usually more expensive as a recall. or will be easy after the price drop.

Nagasama · 06-28-2007, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildside

i see ur point........i mean like i said, i wouldnt mind getting the 4800+. Heck, i wouldnt mind getting the 4600+, but y the 3600+ when the 4800+ n 4600+ is better......err faster? Remember i want dual-core.

now im just asking again, what is the difference between the Opteron 165 or 170 being a server processor n the 4800+, 4600+, n 3600+ being desktop processor? What i know is that the server is used for hosting, like best for hosting game servers for example. Desktop is for everyday computers in homes n offices. Correct me if im wrong.

oh n about how much money i want to spend on my computer, ya that wont happen; in fact, me upgrading my CPU wont happen unless i dont get a job very soon.

my 3600 is clocked at the same speed as an x2 6000. the difference is the cache, and that will mak a small difference in gaming performance (not much), but it is a pretty noticable advantage when encoding and compressing. if you do not do that, an x2 3600 will serve you as well as the higher end amd chips. mine does. the 3600 is a dual core as well.
you are correct about the usage of server vs desktop. but the opty chips also make good desktop chips, as they process information much the same way as amd's desktop chips.

wolfeyes89 · 06-28-2007, 02:05 PM

Not to mention the higher quality silicon used when making an opty giving you the option to overclock those chips like mofos.

Wildside · 06-28-2007, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nagasama

my 3600 is clocked at the same speed as an x2 6000. the difference is the cache, and that will mak a small difference in gaming performance (not much), but it is a pretty noticable advantage when encoding and compressing. if you do not do that, an x2 3600 will serve you as well as the higher end amd chips. mine does. the 3600 is a dual core as well.
you are correct about the usage of server vs desktop. but the opty chips also make good desktop chips, as they process information much the same way as amd's desktop chips.

so which Opteron would u suggest i decide on getting if i want to get a server processor? The 165 or 170?

if i just stick with desktop, which one should i get? The x2 3600+, or x2 4600+, or the x2 4800+? If i can find the 4800+, i will be thrilled.

thx for ur help by the way, i appreicate it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolfeyes89

Not to mention the higher quality silicon used when making an opty giving you the option to overclock those chips like mofos.

really? Interesting............but i really have no intention in OCing any CPUs yet, not until i get one of those Phenom/FX processors.

Nagasama · 06-28-2007, 02:22 PM

well, if you are not going to overclock, you should stick to the best that you can afford. if you can find a 4800, get that. you would have to overclock both the opty and the 3600 to reach the performance level of a 4800.
out of the optys, the better overclocker is the 165.

Wildside · 06-28-2007, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nagasama

well, if you are not going to overclock, you should stick to the best that you can afford. if you can find a 4800, get that. you would have to overclock both the opty and the 3600 to reach the performance level of a 4800.
out of the optys, the better overclocker is the 165.

alright thx dude, im first gonna try to find the x2 4800+ somewhere that is at a reasonable price. If i find one, i post it on this forum to see if the price isnt a rip off or anything like that, same goes with an x2 4600+ if i find one.

IF NOT HOWEVER, then ill go with an Opteron 165 n maybe OC it a little. Question though, y not 170? U say that 165 is more OCable? How so?

Nagasama · 06-28-2007, 02:33 PM

lol well...i dont really know why. it just is. the same way my 3600 will probably overclock better than a 4800. all of the research that i have done into optys suggests that the 165 just gets easier clocks with less voltage. it also could have something to do with the fact that the 165s are way more popular in desktops than the 170. thats probably a big factor. they are both great cpus, tho.

Wildside · 06-28-2007, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nagasama

lol well...i dont really know why. it just is. the same way my 3600 will probably overclock better than a 4800. all of the research that i have done into optys suggests that the 165 just gets easier clocks with less voltage. it also could have something to do with the fact that the 165s are way more popular in desktops than the 170. thats probably a big factor. they are both great cpus, tho.

ok cool, thx dude for helping me.

Poizen22 · 06-29-2007, 05:12 PM

so topty 170 wiull be beter for gaming then a e6300? and im trying to do 2 things one is keap my computer up a litle longer until i can afford a new build in the spring and salvage this machien and teh second is to try and build a new system faster but im preaty sure i could get the 150 for the 170 as a end of the year gift off of my father instead of a nitro tank for my paint ball gun and what kind of increase will i get from my 4000+

edit: plus im getting a 8800gts 320 mb by the end of the week for free from xfx to replace my 7900gt

Member Login