AMD Opteron vs. AMD64-Venice 9 replies

Please wait...

MrFancypants Forum Admin

The Bad

216,814 XP

7th December 2003

0 Uploads

19,996 Posts

6 Threads

#1 12 years ago

I'm looking for a new CPU and narrowed my search down to these two:

AMD Opteron 144 (1,8Ghz) for 189 Euro

AMD Athlon 64 3200+ for 139 Euro

I keep hearing those stories of the Opteron being overclocked to 2,9Ghz with air-cooling while the Athlon usually reaches 2,5 Ghz. But then there is always the chance that I end up with an Opteron which isn't as fast.

I will probably buy a Thermaltake "Big Typhoon" for the new CPU and Asus A8N5X as motherboard.

What do you think? What kind of RAM (one 1GB stick) should I get for overclocking the Opteron?




xephus

I post to get attention

50 XP

11th February 2003

0 Uploads

66 Posts

0 Threads

#2 12 years ago

The 'bad' (CABGE, some CABJE) Opterons hit 2.4+ , the 'good' (CAB2E, CABNE) ones hit 2.6+ on air 939 Opterons have san diego cores (less heat, less voltage needed to get higher clocks and have larger L2 Cache sizes) If money is an issue - go for Venice If not - Opterown :) Memory wise - It depends on the dividers you want to use, which you won't know until you get the chip and see exactly what it can do. I'd suggest any 'decent' budget stuff - which you can clock slightly if needed. Corsair, Giel, Kingston, OZC, etc. Personally, I use the Giel value stuff (4 x 512mb 3200 and run them @ 216mhz) 270 fsb/htt x 10 multiplier with 166 on ram divider and is rock solid :) You can use a tool (A64 Tweaker) which can set non standard clocks in windows like 150 or 183 to help with better ratios.




xephus

I post to get attention

50 XP

11th February 2003

0 Uploads

66 Posts

0 Threads

#3 12 years ago
MrFancypants Forum Admin

The Bad

216,814 XP

7th December 2003

0 Uploads

19,996 Posts

6 Threads

#4 12 years ago

That's an interesting table. Too bad I can't be sure what kind of Opteron I'll get beforehand.

Is an not overclocked Opteron faster than a Venice? They seem to be clocked at a lower speed but more expansive.




xephus

I post to get attention

50 XP

11th February 2003

0 Uploads

66 Posts

0 Threads

#5 12 years ago

The 939 Venice 3000 is clocked @ 1.8ghz with 512kb L2 cache (venice core) The equivilent 939 Opteron (144) is clocked @ 1.8ghz with 1024kb L2 cache (San diego core) Both x9 multiplier

The 939 Venice 3200 is clocked @ 2ghz with 512kb L2 cache (venice core) The equivilent 939 Opteron (146) is clocked @ 2ghz with 1024kb L2 cache (San diego core) Both x10 multiplier

and so on...

So yes, a non overclocked Opteron will 'usually' outperform the equivilent non overclocked venice.

The opterons are priced higher at the mo (They were cheaper than venice for several months). But for the extra price you have a chip that WILL overclock better than most venices.

To know what 'kind' of opteron you would be getting - Ask for revision and stepping numbers. If the site/seller doesn't know ask them to look at the chip and read the letters/numbers on it.

If you find stepping/revision info/numbers, post them here - I should be able to find info on what kind of speeds are to be expected on your mobo (Asus A8N5X).

If you are not interested in overclocking your chip - Get a Venice, they're cheaper (at the mo) :)




MrFancypants Forum Admin

The Bad

216,814 XP

7th December 2003

0 Uploads

19,996 Posts

6 Threads

#6 12 years ago

Thanks for the advice. I think I will go the middle-way and get an AMD 3500+. Overclocking isn't really necessary for me right now because most games will run just fine with 3ghz.

Now I only have to find out how much Watt my PSU should have for this CPU and a ATI X1900Xt. I wanted to get a PSU by Sharkoon - either 430 or 480W. Less is better in my case because I often download stuff over night and electricity isn't that cheap. What do you think?




Hmmmdonut

The real Homer

50 XP

6th July 2005

0 Uploads

441 Posts

0 Threads

#7 12 years ago

untitledgg6oc.jpg

Provided you get a good stepping both will probaly OC the same. The opty will be faster at the same clock because of more cache. Go with whichever one is cheaper.

Be warned though that my opty only did 2.7ghz. Overclocking is all about luck.




MG42Maniac

A man of dubious moral fibre

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

3,932 Posts

0 Threads

#8 12 years ago

MrFancypants

Now I only have to find out how much Watt my PSU should have for this CPU and a ATI X1900Xt. I wanted to get a PSU by Sharkoon - either 430 or 480W. Less is better in my case because I often download stuff over night and electricity isn't that cheap. What do you think?

Hi there,

I will have a very similar setup ( AMD64 3700+ & X1900). Make sure the PSU you get has decent 12v rails that can give out 30a as this is the power figure given by ATI. The X1900 series cards are extremely power hungry and will suck the power right out of a cheap PSU. I found this topic very helpful. I got to ask loads of n00b questions and get responses from professionals :). I'm personally getting an Enermax 485w as its nicely priced and gives me the power my new system requires.




MrFancypants Forum Admin

The Bad

216,814 XP

7th December 2003

0 Uploads

19,996 Posts

6 Threads

#9 12 years ago

Thanks for the links :) I'll better take the 480W version in that case (the 430W has 29A on +12, the 480 has 32). It also has practically the same technical details as an Enermax 485W.




xephus

I post to get attention

50 XP

11th February 2003

0 Uploads

66 Posts

0 Threads

#10 12 years ago

Good read for PSU info http://forums.extremeoverclocking.com/showthread.php?t=136602

Also, nice site for calculating (roughly) what size of PSu you will ACTUALLY need: http://www.extreme.outervision.com/index.jsp