AMD: Athalon II vs. Phenom II

[Siphaed]

Okay, so I've been trying to get as much info as needed to be building a new PC over the next month or so.

 

The processor I'm choosing is an AMD since it's sockets have had much better compatibility than Intel, and they're about 1/2 the price.

 

I'm not going to be getting a 6-Core, because they're not that great for gaming just yet (there's almost NO games that supports it) and it'd just be a waste at the moment.

 

Between those I'm looking to:

 

-AMD Athelon II X4 630 Propus 2.8GHz

Newegg.com - AMD Athlon II X4 630 Propus 2.8GHz 4 x 512KB L2 Cache Socket AM3 95W Quad-Core Processor

 

and

 

-AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Deneb 3.2GHz

Newegg.com - AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Deneb 3.2GHz 4 x 512KB L2 Cache 6MB L3 Cache Socket AM3 125W Quad-Core Processor

 

 

The obvious difference is the .4GHz per core (or 1.6GHz overall between 12.8GHz and 11.2GHz). And of course the Phenom takes up 30W more as far as power consumption when looking at the 95W vs. 125W.

 

I also noticed that the Athelon II does not include a Level 3 cache, yet the Phenom II does. I know that's used for quick instruction and line fetching, yet what's the efficiency of using that for video game applications?

 

 

If the Athelon can give a great performance (40-60+FPS with 6 or more programs running at the same time with duel-monitors), then I'd get it and save myself some money. But, if I can't get that out of that and need the Phenom,...well, see, that's where I need the advice.

 

 

P.S. No, I'm not going with a top-tier $300-400 GPU. I'm thinking a GeForce GTS 250 1gb. That comes later, so I might have the wrong one for what I want to do.

[I Love Lamp]

Get the Phenom II 3.0, I've heard it's more stable than the 3.2, and has more room to overclock.

 

To be completely honest, I didn't even know they made AM3 Athlon's. I thought Phenom's were AMD's quad core line.

 

Also, you don't get multiple cores for gaming, you get them for the multitasking. Most games that even have multicore support are still rather rudimentary.

 

Your best bet would be to look for some benchmarks similar to the build you're planning and go from there.

 

Or, Terry could come in and tell me why I'm wrong, that I'm dumb, and that I eat my own feces.

[Siphaed]

Get the Phenom II 3.0, I've heard it's more stable than the 3.2, and has more room to overclock.

 

To be completely honest, I didn't even know they made AM3 Athlon's. I thought Phenom's were AMD's quad core line.

 

Also, you don't get multiple cores for gaming, you get them for the multitasking. Most games that even have multicore support are still rather rudimentary.

 

Your best bet would be to look for some benchmarks similar to the build you're planning and go from there.

 

Or, Terry could come in and tell me why I'm wrong, that I'm dumb, and that I eat my own feces.

 

The one thing that I want to comment is on that part. I never try to overclock my CPUs, GPUs, or anything really. It just causes issue of extra power consumption, extra heating, and the general shrinking of life of the item being OCed.

 

And as far as the Phenom II 3.0, are you talking the 95W version or the 125W version? For that matter, is it the normal Deneb or the Black Edition Deneb?

Edited May 2, 2010 by Siphaed

[Infectious]

The Athalon II should do you fine if you're tight on money.

[Guest The_Monkey]

My Phenom III at work makes me want to stab babies...it is so twitchy and slow.

[LaMigra]

Just get it and be ahead of the game............. Newegg.com - AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition Thuban 3.2GHz 6 x 512KB L2 Cache 6MB L3 Cache Socket AM3 125W Six-Core Desktop Processor

[Cefdinir]

The only difference I see between those two CPUs is the presence of an L3 cache. (Besides the obvious clock speeds)

 

Based on Tom's Hardware review and benchmarks on L3 caches, you may find that the Deneb 965 may not be the best choice for you budget.

 

Although you may see a difference in processor heavy games such as Flight Simulator X and maybe L4D2.

[Clark]

Lamp's wrong, he's dumb, and he eats his own feces.

[RetiredTacos]

Get the Phenom II 3.0, I've heard it's more stable than the 3.2, and has more room to overclock.

 

To be completely honest, I didn't even know they made AM3 Athlon's. I thought Phenom's were AMD's quad core line.

 

Also, you don't get multiple cores for gaming, you get them for the multitasking. Most games that even have multicore support are still rather rudimentary.

 

Your best bet would be to look for some benchmarks similar to the build you're planning and go from there.

 

Or, Terry could come in and tell me why I'm wrong, that I'm dumb, and that I eat my own feces.

 

Phenom's have the L3 cache, that's the difference between those and the athlon's.

 

Multicore support is getting better, SC2 is a prime example. Not that dual core doesn't work, just quad works better in a lot of cases.

 

 

The one thing that I want to comment is on that part. I never try to overclock my CPUs, GPUs, or anything really. It just causes issue of extra power consumption, extra heating, and the general shrinking of life of the item being OCed.

 

And as far as the Phenom II 3.0, are you talking the 95W version or the 125W version? For that matter, is it the normal Deneb or the Black Edition Deneb?

 

I've been overclocking for a little while, the only issue it causes is more heat :blink2:

 

I'd do any Phenom II quad core, 3.6ghz is the sweet spot on quads. After 3.6 there is very little performance gains in most cases from what I've found.

 

But since you're not gonna overclock, the best CPU for the $ will be the 3.2ghz Phenom II.

[Siphaed]

Here's the planed build minus the GPU, monitor, and M&K combo as I'm getting those in a few weeks and have spare ones to use right now.

 

 

Originally I planed on a Samsung 500gb for the HDD, but they sold out so I cannot order it and I've got no idea when they get it back in.

[RetiredTacos]

Not a fan of the MSI board, but looks like you've decided.

 

OCZ freeze > Artic silver 5

 

OCZ fatality = paying for fatality name.

 

Everything else looks okay.

[Siphaed]

Not a fan of the MSI board, but looks like you've decided.

 

OCZ freeze > Artic silver 5

 

OCZ fatality = paying for fatality name.

 

Everything else looks okay.

 

Well, it's not what I've decided 100%, it's just what I'm considering and I do take constructive critisism to adjust it. As far as the MSI, I picked that over an Asus or their sister company because neither supported the 1600 RAM. The MSI supports the 1600 RAM, which is a very big plus because that RAM is actually cheaper than the 1033 RAM. Also, it was one of the higher rated boards over some of the other ones which people rated as "crap".

 

And, I suppose you're right on the coolant gel. I just selected one because that was the 1st I saw. I didn't know there were any cheaper.