Just something to watch. I have been tracking 5-6 AMD chips and they seem to be dropping a few bucks each day this week. On I have had my eye on has gone from $139 at the initial price cut to $118. You might want to wait them out.
I have been watching the AMD Athlon 64 x2 4200+ for a while now and it has dropped from $399 to $199 at Newegg in the past two months - figure in a couple of weeks it will be near my $100 price point-eh!
Can we place pre-order for the $100? that wouldn’t be bad.
I’ve been a long time AMD user, but if the entry level Conroe processors are within the same price range I may have to make the switch.
Of course, I will have to take the cost of DDR2 memory and compatible motherboard into consideration.
Switching over to an AM2 and new CPU will not really increase the speed unless the DDR2 is significantly faster so you need to take that into consideration.
One should really get dual core and there is no point at staying at 200MHz so the X2 4200+ is minimum for a step up: $200
An AM2 MB is $100-$145 depending on SLI.
DDR2 is pointless unless you get DDR2 800 and the price is good: $150 or higher if you want low latencies or some fancy Corsair.
So $500 is the price to make the move and the main benefit of this will be the memory throughput and a substantial part of the gain could well be theoretical.
No question the newer parts would be the way to go for a new system, but in terms of increased speed, the $500 is hard to justify, especially so when you factor in what we will have to pay for Vista and a new graphics card to support DX 10.
Conroe and or AM2, Bah!! I’m sticking with 939 and am enjoying looking at all the bargains while business and consumer alike has fire sales
I made the move to AM2 just recently (new computer though) as I got the processor + mobo for $300 which I think is a good deal. Better than waiting for a Conroe which will be higher priced and whose availability is a big question.
Coming back to 939 vs AM2, I have a Centon 1 Gb DDR 2 533Mhz memory module. Do you suggest I buy DDR 2 800? What kind of improvements can I expect by this?
I did not explain myself properly… I think brain cells 57,000,000 -95,000,000 decided to go on vacation.
I wasnt looking at an AM2 as my primary upgrade path, but if the prices for a comparable AM2 system are reasonable to me… I may entertain the thought.
But it is a 90% possibility of me going the Socket 939, X2 route within a month. My interest in video conversion/dvd authoring is increasing and I need to keep up.
My skill arent at the level where I would need a top of the line system. But I am going to budget myself, and get the best system upgrade I can purchase with whatever amount of cash I can spare to my upgrade fund. I was initially saving for a laptop, but that is going to have to wait another year. Gotta seperate desire from practicality.
Correct me if I am wrong as I am still just initially learning the diffrences between ddr and ddr2, but don’t you have to go to ddr2 800 just to get on par performance with ddr 400 (overall performance)? The way I understand it, you are just doubling the data pathways, not actually increasing the speed (the chips stil run at 100MHz). The architecture of ddr2 actually demands the latency be about double what ddr is. The effect would be that ddr2 800 would perform beter than ddr 400 with aplications that are processing large chunks of data (and can take advantage of the bandwith), but ddr 400 would actually outperform ddr2 800 with aplications that are dealing with smaller random portions of datadue to the latency? Kind of like using a larger raid stripe size (ddr2), or a smaller raid stripe size (ddr).
Does that sound about right? If so, I would think that you would get a beter performance boost going from single channel to dual channel (double your bandwith and keep your low latencys). Of course you could run ddr2 dual channel (quad bandwidth compared to single channel ddr), but what kind of programs actually use that much memory bandwith (I’m not saying there aren’t any, I’m saying I don’t know).
Or am I misunderstanding it all?
if you have the money, this is the only ddr2 to get
This link does a good job of summarizing the differences between the two.
My point was that the main benefit was the higher speeds due to lower voltage and heat, so the only reason to upgrade was to take advantage of the higher speeds which means buying the fastest DDR2 around. Otherwise you can just be out a lot of money and back where you started.
I would normally agree with you but I just sent back a brand new matched set of Corsair with one stick bad right out of the box. It had so many errors that Memtest86 would blur the screen when it ran the error report. So I am a little put off by Corsair quality control at the moment.
You would be increasing your memory throughput from 4.267 GB/s to 6.400 GB/s, almost a 50% increase. The real question is whether your system has any constraints that would limit the value of this increase. Remember the 1.5 speed of SATA connections that we never really see because the drives are not able to deliver data that fast? I cannot really say if you would be able to use it. Maybe others can. You are already 1/3 ahead of the standard DDR PC3200 system so you are hardly slow as it is.
Well, I am currently on a Barton 2500+ stock and 1gig of RAM. Hopefully the 4800 X2 will have another price drop, but more than likely I will be settling for the 4400 X2. By next spring the 4800 or better will be affordable to the point where I can hold off a major upgrade until early 2008.
It sucks being financially strapped, but I think my performance needs should be met until late 2007 with the choices I listed above.