Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, JustAnEngineer
[SDG]Mantis wrote:I am sure that someone will correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that the Phenom II X4 840 is a Propus core chip which have only 4 cores. It is the Zosma chips which are failed Thubans (six core chips with only four active cores). Those are Phenom II X4 960T chips.
Also, though I have not done it, I think that core unlocking is done in the bios of the motherboard, not in software. So I am skeptical of the claim of the salesman...particularly since I see no mention of core unlocking anywhere on CA's page for the software. MSI does have a BIOS-free core unlocking tool for some of their their AMD 8xx series motherboards.
Also, do you have an OS that you are installing on the new system or do you need to account for a Windows license?
Quite honestly, even a dual-core i3 will give the Phenom X4 a run for its money and the integrated graphics are better than the rather dated motherboard in the combo.
If you are adding a 7200 RPM hard drive...which is not a bad decision...go with a 1 TB model like this one which will only run you about $20 more for twice the capacity of the drive that you noted.
futilerecordings wrote:Ahh, forgot to mention that. I already purchased Windows 7 Ultimate. Regarding the i3 system... it seems that components for the intel systems are more expensive. Could you see me doing any better with that amount of money? Again, I'm really tight on cash at the moment.
futilerecordings wrote:Interesting. So you think that the dual-core i3 would be faster/more powerful than that quad-core AMD?
Voldenuit wrote:futilerecordings wrote:Interesting. So you think that the dual-core i3 would be faster/more powerful than that quad-core AMD?
No, it won't be.
For music mixing and media encoding, I recommend getting a quad core these days. A Llano system might not be a bad idea if you're looking to use the IGP.
Voldenuit wrote:futilerecordings wrote:Interesting. So you think that the dual-core i3 would be faster/more powerful than that quad-core AMD?
No, it won't be.
For music mixing and media encoding, I recommend getting a quad core these days. A Llano system might not be a bad idea if you're looking to use the IGP.
CMOl wrote:What you have listed here is a good deal and it will work. It seem like you already looked at Tech Report CPU benchmarks. The app that you are using I don't know how many cpu cores it can use? The links I have listed below shows a alternate system configuration . The new PC cost is about $463.00 shipping included. The major difference is this has AMD six core processor with 6MB of L3 cache instead of AMD four core with no L3 cache. The power supply you have listed will work, but I don't like to skimp on the power supply. I don't think you will need the PC Tune-Up software. No Sata 6Gb control on the motherboard, also on motherboard you listed. Sata 6Gb hard drives are backwards compatible. I am assuming you have already a keyboard, mouse and monitor.. What I have listed is AMD, your app might only use two cpu cores, then the Intel I3-2100 would be faster. Benchmarks can be deceptive, are they only showing integrated graphics or something else? How many cpu cores does this game benchmark take advantage of? Things can range widely from one application to the next.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6827151233
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6811156241
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6822148697
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6813138199
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6817152028
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6820226095
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819103849
[SDG]Mantis wrote:Voldenuit wrote:futilerecordings wrote:Interesting. So you think that the dual-core i3 would be faster/more powerful than that quad-core AMD?
No, it won't be.
For music mixing and media encoding, I recommend getting a quad core these days. A Llano system might not be a bad idea if you're looking to use the IGP.
That's the older i3. And a faster X4.
The 840 has less cache than a 955 even though it has the same clock speed.
A more accurate comparison would be this one.
Voldenuit wrote:The i3 2100 is (slightly) more expensive ($124) than the X4 955 ($119) or 840 ($109), not to mention that AMD motherboards tend to be cheaper than intel ones. In addition, getting an AM3+ motherboard now means that the OP can upgrade to Bulldozer in a year or two without having to buy new RAM or a new motherboard. The writing is still on the wall whether Ivy Bridge will be compatible with existing motherboards.
Alternatively, buying a Llano system now also means that he will likely be able to upgrade to Trinity when that comes out.
The performance differences are small between AMD and intel at the low end pricepoint, but going AMD can potentially save lots of money in the long run if the OP chooses to upgrade incrementally.
JustAnEngineer wrote:Those motherboards with the NVidia chipsets are pretty bad. You'd probably have better luck with an AMD 880G or 785G motherboard.
If you like shopping at Tiger Direct, consider these.
$400 -30MIR Thuban
$402 -60MIR Deneb
$410 -40MIR Llano
$404 -40MIR Llano
The kits that I linked from Newegg yesterday may be a better deal.
futilerecordings wrote:Also, in case I didn't mention it, I do have a case (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... v4%20black) as well as a DVD drive, so I can do without purchasing those. So I guess I REALLY only need the MoBo, CPU, HDD, RAM & PSU. I was just going to sell this case, as the kits from Tiger include a case and you save money doing it that way. However, if anyone can suggest a better option in terms of building a system from scratch, please let me know. Thanks again!
[SDG]Mantis wrote:In general, I agree with LoneWolf15
LoneWolf15 wrote:If there's a quality motherboard/Core i5 combo that split the difference and had four RAM sockets and has a reasonable price, I'd say go for it; otherwise, I'd go with the Phenom II.
[SDG]Mantis wrote:In general, I agree with LoneWolf15.
But another option is, for $40 more than the motherboard/CPU combo, this combo at NewEgg. It is a Sandy Bridge i5 and an ASUS motherboard. That's a lot more processing power than the Phenom II X4.
I know you're on a tight budget, but that's a reasonably significant upgrade.
Again, though any of the options here: i3, Phenom II X4 (with AM3+ motherboard), Llano all are major upgrades to your existing system and all would have upgrade paths.
CMOl wrote:L3 Cache is shared between all the cores of the cpu, it's like memory. Games , 3d modeling and rendering, etc applications have code that is consistently be used and L3 cache is a lot faster than system memory, newer software would probably take more advantage of it.
futilerecordings wrote:I'm curious... that i5 is a Quad-core 3.1 GHz, the x4 is quad-core 3.2 GHz. What makes the i5 faster? I realize that specs, in many cases, don't tell the whole story... is that the case here?
Anyway, I'm PROBABLY gonna go w/ the x4 kit. I'm not too concerned w/ upgrade paths at the moment. At this price point, I won't feel bad if I had to buy a new system in 3 or 4 years. But for what I'm doing (music production) I won't need to upgrade once I get a system that can handle my software w/ stability. I'm not 100% sure yet, and I'm not gonna order anything until Monday, so I'd be happy to hear any other comments. Thanks to everyone for all the help!
[SDG]Mantis wrote:futilerecordings wrote:I'm curious... that i5 is a Quad-core 3.1 GHz, the x4 is quad-core 3.2 GHz. What makes the i5 faster? I realize that specs, in many cases, don't tell the whole story... is that the case here?
Architectural differences in the chip. Both might process x86 instruction sets...and a number of other command sets like AMD64, but they do so in different ways. I think that P4's peaked around 3.8 GHz. And even in a single-threaded application, the i5 is going to be faster even. The processing path is just that much more efficient.Anyway, I'm PROBABLY gonna go w/ the x4 kit. I'm not too concerned w/ upgrade paths at the moment. At this price point, I won't feel bad if I had to buy a new system in 3 or 4 years. But for what I'm doing (music production) I won't need to upgrade once I get a system that can handle my software w/ stability. I'm not 100% sure yet, and I'm not gonna order anything until Monday, so I'd be happy to hear any other comments. Thanks to everyone for all the help!
If you haven't upgraded since a P4, you'll be happy with the results. For reference, here is a comparison of efficiency between some first generation Core processors, Sandy Bridge (second generation Core), and Phenom II X4 and X6 processors. It shows just how large the Sandy Bridge gains were. TR also did an article on Sandy Bridge that compares it with a range of other CPUs.