amd 3200+ or pentium D 805 2.66 GHz

[kaykay21]

I am tech illiterate. Want to upgrade my age old computer in a cost effective way. Basic needs are internet, some technical graphics viewing, and general home use as for digital photography and video. Seems like a boring question to techgurus but ....!
HELP

 

[furballi]

AMD runs cooler. I'd go with a boxed AMD 3000 for $107. Search for ADA3000BPBOX at Chiefvalue.com. Should be able to oveclock this processor up to 2.3GHz or the equivalent of a +A64 3500.

 

[Absolute0]

Well the 3800+ is significantly more powerful, but the 805D is less than half the cost. If cost is an issue and you're not going to game, 805D is a solid choice.

Wow i can't believe i read this as 3800+. 3200+ is single core, screw it, get the 805.

 

[firewolfsm]

The 805 is dual core so if you think you need that then go for it, but at times, it's so slow that in dual core programs a single core can be faster, I would go with the AMD if you want to overclock it. A 3200 should 2.5GHz+

 

[MechaSheeba]

The average user won't properly take advantage of dual core, you have to be doing so many things at once for it to make even a slight impact. The 805D is pretty much a marketing gimmick, anyone with a workload serious enough to warrant a dual core CPU would never buy such a low end CPU, go for the A64.

 

[chilled]

Check the benchmarks on this very website!

 

[AkumaX]

README

 

[dguy6789]

Originally posted by: firewolfsm
The 805 is dual core so if you think you need that then go for it, but at times, it's so slow that in dual core programs a single core can be faster, I would go with the AMD if you want to overclock it. A 3200 should 2.5GHz+

It is a suggestion that comes from both myself and many others on these forums that a member should not make up something on the spot and state it as truth when it is in fact false, when the person requesting the information wants truth.


In single threaded applications, the Athlon 64 3200+ will be a moderate bit faster than the Pentium D 805.

The Athlon 64 3200+ can commonly overclock to 2.5-2.6Ghz, while the Pentium D 805 can commonly overclock to 3.7-4Ghz, which at that point, it is faster than the AMD processor in even single core tasks.

Now to bring dual core to the equation. Let us compare the Pentium D 805 at stock to the Athlon 64 FX57. Both machines are equal. Have both burn a dvd. Fine, both can do it. Now, have both burn a DVD, and have both try to play a game at the same time. The FX57 will fall flat on its face while the PD805 will play the game as fast as it would if it was the only program. Have both scan for viruses. Both can do that fine. Now have both play a game while scanning for viruses. The FX57 will fall flat on its face while the PD805 will play the game as fast as it would if it was the only program. Encode some media. Both processors can do that. Now have both encode media and play games at the same time. The FX57 will fall flat on its face while the PD805 will play the game as fast as it would if it was the only program.

The FX57 cannot do anything the Pentium D 805 cannot do. The FX57 will only do it faster. However, there is a whole array of possible scenarios that you can run on the Pentium D 805 that you could never hope to achieve on the FX57. Keep in mind that the Athlon 64 3200+ is far slower than the FX57.

Perhaps now you see the advantage of dual core.

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
[
The Athlon 64 3200+ can commonly overclock to 2.5-2.6Ghz, while the Pentium D 805 can commonly overclock to 3.7-4Ghz, which at that point, it is faster than the AMD processor in even single core tasks.

Perhaps now you see the advantage of dual core.

Basicly true but a little off. @3.7ghz my 805 is slower in many non-smp aware apps than my dothan @2.4ghz, let alone my X2 @2.6ghz. More like 4ghz will catch a 2.5ghz A64, 4.2ghz for 2.6ghz A64. Also, 4ghz isn't all that common, especialy on air. @3.7ghz mine is hitting 57c on water cooling. If only they made a cheap 533mhz FSB 9xx series, that would be a killer chip, but smithfield is a flamethrower either way. Fine at stock speeds, but not easy to OC on air.

 

[n19htmare]

Look at the reviews. The Pentium D outperformed the 3000+ in most of the benches.... put it up against 3200+ and it would prbably be even in single threaded apps. Throw in the Dual core apps and the P 805D will kill the 3200+... For the cost, Pentium D is a nice choice. It will Overclock well enough to keep up with 3200+ overclocked, not to mention its a dual core.

I hate people who put down a product because they dont like the "company".. If you fellas bothered reading his post, he said .... "Basic needs are internet, some technical graphics viewing, and general home use as for digital photography and video"... I don't know about you folks but somehow his needs favor the Pentium D over the A64. He can use the internet while doing some videos or photography and viewing graphics......the Dual core will come in handy.

For the price, get the Pentium D... It will be a better Budget Buy..... If you could have higher budget, I would HIGHLY reccommend the Opteron 165 but your budget is a restraint and P D805 is your best choice.

 

[BassBomb]

ok first of all, everyone talking about OC"ing doesnt understand this guy is an average user so why would he overclcok, its very unlikely he would so chill out on the oc'ing potential

are they the same price?? if so go for the Pentium, im only saying that because its so cheap it justfiies itself ... dual core for as cheap as single why not... careful on board selection

 

[perdomot]

I actually have both of these cpus and here's my impression. I have the AMD OCd to 2.4 Ghz and the 805 going at 3.5 Ghz. When it comes to video encoding, the 805 flies, about 2-2.5 times as fast at encoding divx/mpeg. Havent tested out multitasking much but it should be smooth as others have posted above. For other things including gaming, the 3200+ feels and handles better than the 805. I usually set up any video work to run on the 805 and then switch via KVM to the 3200+ to web surf, etc. If you arent going to be doing much encoding, I'd say the 3200+ is the best bet especially if you are a gamer. Otherwise, the 805 on an Asus 865PE mobo is the way to go.

 

[pcoffman]

The 805 should help future-proof your investment, too. Since more and more applications should be written to take advantage of dual-core in the future.

The 805 is great value chip, as many here and the article pointed out by AkumaX indicate.

 

[inveterate]

Originally posted by: dguy6789

Originally posted by: firewolfsm
The 805 is dual core so if you think you need that then go for it, but at times, it's so slow that in dual core programs a single core can be faster, I would go with the AMD if you want to overclock it. A 3200 should 2.5GHz+

It is a suggestion that comes from both myself and many others on these forums that a member should not make up something on the spot and state it as truth when it is in fact false, when the person requesting the information wants truth.


In single threaded applications, the Athlon 64 3200+ will be a moderate bit faster than the Pentium D 805.

The Athlon 64 3200+ can commonly overclock to 2.5-2.6Ghz, while the Pentium D 805 can commonly overclock to 3.7-4Ghz, which at that point, it is faster than the AMD processor in even single core tasks.

Now to bring dual core to the equation. Let us compare the Pentium D 805 at stock to the Athlon 64 FX57. Both machines are equal. Have both burn a dvd. Fine, both can do it. Now, have both burn a DVD, and have both try to play a game at the same time. The FX57 will fall flat on its face while the PD805 will play the game as fast as it would if it was the only program. Have both scan for viruses. Both can do that fine. Now have both play a game while scanning for viruses. The FX57 will fall flat on its face while the PD805 will play the game as fast as it would if it was the only program. Encode some media. Both processors can do that. Now have both encode media and play games at the same time. The FX57 will fall flat on its face while the PD805 will play the game as fast as it would if it was the only program.

The FX57 cannot do anything the Pentium D 805 cannot do. The FX57 will only do it faster. However, there is a whole array of possible scenarios that you can run on the Pentium D 805 that you could never hope to achieve on the FX57. Keep in mind that the Athlon 64 3200+ is far slower than the FX57.

Perhaps now you see the advantage of dual core.

Ur such a Fanboi,, Anyone here would take the fx57 over any pentium to date

 

[n19htmare]

Originally posted by: inveterate

Originally posted by: dguy6789

Originally posted by: firewolfsm
The 805 is dual core so if you think you need that then go for it, but at times, it's so slow that in dual core programs a single core can be faster, I would go with the AMD if you want to overclock it. A 3200 should 2.5GHz+

It is a suggestion that comes from both myself and many others on these forums that a member should not make up something on the spot and state it as truth when it is in fact false, when the person requesting the information wants truth.


In single threaded applications, the Athlon 64 3200+ will be a moderate bit faster than the Pentium D 805.

The Athlon 64 3200+ can commonly overclock to 2.5-2.6Ghz, while the Pentium D 805 can commonly overclock to 3.7-4Ghz, which at that point, it is faster than the AMD processor in even single core tasks.

Now to bring dual core to the equation. Let us compare the Pentium D 805 at stock to the Athlon 64 FX57. Both machines are equal. Have both burn a dvd. Fine, both can do it. Now, have both burn a DVD, and have both try to play a game at the same time. The FX57 will fall flat on its face while the PD805 will play the game as fast as it would if it was the only program. Have both scan for viruses. Both can do that fine. Now have both play a game while scanning for viruses. The FX57 will fall flat on its face while the PD805 will play the game as fast as it would if it was the only program. Encode some media. Both processors can do that. Now have both encode media and play games at the same time. The FX57 will fall flat on its face while the PD805 will play the game as fast as it would if it was the only program.

The FX57 cannot do anything the Pentium D 805 cannot do. The FX57 will only do it faster. However, there is a whole array of possible scenarios that you can run on the Pentium D 805 that you could never hope to achieve on the FX57. Keep in mind that the Athlon 64 3200+ is far slower than the FX57.

Perhaps now you see the advantage of dual core.

Ur such a Fanboi,, Anyone here would take the fx57 over any pentium to date

I'd take a Dual core Pentium 65nm over the Fx57 any day... sorry

 

[Amplifier]

Originally posted by: inveterate

Ur such a Fanboi,, Anyone here would take the fx57 over any pentium to date

Nomination for 'missing the point completely' post of the week .

Yes we'd all take an FX-57 over an 805 if they were both free. But posters who don't game would trade the FX-57 for an 805/motherboard/ram/digital camera.

 

[dexvx]

I love how people recommend the OP overclock despite the fact the OP claims to be a complete illiterate on tech. So yea... do NOT factor in overclocks into the equation.

Seems to me you're better off with a cheapo Dual Core. But take note that the Pentium-D 920/930 isn't that much more expensive than the 805. Fry's had a Pentium-D 920 + ECS i945 motherboard for $199 (no sales tax in Oregon!).

 

[jedisponge]

Originally posted by: inveterate

Ur such a Fanboi,, Anyone here would take the fx57 over any pentium to date

I registered just for the idiocy of this reply.

Yes, we would all pick the FX-57 most of time, in most conditions. But this isn't one of those times.

Also to the originl poster, is this PC going to be "custom built" or what? With your needs, it would be fairly cost effective to get a Dell. They have great deals on the net (search Dell Coupon Codes on google) with something like 25% to 40% off PCs that would fit your needs. You could get a fairly good system in the $2000+ range for $1200-ish. They would be very good for someone like you, even though as a heavy gaming enthusiast myself I would stay away from most of Dell's offerings.

 

[cubeless]

if u r really 'tech illiterate' then u ought to just get a dell... unless u have a lot of time and want to learn then most of what is said here is not going to do u much good...

here is a good calculator for a novice:

how much money i have - $150 for a midrange video card = buy what is in the n ad this week... you get a warranty this way, too...

n is the variable for whoever has the best deal on a pc in your price range this week...

 

[Absolute0]

I wouldn't pick an FX57 even if it was 300$. I've had Opteron 146s running up to 3.2 Ghz stable on my watercooling. FX isn't going to go much further... and it's single core.

As far as i'm concerned any 165 with a half decent overclock beats all the FX57s at 3+ Ghz. Especially for folding purposes. I can say the same for the FX60, overpriced POS, my 170 Opty clocks better than most FX60s.

As for the thread, 3200+ Venice is old news, you can compare that to a Barton at 2.35 Ghz or a s754 at 2.2 Ghz. Screw that, it's dual core time

 

[Amaroque]

You guys probably confused this person way more then they were in the first place... :disgust:

IMO I'd go with the 805, unless you live in a hot climate/house.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: firewolfsm
The 805 is dual core so if you think you need that then go for it, but at times, it's so slow that in dual core programs a single core can be faster, I would go with the AMD if you want to overclock it. A 3200 should 2.5GHz+

uhhh frys had a sale on the 805D with a mATX board for 149.99. I was able to overclock all 5 systems i built from this sale to 3.2ghz on stock cooling and temps didnt get higher then 55 on prime95 for 16 hours on max heat torcher test.

Your choice is kinda obvious, 805D will pwn the AMD single core in almost everything you throw at it expecially since now things are now going to become multi core friendly. At that steal of a price, i dont think many can come close. However if you have the budget my X2 will pwn almost any Intel CPU out right now >:]

 

[NEVERwinter]

Say, I work with multiple audio aplications... Cubase, Reason, Rewire-ing, VST plugins, etc. Will the dual core 805 gives me better performance than A64? And no, I don't have the budget for X2.....

 

[greatromances]

I'm running the 805 right now at stock speeds (still waiting for my arctic cooler 7 to overclock), and it's an EXTREMELY nice processor as far as the price goes. It won't be able to handle heavy stuff as well as the A64 would, but you *could overlock the 805 on your stock cooling (up to ~3.2ghz without a better cooler) to outperform the A64 if you wanted to. It's hands down the best bang for your buck. It won't cost as much as the AMD, and you could squeeze more performance out of it without a problem. So, in a nutshell, my suggestion would be to save a couple bucks and go with the 805, and overclock it just a bit to have it outperforme the AMD chip.

 

[A554SS1N]

For me, in games, the 805 at stock is going to be alot worse in games as there aren't many apps that give it any benefit because of being dualcore, so the fact that to beat it, it would need to be overclocked to 3Ghz+ to equal, and that the Athlon 3200+ can be overclocked as well, means that it's going to start using lots of power and generate lots of heat - at which point, it's a POS, as I won't touch anything that uses the power it does as I care about my electricity bill. If you don't care about electricity bills, then fine, get an 805 and overclock it.