Opteron 165 vs 3200+ Venice

NosferatuNosferatu Arizona
edited February 2008 in Hardware
Opteron 165: (new)
Core: Toledo
Clock Speed: 1.8Ghz (per core)
L2 Cache: 2MB (2 x 1MB)
Process: 90nm


3200+ Venice (old)
Core: Venice
Clock Speed: 2.0GHz
L2 Cache: 512KB
Process: 90nm


Was this a smart upgrade? The only thing i'm really concerned about is gaming performance and if it will take a hit, namely Battlefield 2. Because of the increased L2 cache, should the Opteron 165 be at least as good as the 3200+ venice in terms of frames per second? I mean, will the extra L2 cache on a single core make up for the 200MHz reduction in clock speed? I'm sure it would have no problem at all OC'ing to 2GHz, but i'm curious at stock speeds whether I will take a hit in BF2/BF2:SF. I know general desktop/multitasking performance will increase for sure though.

Also, if anyone wants in on the deal, check this thread (Opteron 165 OEM for ~$278 shipped).

Comments

  • muddocktormuddocktor
    edited December 2005
    I would say that you shouldn't see much of a difference in gaming at all, myself, at stock speeds. The extra L2 cache should make up the 200 MHz speed difference IMO and there is generally a lot more left in the 165's, speedwise, when you overclock them. I figure you should easily hit 2.2-2.4 GHz without raising the vcore on it and with your mobo, it shouldn't be hard to keep your ram speed within it's limitations either. If you select a 166 memory divider, you should be good for 250 HTT (fsb) still keeping the ram at or below 200 MHz. BTW, there's no real performance penalty running an A64's ram asynch from the HTT bus.
  • csimoncsimon Acadiana Icrontian
    edited December 2005
    I think you'll be happy with the 165. What stepping did you get?
  • NosferatuNosferatu Arizona
    edited December 2005
    I'm not sure yet, I just ordered it today. It should arrive on the 29th, so we'll see. I think if I can get it to 2.2GHz+ i'll be happy and I can stop thinking about getting an X2. ;D
  • csimoncsimon Acadiana Icrontian
    edited December 2005
    Nosferatu wrote:
    I think if I can get it to 2.2GHz+ i'll be happy and I can stop thinking about getting an X2. ;D

    No sweat ...with decent ram you should be able to get a high frequency as well. The steppings coming out lately have been quite nice!
  • NosferatuNosferatu Arizona
    edited December 2005
    Ok, I vacuumed out all the dust from the PC, cleaned the old CPU as well as the heatsink base and installed a new coat of AS5 to the CPU. Installed and running in x64 without having to change anything manually within Windows. It now detects both cores and I have some new things to play with in Task Manager. So now, what should I start with to overclock? Maybe first test at 2GHz and then 2.2GHz.

    Here are my current settings:

    dualcore.jpg
    a64tweaker.jpg

    Keep in mind, i'm still confused as hell with AMD 64-bit overclocking. Back in the Athlon XP days all I had to do was adjust the multiplier upwards to get a nice OC.

    P.S. What does "(UP)" mean in the CPU identifier?
  • lemonlimelemonlime Canada Member
    edited December 2005
    UP stands for 'Uniprocessor' meaning it's an opteron beginning with '1' in the model number.

    Good choice going with the 165 :thumbup

    I doubt you'll have any difficulty hitting 2.4GHz with close to default vcore. Throw your memory on the 133MHz divider and crank her up. Once you find the maximum, bring the ram back into the equation.
  • csimoncsimon Acadiana Icrontian
    edited January 2006
    Nos how's your progress coming on the overclock ...you've been too quiet.
    What stepping did you end up getting?
  • veniceitalyveniceitaly
    edited February 2008
    csimon wrote:
    No sweat ...with decent ram you should be able to get a high frequency as well. The steppings coming out lately have been quite nice!

    Infact. this is what I did... and went absolutely better! thanks.
  • csimoncsimon Acadiana Icrontian
    edited February 2008
    yw :csimon:
Sign In or Register to comment.