AMD Athlon 64 versus Athlon 64 X2

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
Hi group,

What's the difference between an Athlon 64 3800+ and an Athlon 64 X2 3800+.
I know the last one is dualcore, but what does this mean in terms of speed?

Machine will run be used for Visual Studio 2005 development, SQL Server
2005, Office and Video-editing.

Will the dualcore AMD give me any benefits?


- - -

Re: AMD Athlon 64 versus Athlon 64 X2

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 15:53:02 +0200, "Steven Spits"

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Last time I checked if you are running one program that doesn't take
advantage of the dual core CPU the single core is slightly faster for
the same rating. Not a huge amount when I saw a test but there was a

However that didn't matter much to me at all since the 3800 x2 can
easily be OCed to 2.4-.2.5 range supposedly and some even claim to
have it higher. So it equals a much faster and far more expensive
processor with some OCing.

And even if you do or don't OC it when you run multiple apps.
multi-task than the dual core runs much better than the single core.
There's talk that in the future more and more apps will take advantage
of dual core processors but right now I don't there are a whole lot. I
think Photoshop took some advantage of it and various rendering
programs etc.

For me the biggest thing isn't only getting the fastest speed since we
are talking about relatively small percentages in improvements. The
bigger problem for me is having my system bog down during certain
processes and the dual core can help in various situations where you
are doing several things like compressing and expanding things and
doing something else at the same time. Its not the only problem, there
can be other bottlenecks but sometimes it seems to help.

If you look for deals  sometimes a dual core can be cheaper than a
single core around the same rating.

Pricewatch currently lists them at only 12 bucks difference

dual core 3800  $296
single core 3800 $284

You can check Toms Hardware benchmark where you can pick two
processors and compare them
There's two
3Dmark 05 X2 slightly ahead
Divx6  2 min ahead
3Dmark graphics X2 slightly behind
3dmax 1 min ahead
Doom 3 1024 res slight behind 97 vs 104 fps
Doom 3  1280  slightly behind 80 vs 83
Lame encoder 1 min behind
Main concept encoder slightly ahead
Multitasking test 1 - 1 min ahead
Multitasking test 2 - 2 min ahead
Pinnacle Studio Plus slightly ahead
WinRAR lags
Xvid ahead

Shows a fair lag in memory tests in Sandra and PCmark
And in FPS in FAR CRY ,  UNREAL TOURN, Wolfenstein
However the FPS for both are very high in these tests
so having it 5% higher or so is no big deal to me.

Considering the OCing potential for the 3800 X2 though the venice can
be Oced too of course and then add the dual core aspect and the
virtually identical cost --- I tend to lean towards the dual core.

Site Timeline