opteron cpu ?

Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 8:08 pm Post subject: opteron cpu ?

I decided to not go am2, and stick with my 939, it works, but do want to upgrade.

I already have 2 gigs of ram, and will upgrade my cpu and v card.

I ordered an opteron 185 (2.6 ghz, 2x 1mb) from the egg, but someone had their thumb stuck up their butt and kept sending me an Intel chip (twice), very prompt refund on the amex, impressive.

The 185 seems like a good deal, I have no interest in over clocking.

anyone have experience with these?

anyone have an fx 57 or higher chip ?, I'd take one of those instead if I could find one. the fx 60 is dual.

By the way upgrading from 1 to 2 gigs in vista made a world of difference.

Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 9:35 pm Post subject:

Have you not considered going Intel Core 2 Duo?
AMD have shot themselves in the foot and change their chipset every day it seems like. Is it AM2, FX series, AM3 announced, 64 bit or what. There is no consistancy and makes it hard to keep up with. My dad got a new Intel computer in the end because his AMD 64 3700+ 939 chip bunt out and no sod sold them. They are obsolete. So after a load of 'SRSLY? NO WAI, WTF?!' he just got an Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 and we have the peace of mind of knowing the chipset numbers are easy to follow, the option for Quad core is available and so forth. I mean AMD used to be good. I mean 64 Bit was a kinda letdown, only run through about 7 CPUs, or are they all 64 bit, and if so, are they dual core I mean they make it so hard to keep up and the performance increase in the Core 2 Duos are superb. More and more programs and games especially are really taking a liking to Intel. What game recently has been truly optimized for AMD chipsets. They have all been Core 2 Duo. And the one I have (E6420) I saw around $120, and has so so much room for overclock with the stock cooler you can overclock it to beyond the speed of the model 4 chips up. All Core 2 Duos are easily overclockable so you can get a lot of bang for your buck (although if the CPU goes bang, then it will cost you a lot of buck Wink

If you must have AMD then I would have no idea what is the newest and whatnot. I hear they have a new CPU in the works that is Quad core. I mean Intel have Quad core selling already. I think it's called Phenom or something. Another name to remember. I highly recommend that you, like the majority it seems like now, go on the Intel bandwaggon. I certainly will not have an AMD chip again. Bloody socket 939 chips obsolete, wtf gives?
As you may have gathered, I hate AMD

A bsolute
M otherfcukin'
D ogsh*t

...as far as I'm concerned.

I agree with you on Vista, 2GB+ is definatly the way to go.

Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 9:56 pm Post subject: Re: opteron cpu ?

Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:02 pm Post subject:

AMD all the way for me!!

A nother
M otivated
D ominator

I can't knock intel either, but not my choice. Everybody has their own opinion.

Please keep the language down.
_________________

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:23 am Post subject:

I have the fx 55 and no ya can't have it lol
_________________

http://tinyurl.com/yobjfs

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 5:34 am Post subject:

jack you crack me up. Is fanboyism a disease?
Remember hatred leads to anger, and anger leads to poonage, poonage leads you to wearing out your f key.

don't think I have ever had an Intel chip. not by choice, just the way it worked out. amd is better than fine, besides I don't want to have to yank boards and buy new ram, and yada yada ...oh yeah yada, just to get a 1-5% gain in performance going am2.

I ordered an opteron, but did not get an opteron, thus the post.

I'll order another one and be done with it, it will last comfortably for a few more years.

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 7:34 am Post subject:

Boo- I run a 939 also with a 4400 X2 and 2 gigs of mem and it's plenty fast for everything! Very Happy

NewEgg has a 4200 X2 for $72.50, same chip as the 4400 but with 512mb L2 cache BUT if you get one get a good aftermarket cooler, the 939 X2's tend to run alittle warm when gaming!

Yea I know the 939s are obsolete BUT so am I and I'm still around!!! Very Happy

Oh by the way.... VISTA SUKS!!!!!!! Shocked

_________________

+SC+

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 8:44 am Post subject:

Pah! stick to your AMD fanboy club, proper gamers go Intel Wink

j/k
I know it's just a matter of experience and opinion but after having 2 AMD chips burn out it does kinda leave a bad taste in my mouth about them. I just feel that Intel give better deals, I mean my E6420 stock is 2.13GHz but can overclock to a 3Ghz with ease according to many of the reviews and so forth, and with a 4MB L2 Cache who can complain Smile

My F key is already worn out... not by my respawning on CoD2, but by typing the 'F' word so many times discussing AMD Shocked

j/k

And Underdog, Vista rocks Smile

and I am not talking about the glass, that isn't my reason for preferring it. The streamline layout, the ReadyBoost memory function, the way games add themselves into the Game Explorer without being cluttered on the start menu, the new start menu I just prefer it. DirectX10 is great. Can't wait to see Crysis demo. The BETA is only DirectX9 unfortunatly Sad

Everyone slates Vista not remembering that XP was just as bad, even worse when it comes to driver support. And is it really Vistas issue that nVidia cannot make a full driver for the O/S? nVidia had plenty of time, they knew it was coming. A lot of it is down to the company that provides the hardware to keep up with the new releases. I have personally had no faults with Vista, all my hardware works and I just find it easier to use. Just a matter of personal experience I guess.

With all that said I would still probably get whacked by Boo "poon" Radley Rolling Eyes

Lucky I don't play CoD2 no more hehehe.

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 10:08 am Post subject:

lol

I like it when Fanboys call other fanboys... fanboys.

Look... Anyone that's been here for a long time knows how long I was the leader in the "AMD is better than Intel" wars. You know why? Because the AMD chips were just as fast if not a tad faster than Intel AND was cheaper.

Today, that's changed. The Core 2 Duo chips are currently the CLEAR leader in performance and at a comparible price point. Do some google searches from reputable sites. You'll find it to be true rather you like it or not.

Hell, I was also a clear lover of ATI until the recent nVidia chips for the same reason.

I'm no fanboy. I go for the best bang for the buck and could care less what name is on it. Right now, that best bang for the buck is CLEARLY Intel.

Just to add to this... The whole Vista sucks thing is old (I was once on that bandwagon as well if you remember). All the drivers are now caught up to speed and Vista is a pretty rock solid OS now. Move forward people.

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 10:13 am Post subject:

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 10:39 am Post subject:

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:06 pm Post subject:

BUT Jack- why do u need 2gigs just to get ViStA moving????? Forget 512 or 1 gig that's NOT enough! Very Happy

I've played with the Mac OS- lion, tiger or whatever animal they're up to and it's great! Very Happy

Not good for gaming although...

ME was the worst OS Microsoft ever came up with! Shocked

We may diagree Jack but I still love ya, now give me back my beer!!!! Cool

I know take my meds.
_________________

+SC+

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:49 pm Post subject:

LOL Underdog
BUT sure XP can run on 512mb Ram but for gaming it won't be enough, even 1GB for gaming is barely sufficiant now, so getting 2GB isn't just for Vista, it's for the games. It's just a case of getting with the times Smile

and NO, you cannot have your beer back...it's a little too late