Athlon X2 on socket 939

New Member
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
842
Best answers
0
I was wondering if anyone heard any negatives about using an Athlon XP X2 on a socket 939 board. There are a few X2's available on 939. The obvious negative would mean no DDR2 support. I was looking to upgrade my processor, but I believe my board is sufficient, despite it's lack of DDR2 support. Will I see any major bottlenecking?

current specs:
AMD Athlon 64 XP 3500+
DFI Lanparty DFI nf4 UT (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813136152)
Geforce 7800 GT PCI-E
OCZ Gold Series 1GB (512 x 2) DDR3200

My current plans are to double my ram capacity to 2GB and upgrade my processor to a socket 939 Athlon X2. The graphics card will be upgraded in the future. I'm not switching brands at this point, so don't make a suggestion like "ZOMGZ GO INTEL LOLZ". I'm trying to do a sufficient upgrade that will save me money, but boost my computer power a good deal at the same time.
 
Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2005
Messages
475
Best answers
0
Other than RAM count, what's wrong with your current setup...?
 
New Member
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
842
Best answers
0
Nothing. I just want more computing power. I'm already noticing a slow down in the newer games, and I want to keep up.
 
Live free or die by the sword
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Messages
7,416
Best answers
0
You will get a significant boost in system performance, but certain features in the AM2 designs are not present in the 939 package. DDR2 is one of them, and probably the major one, even though DDR2's high latencies hurt AMD's memory controller setup. Another missing feature will be hyperfocusing [sic] where both cores work on one thread. To date, no software I know of uses this feature, but you can bet that they will start showing up sooner than later.
 
Lost in space
Banned
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Messages
3,608
Best answers
0
You will get a significant boost in system performance, but certain features in the AM2 designs are not present in the 939 package. DDR2 is one of them, and probably the major one, even though DDR2's high latencies hurt AMD's memory controller setup.
Not exactly, take a look at these benchmarks. You'll notice that in most tests that DDR2 667mhz AM2 configs and 939 configs are practically on par in terms of performance, with faster rated memory showing better performance in a few tests as well. You can see though that ddr2 400mhz memory though is taking some hefty performance loss compared to ddr1 400mhz memory.

However, I do agree with you that the performance differences don't really warrant a platform move from a 939 setup (not till AMD releases some newer processors and Hypertransport 3 based products).

What would your budget be for your current planned upgrades?

Edit: I decided to poke my head around to newegg and take a look at some current prices:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103626R - X2 4400+ Toledo 2.2ghz (89W) $218.59
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820178101 - PNY OPTIMA 2GB (2 x 1GB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM DDR 400 (PC 3200) Dual Channel Kit System Memory - Retail $219.99

Sub total: $438.58
 
Live free or die by the sword
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Messages
7,416
Best answers
0
Not exactly, take a look at these benchmarks. You'll notice that in most tests that DDR2 667mhz AM2 configs and 939 configs are practically on par in terms of performance, with faster rated memory showing better performance in a few tests as well. You can see though that ddr2 400mhz memory though is taking some hefty performance loss compared to ddr1 400mhz memory.

However, I do agree with you that the performance differences don't really warrant a platform move from a 939 setup (not till AMD releases some newer processors and Hypertransport 3 based products).
That actually supports my claim, 939's have better RAM performance at same speeds, you actually see the gains when you climb over that 667MHz Mark. For the most part, DDR2 is fast but laggy. It moves quick once it gets going, but that latency hurts it on initialization every time.

I agree, for the most part, upgrading to AM2 is not a good Idea if you have 939 setup. What he asked for though is if 939's X2's are worth it from the regular 64s, to which I answer, HELL YEAH.

I see where the problem was, I meant to say that going from a 939 64 to a 939 x2 would be a big boost, not from 939 to AM2. My bad ;)
 
New Member
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
842
Best answers
0
Ah, thanks for the info guys. Overlord I never trust an open box... but thats probably the proc I'm gonna get. And since I already have a gig of ram I don't really need to get 2 more gigs. I'm shooting for 2GB, my mobo has 4 ram slots, I'm using two. So I figured might as well just get another 512x2.

And also.. I was building my friend's computer.. which I made a socket AM2. I mistakenly added DDR1 (512x2)ram to the cart cause I was going too fast. So instead of RMAing it, I decided I'm just gonna keep it and pay my friend the difference.
 
Live free or die by the sword
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Messages
7,416
Best answers
0
2 GB is stellar for XP enviroments. Keep in mind however, that it'll be pretty weaksauce if you plan on going Vista.
 
Lost in space
Banned
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Messages
3,608
Best answers
0
Ah, thanks for the info guys. Overlord I never trust an open box... but thats probably the proc I'm gonna get. And since I already have a gig of ram I don't really need to get 2 more gigs. I'm shooting for 2GB, my mobo has 4 ram slots, I'm using two. So I figured might as well just get another 512x2.
Meh, you could always get the OEM version for $30~ cheaper, but all I found in my search was a open box on newegg. OEM version won't come with a hsf.
And also.. I was building my friend's computer.. which I made a socket AM2. I mistakenly added DDR1 (512x2)ram to the cart cause I was going too fast. So instead of RMAing it, I decided I'm just gonna keep it and pay my friend the difference.
A 4 stick configuration on a A64 setup has higher latencies then that of a 2 stick configuration.
 
New Member
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
842
Best answers
0
How much higher latencies are we talking about? Something that'll be really noticeable?

Also, why would Vista be out of the picture if I decide to take this route Cuc?

Oh and also I was told if I use 4 DDR3200 my mobo will downclock them to 333mhz. Is it true?
 
Lost in space
Banned
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Messages
3,608
Best answers
0
How much higher latencies are we talking about? Something that'll be really noticeable?

Also, why would Vista be out of the picture if I decide to take this route Cuc?

Oh and also I was told if I use 4 DDR3200 my mobo will downclock them to 333mhz. Is it true?
8 banks of memory for the mem controller to access versus 4 banks on the 2 X 1024. And yes, it's true that there is a possibility your ram speed will drop to 166mhz (333mhz DDR) as opposed to running at DDR400.

As for your vista question, some people consider 2gb of memory to be the ideal configuration for vista.
 
Live free or die by the sword
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Messages
7,416
Best answers
0
8 banks of memory for the mem controller to access versus 4 banks on the 2 X 1024. And yes, it's true that there is a possibility your ram speed will drop to 166mhz (333mhz DDR) as opposed to running at DDR400.

As for your vista question, some people consider 2gb of memory to be the ideal configuration for vista.
It's worth noting that newer 939 boards do not have this bug.
 
Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2005
Messages
475
Best answers
0
It's also worth noting that Vista is a piece of crap.

You wanna get that oh so desired boost, up to 2GB first. I had lag in Matrix Online, but then I went from 512 to 1GB, and I was shocked at the difference. Went from 1GB to 2GB, and never noticed any problem ever again.
 
Lost in space
Banned
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Messages
3,608
Best answers
0
It's worth noting that newer 939 boards do not have this bug.
Revision E chips don't have this issue as far as I am aware. The bios usually was tje culprit, as if you were running the command rate at 1T it would set it to 333mhz compared to 2T being able to run at 400mhz.
 
Lost in space
Banned
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Messages
3,608
Best answers
0
Bah, I put the new ram in and it did downclock to 333. My mobo is this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813136152

How significant would this be? I don't really have any suitable games to test at the moment. I noticed the X2 isn't even listed as compatible with my board... I might have to RMA this anyway.
You shouldn't have any issues with dual core chips being incompatible with your mainboard, if need be you should update to the latest bios for your mainboard if you are experiencing such problems.
 
New Member
Joined
May 14, 2003
Messages
904
Best answers
0
Bah, I put the new ram in and it did downclock to 333. My mobo is this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813136152

How significant would this be? I don't really have any suitable games to test at the moment. I noticed the X2 isn't even listed as compatible with my board... I might have to RMA this anyway.
It will be noticeable, but not devastating or gameplay ruining.
|Overlord| said:
The bios usually was tje culprit, as if you were running the command rate at 1T it would set it to 333mhz compared to 2T being able to run at 400mhz.
Both of which, sadly, give nearly the same performance.
 
Lost in space
Banned
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Messages
3,608
Best answers
0
It will be noticeable, but not devastating or gameplay ruining.Both of which, sadly, give nearly the same performance.
A 4x512 configuration compared to a 2x1024 configuration. Memory bandwidth also takes a taxing from 4 Dimms seen in sisoft memory tests.

While some apps see hardly any performance loss, some others do. It takes more cycles for the memory controller. Some people report performance losses of 5-10%, sometimes higher.
 
New Member
Joined
May 14, 2003
Messages
904
Best answers
0
A 4x512 configuration compared to a 2x1024 configuration. Memory bandwidth also takes a taxing from 4 Dimms seen in sisoft memory tests.

While some apps see hardly any performance loss, some others do. It takes more cycles for the memory controller. Some people report performance losses of 5-10%, sometimes higher.
Thank you... for agreeing with me?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top