A64-X2 vs Opteron

Locklear · Post by **Locklear** » Thu Dec 08, 2005 11:35 pm

So i'm looking for a new socket 939 CPU for the new PC I'm currently putting together. I was planning on getting a X2 4400+/4800+ but then I noticed the Opteron 175/Opteron 180 socket 939 models are priced exactly the same as their X2 brotheres.

So on to the questions. What's the difference between these processor families really. Clock is the same, cache is the same, as far as i know cores are the same, and price is 100% identical.

srue · Post by **srue** » Thu Dec 08, 2005 11:56 pm

Supposedly the Opterons undergo a more strenuous verification process since they are designed to be used in 24/7 servers. Some have therefore suggested that the Opterons may have more overclocking headroom.

Otherwise they are exactly the same - same core, same revision, everything.

Locklear · Post by **Locklear** » Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:58 pm

Thanks for the quick answer. Was exactly the impression I was left with.

warriorpoet · Post by **warriorpoet** » Sun Dec 11, 2005 8:41 pm

srue wrote:Supposedly the Opterons undergo a more strenuous verification process since they are designed to be used in 24/7 servers. Some have therefore suggested that the Opterons may have more overclocking headroom.

Otherwise they are exactly the same - same core, same revision, everything.

Not entirely true.

Opterons utilize 1Mb L2 cache, unlike Venice-base procs.

They also have an aditional HTT link available for greater memory throughput, advantageous for any program that utilizes it (admitedly not mainstream stuff ATM).

...and they cost more

~El~Jefe~ · Post by **~El~Jefe~** » Sun Dec 11, 2005 11:39 pm

NOPE!

opteron dual cores cost LESS than x2.
they also have a better built memory controller many tech report places say.

amd is squashing them asap however if you read on the theregister.com

they just are way too good.

hravn · Post by **hravn** » Sun Dec 11, 2005 11:58 pm

warriorpoet wrote:Opterons utilize 1Mb L2 cache, unlike Venice-base procs.

They also have an aditional HTT link available for greater memory throughput, advantageous for any program that utilizes it (admitedly not mainstream stuff ATM).

Hmm, but the comparison was with 4400+/4800+ (Toledo), which has 2x1MB cache.

Also, AFAIK the Opteron 1XX series does not have extra HTT links, that is only for the 2XX and 8XX series.

warriorpoet · Post by **warriorpoet** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 4:50 pm

~El~Jefe~ wrote:NOPE!

opteron dual cores cost LESS than x2.
they also have a better built memory controller many tech report places say.

amd is squashing them asap however if you read on the theregister.com

they just are way too good.

Opterons cost more per MHz

i.e. x2 3800+ @ 2.0GHz is $322; opteron 170 @ 2.0GHz is $403

If you're talking about the low-end Opti 165, it clocks at only 1.8GHz with a 9x multiplier; good luck finding one...

I'll second the motion for a better memory controller