Phenom II 955 and 965

Phenom II 965 only has a 6.25% higher clock speed than the Phenom 955, and real world won't even show a 6% performance gain in most tasks as it doesn't scale that way. I would say in most cases, you won't see more than 1-2fps difference.
 
As everyone said earlier, the 965 is, effectively, a factory OC'ed 955. Just go into the BIOS, raise the multiplier by 1, and boom! You have a 965.

Most games scale with the GPU instead of the CPU. So a slightly better graphics card will give you better performance as opposed to a slightly better CPU.
 
1 good thing is right now newegg has combo deals on the 965 so youll save the cash you spend extra on the 965. currently the deal i choose was

#

AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition Deneb 3.4GHz Socket AM3 125W Quad-Core Processor Model HDZ965FBGMBOX - Retail
Item #: N82E16819103727
Return Policy: CPU Replacement Only Return Policy

#

GIGABYTE GA-790FXTA-UD5 AM3 AMD 790FX SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail
Item #: N82E16813128415
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy

#

AMD Gift - Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 Coupon - Retail
Item #: N82E16800995090
 
I'm guessing that they also improved the 955, but just kept the voltage the same and didnt change the TDP rating. I mean, really, they just were able to clock them at a higher speed without increasing voltages. So most likely what that means is you could probably under-volt the 955 at stock settings with the c3-stepping and still run at the spec speeds.
 
The original 965 C2 had a TDP of 140W, but it never really ran all that much hotter than a 955 C2 (125W TDP). The C3 steppings have much improved IMC(memory controllers), where RAM can run 1600-1800mhz stable. Also, the C3 steppings use less voltage for higher clocks, meaning lower temps.

Between the 955 and 965, the 955 uses a stock voltage of 1.35V for 3.2ghz (up to 3.6ghz on stock voltage) and the 965 uses a stock voltage of 1.4V for 3.4ghz (up to 3.7-3.8ghz on stock voltage). The 965 C3 has an easier time getting 4-4.2ghz stable, though I haven't read too much about the 955 C3, so it could be the same.

If money isn't an issue, I would go for the 965 C3, simply because it's a much better overclocker and has a higher potential to reach 4+ghz stable. Though if you want to save money, go for the 955 C3 and use the spare $25 to get yourself an aftermarket CPU cooler or spend more on your GPU, which is more important in gaming.

Just remember to look at the model number like what RazberyBandit said, and make sure it ends with "....MBOX" instead of "....IBOX" as the "IBOX" are the C2 steppings. Here are links to the C3 steppings of the 955 and 965:

955 C3 stepping Link

965 C3 stepping Link

Hope I helped! 😀
 
i plan on getiing a 5870 or 5850 cause i use a 24" screen now and my Gpu struggles on Crysis

on 1280X1024 i can play crisis perfectly

but i think this should be good

955+HD5870

but i will upgrade only after a months
 

Sounds good to me, but I wouldn't upgrade anything in the next few months once you have your 955+HD5870, that's already overkill for most games. Unless you got a lot of money, it should last you at least a year or two before you have to upgrade.
 
Man with Metro 2033 out it makes me damn glad to have my overpowered GPU setup. That damn game is beautiful.

Makes me start to want my 5870 crossfire setup now that my current ones get pwned during extreme lighting/explosions in metro. (Crysis = pwnt DX9 High 1920x1080 60+FPS, 8XAA 30-50FPS)

Hopefully I'll be happy enough when I sell my 4870 for a 2nd 4890. We'll see... =/ It'll be hard to convince myself to spend $800 because I know I won't be happy going to just a single 5870.

955+5870 = Prime gaming setup these days.
 


It depends on your graphics card like if you have an NVIDIA you might want to enable PHys-x to relieve stress off the CPU. So the graphics card will take some of the work load, but as far as your question goes both will game I mean I see some old P4 3.20Ghz keeping up with some Dual-Cores.
 

Phys-X doesn't do wonders, sure it helps for the older CPUs/GPUs and keep in mind it only helps in games that support Phys-X. If the person already has a high-end Nvidia/ATI GPU, it's not gonna help at all.
 


Used to be 955+4890 just 6 months ago. -sigh- The times go by too fast sometimes. Does Metro 2033 really use up that much power? For a game to make a 4870 xfire setup stutter, just seems impossible.
 
He's got a mixed CrossFire setup - 4890 + 4870. It should actually outperform a dual-4870 setup slightly. Either way, I too find it hard to believe he's got problems running any game... But, Metro 2033 is new so the driver package / Crossfire profile may need some tuning. As a single 4890 owner, and with their availability dwindling, I've wondered about adding a 4870 for CrossFire myself. I'm just reluctant, as I'd rather have two 4890's.

I view PhysX as somewhat of a gimmick. There really aren't that many titles that support it. Those that do will only show major performance gains if there's a dedicated PhysX card, as running the physics and the game's normal graphics simultaneously on a single GPU can cause performance hits.

Xbit-Labs did a nice comparison between the eVGA GTX-275 Co-Op and the HD5850. The 275 Co-Op is built similar to a GTX-295, but the 2nd GPU is actually a GTS-250 G92b GPU that only runs PhysX. If the game doesn't support PhysX, then the 2nd GPU does nothing. The GTX-275 GPU within it is underclocked some, too, so it's performance isn't the same as a standard one. Anyway, he's the link:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/evga-gtx275-coop-physx.html
 
Ah, yeah I know he was running a 4890/4870 combo, but it's closer to a 4870xfire setup than anything else, so I said that.

I've got a single 4890 too and it's the Sapphire Toxic edition (960core/1050mem@stock), so I don't want it's 1025/1111 OC clocks to go down to a 4870's lower clocks. It wouldn't do it justice and I would have wasted the extra money I spent on this card over the stock/less factory-OCed cards. Hopefully, I'll be able to find another Toxic on a forum or ebay IF I ever need that second card.

Good job on talking about the Phys-X dedicated setups. I forgot about them entirely, but they are the exceptions of when Phys-X will actually show a significant improvement in games. The only draw back is that you will need at least a dedicated 8800/9800GT/GTX250, to effectively help out the higher-end GPUs.
 
I wish my XFX 4890 would OC that high. It's a ZDEC model with 875/975 stock settings. The highest successful OC I've managed is 930/1090, which is decent, but it's nowhere near your Sapphire's speeds. I've yet to bother voltage or BIOS modding it... XFX is pretty liberal with their warranty, permitting overclocking and 3rd-party cooler installations. However, I'm pretty certain actually modding the BIOS would void it.
 
The thing is my Toxic runs at a default stock voltage of 1.4Vcore/2.1Vmem, so I'm probably using more voltage than you are. I've tried running it at 1.5Vcore/2.3Vmem and it can OC as high as 1060/1150, but I just didn't like how my memory's temps would reach 90°C+ during load.

I was thinking about using the Atomic (1000/1050) BIOS, but I haven't learned how to do GPU BIOS flashes yet. In fact, many people flash their GPU's BIOS and it's possible to even reflash it back to it's original BIOS, just in case you were thinking about sending it back for warranty or for some other manner.
 
They'll both perform equally well. That's why the 955 is the better buy of the two. All CPUs have to do these days is be fast enough not to bottleneck the GPUs when it comes to gaming. Even the Athlon II X4 2.6GHz is fast enough not to bottleneck almost all GPUs so I wouldn't worry about it. :sol: