Up the creek with my Socket 939...

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
S

Shecky

Distinguished
Mar 30, 2008
63
0
18,630
I'm currently looking to upgrade my system, primarily to get better in-game performance (Dungeons & Dragons Online - a very graphics-intensive game). I was trying to figure out how best to make one upgrade deliver the most bang for the buck (IMPORTANT: at present, I have only in the range of $100 liquid cash available; everything else is already spoken for). On recommendation, I ran my Task Manager CPU usage function while in-game, and it was reading in the 80s and 90s percentiles!

First question: is this as sure a sign as my friend said that it's my CPU that most needs upgrading?

Second question: where the HECK are there any AMD socket 939 processors that are an improvement on my current one?!? This one is an Athlon 64 3700+ 2.2 GHz. I'd like to go dual-core, but I can't seem to FIND any Athlon dual-core socket 939 processors.

Help, please! :)
 
Opteron DC available here, but expensive. I just ordered the 4000+ single core San Diego for 39 bucks to troubleshoot with and eventually install on a system. Dual core processor will only help if the progrsam you are using utalizes two cores. DC helps with multitasking also. Socket 939 has been discontinued, so it's a dead end. No 3800X2's available anywhere I know of. If you have the bucks look to building a 775 or AM2 DC system instead of investing any real money into a discontinued 939. 39 bucks for 4000+ was a good deal. I have three 939 systems still running.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2+50001028+40000343+1051707439&name=Socket+939
 
Buy this Opteron 185 and overclock it: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103582 . With good cooling it will do 3Ghz. With regular cooling it will do 2.6 to 2.8Ghz. Unfortunately this is your best option for the money.

I'd strongly suggest just saving up some more and going to an AM2+ system or cheap (non-existent) performance Intel system. DDR2 Memory is ridiculously cheap (DDR2-800 4GB for under $70: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820211188 ). You can also get an AM2 5000+ Black Edition for $84!: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103194
Pair all this with an affordable 780G motherboard which is brand new AND cheap and for ~$250 you have a completely new system that runs circles around your current one. Have a little patience and save your money for a little longer.
 


Thanks for responding!

The problem/question I'm running into is this: as I said, my present processor is a 3700+ 2.2 GHz; will that 4000+ deliver a real improvement over my 3700+, or will it only be a slight incremental jump? I'm looking for something that will make a substantial upgrade to what I'm experiencing in-game.

*edit* I know absolutely nothing about the Opteron processor line. What's the deal with it?
 
i got the sd 4000+ about a year ago for $60 and it's been great. i had it at 2.4 the whole time, but recently oc'd it to 2.7 and made big difference in a lot of games (orange box, coh, crysis demo and cod4 demo). the 300 mhz really smoothed out those games which would occasionally hitch. funny though, i have another thread going and am considering the opteron (basically server grade cpu) but not sure if my mobo will support it and $140 is steep price. the 4000+ was just about the best single core chip excluding the fx series which were way over priced. $40 for the 4000+ is hard to pass up...
 
Realisticly, you're not going to be able to do much with $100. You may find a dual core 939 on ebay but the increase in games will be negligable. The advantage will be able to run multiple applications as long as your motherboard and bios support dual core. You might want to take a look at perhaps buying some more memory with that $100. It's so dirt cheap right now, that it's usually a cost effective upgrade.

Upgrading a discontinued platform is allways a gamble. Most everything you put into it can't be transferred and every other component is also getting older and closer to the point of obsolesence. It's kind of like working on a junky car - you can spend money on a new muffler but you don't know what else is going to break next.

Opterons are server processors that are basically higher quality versions of consumer grade chips. If you want to play around with overclocking, Opterons usually have that ability. Just be aware that your motherboard and bios must have the ability to overclock.

 
Agreed, your not going to do much with just $100. You can find fast dual core 939's on eBay but they still cost. I sold my X2 4800+ Toledo core on ebay just over a month ago. I got almost $300 for that, used the money to pay for my current motherboard and memory.
 



What are your system specs. Include your video card please.
 
Supply and demand. X2-4800 or FX-60 will be as high as you can go on 939 excluding the Opteron line. My X2-4400 OC'd to 2.6 Ghz without much drama... as will several of the Opterons. D&D Online ran like a dream on my X2 with a 7800 GTX... so what kind of video card are you using? If the game doesn't utilize dual core processors, I'm not sure what sort of benefit you'll get from an X2.
 



Okay.

Computer: HP Pavilion a1330e.
Motherboard: ASUS A8AE-LE (Socket 939)
Processor: AMD Athlon 64 3700+ 2.2 GHz (single-core)
Video card: ATi Radeon X1300Pro PCIe
 
2 quick things, folks:

I understand that the neighborhood of $100 isn't going to get me much. I got it. It's that "not much" that I AM looking for. Call me cheap if you want; I'm going entirely by what my bank account tells me, and it's going to be pretty closemouthed for a while (times are tough). If you do know of something in that range, I'd love to see it. If you don't know of something in that range... well, we already know that the pickin's are slim, don't we? :)

Second: I've also heard a lot of initial reactions along the lines of "new video card is needed" (this is the latest in a string of places where I'm throwing the questions up in the air and seeing what's coming down). On the other hand, I've also been told unequivocally that no matter how hot-stuff the video card is, a pokey processor is going to turn that dream video card into a statue. It's entirely possible that I misunderstood this point, though, and if someone has sound reasoning that upgrading the video card while leaving the aforementioned processor in place WILL improve performance, I'd be happy to see that, too.
 
Err Umm...

"Computer: HP Pavilion a1330e. "

Dang.. just save up some more money man. That isn't worth touching anymore, not to mention the people here are thinking you have a MB with overclocking features, which main brands don't offer.
 


Again - no room to "just save up some more money". I have to work with what I've got, and that cushion is tiny. It's "worth touching" to me, because it's all I've got and I don't have the spare cash (and won't have any spare until sometime next year; as I said, times are VERY tight).

I don't mean to sound dismissive, but the money issue is absolutely nonnegotiable, and I was looking for SOME improvement within those boundaries. I can't go beyond them.

And keep in mind that I am NOT looking for top-of-the-line, bleeding-edge or even cutting-edge - I'm looking for "good enough". I'm not running a 32" monitor. I don't need to see everything in excruciatingly complete detail from a mile away in the game. I just want to do something that will improve my framerate, cut down on CPU resource consumption, at least reduce the occasional stuttering and make the game more playable. I don't have to have the BEST, just something better than what I have, because it's causing issues and I want those issues to be diminished as much as possible, within the budget that is actually available to me.

If that can't be done to any significant degree, if the only visible improvement can come from spending more than that budget, then I'll just have to suck it up. But if there IS some way to make it run more smoothly and with less stuttering that will cost in that price range, then I'd like to see it.

That's all I'm asking for. I realize that I'm working with Stone-Age equipment in the middle of folks who have George Jetson gear. I can't afford the Jetsons - period. Is there at least something from the Bronze Age?
 


Then please enlighten me. People are telling me that my CPU is a chokepoint. It's running at 80-100% capacity in the game. How would improving the video card not then be like switching from a Corvette to a Lamborghini on city streets?

I genuinely don't know and would appreciate it if people could explain what the problem is and why; I've already talked it over with a number of people in that game, and they told me that CPU usage that high points to the CPU as being the main chokepoint. Are they wrong and why?
 
At one time, I saw a good explanation from someone who was getting tired of hearing the terms "choke point" and "throttled" when talking about CPU/GPU matching. I can't find it but think it would be a great idea for someone who really has their act together to come up with that again and make it a sticky. It would really help when someone has a question like this and then they can look at actual numbers.
 


Exactly! I know next to nothing about this kind of thing; the only way I can understand it is with numbers and explanation of those numbers. The only reason I even have THIS computer is that I needed something capable of even playing the game (times weren't tough two years ago when I started). Before that, I didn't need a computer capable of doing anything more than simply surfing the net for my news and messageboards. And the way I found this computer was that I looked at the minimum system requirements, then looked at the recommended system specs and found something that was adequate (i.e., above the minima but not at the top recommendations).

Just goes to show that the old adage of "Those who can, do, while those who can't, teach" is 100% wrong - it takes something more than just skill to be able to EXPLAIN a thing to someone else so that they can not only use it but UNDERSTAND it. :)
 
OK, awhile back they tried using s939 to see what bottlenecks, or holding back a cpu would have on a graphics card. They used a FX60. It has the easy ability to overclock by using the multiplier. It comes as a 2.6 Ghz cpu, but can be slowed to whatever speed you desire. At the time, the 1900xtx was the best card out, they used different clock speeds. What they found was, that at 2.2 or higfher you really wouldnt see much advantage using a 1800xt or a 1900xtx. So, at 2.2 Ghz, the FX60 wasnt a bottleneck running at 2.2Ghz. Now your cpu runs at that speed. The ONLY difference is, you dont have anything near a 1900xtx nor a 1800xt for that matter. The best upgrade without a doubt would be a graphics card. Hope this helps
 
To figure out what you need to upgrade, you can change the settings and see what happens. (just looking at core usage isn't enough...)

Load your favorite game and using fraps, check what your frame rate is. Lets pretend that you get 60FPS at 1024x768. To see if its your CPU, drop the resolution, try running it at 800x600. Lets say you do this and the frame rate is now 65FPS. If the CPU was the bottleneck, then the frame rate should have gone up. While 65>60, it should have gone up more then this.

Next, go the other way. Try stressing the video card. Lets say you next try 1280x1024, and get 35FPS. Notice the much larger change in FPS? This put more stress on the video card, and the VC buckled. If you tested your system and got results similar to this, I would argue that you need a new video card in addition to your CPU.

As rodney suggested, you probably need a new video card. The 3500-4000+ (not counting the dual core 3800x2) are ok CPUs for gaming. (more like low end, but not there yet.) The x1300 is barely an entry level video card these days, and should not be used for any form of serious gaming. Getting a 3650 for ~$60-$75 would be a good use for your money.
 
One of the problems is that there are so many variables that there probably isn't an equation that can cover everything. Yes you can increase performance, just remember, speed costs! In your case, you might be able to put a faster processor in but your board may not be able to power it. For example, an AMD 4000 is a 2.6ghz cpu and would definately increase your performance from your 2.0ghz chip but the board can only supply 1.4v (according to the above link) so you need to find out what the voltage ranges are for your proposed chip. I made that mistake myself with my laptop and found that without voltage adjustments in the bios I was very limited. It woulnd't run the 4000 that I bought because that stepping was a different voltage.

You've got a system that will only allow limited changes. It'll take quite a bit of work on your part to determine the components that will work and then to actually find those parts at a price you're willing to pay. That doesn't mean that it can't be done, but you've got one heck of a "pigs ear" to turn into a "silk purse".

 


Actually, I've already tested it using a similar method. 1024x768 gets me anywhere from 20-60 fps; going up to 1280x1024 (my cheapo monitor's native resolution) drops that range by about 10. Going down is out of the question - the UI onscreen takes up too much space when I try 800x600. Does this info help?

Pirate, I don't want a silk purse. I want to turn my sow's ear into decent pork rinds LOL! But your expression points out exactly what I'm running up against - people seem to be thinking I want the silk purse (well, I DO, but I know I can't afford it any time soon at all), when all I want to do is to shore up that sow's ear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom