pentium D vs athlon 64 X2 socket 939

deepsplash · Feb 9, 2007, 08:32 PM

Can the computer experts out there recommend me which is better if i'll be using my computer mainly for the following:

downloading
watching movies and dramas
burning dvds
casual gamer (i game once in a while)

Qualities important to me:
-quiet (computer will be on all or most of the time)
-cool running...i really can't stand computers acting like my furnace (no thanks)

My last option is to get the cheapest core 2 duo but if the 2 types of processors i mentioned in the title satisfies my needs, then i don't want to spend more than i have to.
Thanks!!

p.s. not looking to overclock

**temeteus82** · Feb 9, 2007, 08:39 PM

Hi there and welcome to DH!
Core 2 Duo E4300 is the one I would recommend to you right now.

deepsplash · Feb 9, 2007, 11:55 PM

thanks.

can someone tell me if the following applications are MULTI-THREADED or Single-threaded??
that woud really help me in determining whats best for me.

windows media player
windows classic player
bittorrent program
burning dvds using nero

THANKS!!

Judas · Feb 10, 2007, 12:31 AM

It's not really dependant if a specific application by itself.

The main advantage to dual core or multithreading abilities is that windows will intelligently move processes from one to the other (if they don't support multithreading). Evenly distrubuting the workload best it can.

While one application is pegging a single core, windows should move either excisting or new programs over to the other until they balance out.

jp306 · Feb 10, 2007, 12:47 AM

Core2Duo > A64 X2 > P4D

deepsplash · Feb 10, 2007, 01:27 AM

ive pretty much decided on amd athlon x2 now. the thing is trying to decide between 3800+ or 4200+. ill look into those. I chose amd over intel is because of it having the EE and cool'n'quiet. energy efficient. i totally can't stand the extra heat and noise (when i go to sleep). Ever if it makes a small difference, ill choose it over intel. plus, its cheaper.

Thanks for all the help! really appreciate it.

PangingJr · Feb 10, 2007, 07:45 AM

for a new system build these days i would skip Intel Pentium D-based processors, and would go for building Intel Core 2 Duo-based processor. and if i happened to have too much money to spend, then i think one of Intel Core 2 Extreme or Intel Core 2 Quad processors can be really worth to try.
as for AMD-based processors i'm not sure, but i guess i would skip socket 754 of Athlon 64 (for sure), and probably the entire Athlon 64 processors too, and go for Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core or probably AMD Athlon 64 FXs, but nevertheless i sure needed to learn and decide about these AMD processors socket platforms.

**temeteus82** · Feb 10, 2007, 08:22 AM

Panging, I would add S939 Athlons on that not to get list...

OldBuzzard · Feb 10, 2007, 09:32 AM

deepsplash

You may want to take a look at the 4600+ too. I'm looking at a possible upgrade myself, and in the S939's it looks like the 4600+ is the 'sweet spot' in terms of Price/Performance.

~~DudeBoyz~~ · Feb 10, 2007, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jp306

Core2Duo > A64 X2 > P4D

Ding Ding! We have a Winnar!

Agreed.

Don't think I'd invest in a P4 line of chips at all.

IvanV · Feb 10, 2007, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deepsplash

ive pretty much decided on amd athlon x2 now. the thing is trying to decide between 3800+ or 4200+. ill look into those. I chose amd over intel is because of it having the EE and cool'n'quiet. energy efficient. i totally can't stand the extra heat and noise (when i go to sleep). Ever if it makes a small difference, ill choose it over intel. plus, its cheaper.

Thanks for all the help! really appreciate it.

Considering the activities you listed, you'll be sathisfied with any of the mentioned processors (I haven't forgotten that you game once in awhile). I'd say Athlon64 x2 is a good choice. Choosing between 3800+ and 4200+, you shouldn't be too worried about making the wrong choice. The performance difference is small, and the noise levels should be almost identical (they use the same cooler and generate very similar amount of heat). You may want to consider AM2 platform instead of Socket939 as I suppose it will be discontinued in near future.

~~DudeBoyz~~ · Feb 10, 2007, 11:45 AM

I thought that I read an article about a motherboard that would handle both Socket 939 and Socket AM2 procs. I wish I could remember it.

I found one board, but I'm not sure it's the same one I saw the other day:

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2706

Upgrades to AM2 via a daughter card.

Anway, I think you are right - AM2 is the answer if you can get it all at a reasonable price - it should protect upgrade potential for a much longer period of time. Already the 939 chips are getting hard to find, as production apparently stopped in December 2006.

I was lucky to get an FX 60 when I did.

jp306 · Feb 10, 2007, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DudeBoyz

I thought that I read an article about a motherboard that would handle both Socket 939 and Socket AM2 procs. I wish I could remember it.

I found one board, but I'm not sure it's the same one I saw the other day:

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2706

Upgrades to AM2 via a daughter card.

Anway, I think you are right - AM2 is the answer if you can get it all at a reasonable price - it should protect upgrade potential for a much longer period of time. Already the 939 chips are getting hard to find, as production apparently stopped in December 2006.

I was lucky to get an FX 60 when I did.

Allot of the ASRock 939 boards are upgradeable to socket AM2 and DDR2 using a riser card. I got one so I could use my old memory and old AGP card at the time and 939s were cheaper than AM2s too.

~~DudeBoyz~~ · Feb 10, 2007, 02:12 PM

Pretty amazing board. I like the versatility. Congrats on havin' it.

**kris23** · Feb 11, 2007, 02:17 AM

arent the Core 2 Duo's cooler running and more powerful than the current athlon X2's? i think AM2 is better than the 939 unless youre going to get an ASrock board with the AM2 upgrade......

zaim · Feb 11, 2007, 03:24 AM

AM2 is better than 939 because they support DDR2... but personally I haven't seen any real performance difference between say an AM2 4200+ and a 939 4200+

jp306 · Feb 11, 2007, 04:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zaim

AM2 is better than 939 because they support DDR2... but personally I haven't seen any real performance difference between say an AM2 4200+ and a 939 4200+

From what I understand it's only a 3-5% gain in performance and that's like you said, because of the DDR2.

H3X4D3C1M4L · Feb 15, 2007, 07:46 PM

If you want anything cool running stay away from Pentium D's

AM2 isn't alot better than Socket 939 but I guess its future compatibility you're looking at.

None of your applications are multi threaded or need to be EXCEPT Nero recode which benefits heavily from multithreading.

Also... reconsider the Core 2 Duo, not only is it cooler and quieter but once you see one recode a full DVD9 to a DVD5 with all the high quality options on in less than 9 minutes, you'll be sold.

~~DudeBoyz~~ · Feb 15, 2007, 09:19 PM

I think a lot of processes in XP take advantage of dual cores, and some apps like WinRAR do now too. Just a matter of time.

H3X4D3C1M4L · Feb 21, 2007, 05:03 PM

Yeah but at this moment its going slower than most people expected... I don't see the majority of things that I do benefitting from dual core but enough things do for some people that its invaluable.

Multitasking for example, that's a strong reason to go dual core even if nothing you do is multithreaded

~~DudeBoyz~~ · Feb 21, 2007, 05:46 PM

But Windows XP supports dual core no sweat. Everything from printing to video and sound - all that can benefit.

You can even manually assign tasks to individual cores if you want.

Just because many apps don't support multi-threading / dual core doesn't mean XP doesn't.

H3X4D3C1M4L · Feb 25, 2007, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DudeBoyz

Just because many apps don't support multi-threading / dual core doesn't mean XP doesn't.

....I know that, that's what I just said. Multitasking is a strong reason for going dual core even if nothing you use is dual core aware but the O/S (NT has always been multiproc capable)

jasonbourne · Feb 26, 2007, 09:02 AM

to be honest i have a socket 939 amd x2 4200(2.8) and im loving it,all my games run like a charm theres no doubt that its nots as good as a conroe processor but its good enough for me .

H3X4D3C1M4L · Feb 27, 2007, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jasonbourne

to be honest i have a socket 939 amd x2 4200(2.8) and im loving it,all my games run like a charm theres no doubt that its nots as good as a conroe processor but its good enough for me .

Your Mustang may not be a Ferrari but it'll get you from A to B fast enough

zaim · Mar 1, 2007, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jasonbourne

to be honest i have a socket 939 amd x2 4200(2.8) and im loving it,all my games run like a charm theres no doubt that its nots as good as a conroe processor but its good enough for me .

yep.... my 939 running at 2.6ghz, and my ram running at 520mhz atm with tight timings, beat any am2 system in a benchmark. i get some high bandwidth readings in sandra.. much faster than DDR2

Feb 9, 2007, 08:32 PM	#1
deepsplash DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 3 Rep Power: 0	pentium D vs athlon 64 X2 socket 939 Can the computer experts out there recommend me which is better if i'll be using my computer mainly for the following: downloading watching movies and dramas burning dvds casual gamer (i game once in a while) Qualities important to me: -quiet (computer will be on all or most of the time) -cool running...i really can't stand computers acting like my furnace (no thanks) My last option is to get the cheapest core 2 duo but if the 2 types of processors i mentioned in the title satisfies my needs, then i don't want to spend more than i have to. Thanks!! p.s. not looking to overclock

Feb 10, 2007, 12:47 AM	#5
jp306 DriverHeaven Addict Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 309 Rep Power: 0 System Specs	Core2Duo > A64 X2 > P4D __________________ "I told my psychiatrist that everyone hates me. He said I was being ridiculous - everyone hasn't met me yet." Rodney Dangerfield.

Feb 10, 2007, 09:32 AM	#9
OldBuzzard DH's oldest Geek Join Date: May 2003 Location: Oberlin, OH Posts: 2,783 Rep Power: 145 System Specs	deepsplash You may want to take a look at the 4600+ too. I'm looking at a possible upgrade myself, and in the S939's it looks like the 4600+ is the 'sweet spot' in terms of Price/Performance. __________________ When looking for a reason as to why things go wrong, never rule out sheer STUPIDITY

Feb 10, 2007, 11:45 AM	#12
~~DudeBoyz~~ banned Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,677 Rep Power: 0	I thought that I read an article about a motherboard that would handle both Socket 939 and Socket AM2 procs. I wish I could remember it. I found one board, but I'm not sure it's the same one I saw the other day: http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2706 Upgrades to AM2 via a daughter card. Anway, I think you are right - AM2 is the answer if you can get it all at a reasonable price - it should protect upgrade potential for a much longer period of time. Already the 939 chips are getting hard to find, as production apparently stopped in December 2006. I was lucky to get an FX 60 when I did. Last edited by DudeBoyz; Feb 10, 2007 at 11:58 AM.

Feb 11, 2007, 02:17 AM	#15
kris23 Going Insane..... Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 6,018 Rep Power: 131 System Specs	arent the Core 2 Duo's cooler running and more powerful than the current athlon X2's? i think AM2 is better than the 939 unless youre going to get an ASrock board with the AM2 upgrade...... __________________ Hardwareheaven Super-Moderator Building a new computer system and not sure where to start? Click Here! last updated (5/18/11) Rosewill FUTURE case replaces CM 690 II with its greater interior length. Building a PC: Step by Step Guide Written by Kristopher Pedemonte and Nathan Marks-Forder Edited by Allan Campbell Questions or Comments? feel free to post them in the forums!

Feb 9, 2007, 11:55 PM	Thread Starter #3
deepsplash DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 3 Rep Power: 0	thanks. can someone tell me if the following applications are MULTI-THREADED or Single-threaded?? that woud really help me in determining whats best for me. windows media player windows classic player bittorrent program burning dvds using nero THANKS!!

Feb 10, 2007, 01:27 AM	Thread Starter #6
deepsplash DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 3 Rep Power: 0	ive pretty much decided on amd athlon x2 now. the thing is trying to decide between 3800+ or 4200+. ill look into those. I chose amd over intel is because of it having the EE and cool'n'quiet. energy efficient. i totally can't stand the extra heat and noise (when i go to sleep). Ever if it makes a small difference, ill choose it over intel. plus, its cheaper. Thanks for all the help! really appreciate it.

Feb 10, 2007, 07:45 AM	#7
PangingJr Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,989 Rep Power: 71	for a new system build these days i would skip Intel Pentium D-based processors, and would go for building Intel Core 2 Duo-based processor. and if i happened to have too much money to spend, then i think one of Intel Core 2 Extreme or Intel Core 2 Quad processors can be really worth to try. as for AMD-based processors i'm not sure, but i guess i would skip socket 754 of Athlon 64 (for sure), and probably the entire Athlon 64 processors too, and go for Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core or probably AMD Athlon 64 FXs, but nevertheless i sure needed to learn and decide about these AMD processors socket platforms.

Feb 10, 2007, 02:12 PM	#14
~~DudeBoyz~~ banned Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,677 Rep Power: 0	Pretty amazing board. I like the versatility. Congrats on havin' it.

Feb 11, 2007, 03:24 AM	#16
zaim HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Melbourne, AU Posts: 1,052 Rep Power: 42	AM2 is better than 939 because they support DDR2... but personally I haven't seen any real performance difference between say an AM2 4200+ and a 939 4200+ __________________ زعيم MAIN PC(1)(2)(3):•Q9550•GAP35DS3P• 4GBCrucialPC2-8500BallistixTracerLED•XFX9800GTX•3x146GB CheetahSAS15K.5 Raid0•2x 1TB Raid1•LianLiA10B•2x22"5ms@3360x1050• BEDROOM HTPC(1)(2)(3):E6600•MSI945GM3-F•2048DDR2667•1TB•Samsung26"HDTV•HybridHDTV•5.1• Laptop:•Centrino2 P8400 1066fsb•4GB-DDR2 800•320GBSATA•DVDDL•15.4"WXGA•802.11a/b/g/n• WHServer:•AM2 5200+•2GB DDR2 800•Lots of TB Storage•1GB TCP/IP• www.zaimc.com // myspace/zaimc // zaimm.deviantart BLOG BLOG BLOG BLOG BLOG 16 x 92mm fan + radiator experiment!

Feb 15, 2007, 07:46 PM	#18
H3X4D3C1M4L DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 6,794 Rep Power: 0	If you want anything cool running stay away from Pentium D's AM2 isn't alot better than Socket 939 but I guess its future compatibility you're looking at. None of your applications are multi threaded or need to be EXCEPT Nero recode which benefits heavily from multithreading. Also... reconsider the Core 2 Duo, not only is it cooler and quieter but once you see one recode a full DVD9 to a DVD5 with all the high quality options on in less than 9 minutes, you'll be sold.

Feb 15, 2007, 09:19 PM	#19
~~DudeBoyz~~ banned Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,677 Rep Power: 0	I think a lot of processes in XP take advantage of dual cores, and some apps like WinRAR do now too. Just a matter of time.

Feb 21, 2007, 05:03 PM	#20
H3X4D3C1M4L DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 6,794 Rep Power: 0	Yeah but at this moment its going slower than most people expected... I don't see the majority of things that I do benefitting from dual core but enough things do for some people that its invaluable. Multitasking for example, that's a strong reason to go dual core even if nothing you do is multithreaded

Feb 21, 2007, 05:46 PM	#21
~~DudeBoyz~~ banned Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,677 Rep Power: 0	But Windows XP supports dual core no sweat. Everything from printing to video and sound - all that can benefit. You can even manually assign tasks to individual cores if you want. Just because many apps don't support multi-threading / dual core doesn't mean XP doesn't.

Feb 26, 2007, 09:02 AM	#23
jasonbourne DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: great yarmouth uk Posts: 1,082 Rep Power: 0	to be honest i have a socket 939 amd x2 4200(2.8) and im loving it,all my games run like a charm theres no doubt that its nots as good as a conroe processor but its good enough for me . __________________ http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...asonBourne.jpg