AVS Forum banner

AMD build for a friend

1334 Views 12 Replies 8 Participants Last post by  MSmith83
I'm helping a buddy put together an AMD box for gaming he is on a budget, but fortunately has some parts available from his previous machine. Since I have little exp with AMD setups lately could he buy this processor:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819103674



Put it on this motherboard:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813128387


And use this RAM:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820145184


He has the RAM (8GB worth) and a video card case etc. left from his old machine and is trying to do this cheap, what kind of performance would he be missing out on by not going DDR3?
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Outside of synthetic benchmarks RAM speed makes next to no difference.
IMO, as long as he is not looking into overclocking that CPU, that RAM should be adequate. Of course, I would check on Gigabyte's website to double check on compatibility first to be safe.
OCing the CPU has nothing to do with that RAM. The CPU is a black edition, which means it has an unlocked multiplier. He can leave the base speed at the default of 200 and just increase the multiplier from 16x to 18x to make the CPU run at 3.4GHz. That CPU will overclock easily to 3.6GHz on air cooling and probably even stock voltage. Although it would need a better aftermarket cooler. Even if the CPU multiplier wasnt unlocked, you can still change the divider on the RAM to lower its speed in comparison with the CPU to allow the CPU to run higher.


If he is on a budjet, why get such a nice quad core CPU? Just get one of the much cheaper dual cores. an X2 250 or X2 550... I suggest an x2 250 because it is slightly cheaper than the 550 and consumes less power. The advantage of a 550 is that if you are lucky and use the right motherboard bios, you can get the CPU to run 3 cores or even 4. You could also use an X2 7750 or 7850 cause those are really cheap, but they use a lot of power for what they are...



And yes RAM speed does make a difference, just not as much as people think. DDR2-800 is plenty fine for todays applications and games so dont worry about getting anything better. But there is a definite real world performance difference between DDR2-800 and DDR3-1600.




And yes that CPU, MB, and RAM will all work together. What graphics card is he using?

And what hard drive is he using? Hard drives are the slowest thing in a computer so if the HDD is too old he might want to consider getting a newer one. The Western Digital "Black" drives of 640GB size are really fast for mechanical drives and pretty cheap too.
See less See more
He has an ATI 4870

750W PC power and cooling PS (same as mine)

7200 RPM Samsung Spinpoint HDDs (1x250GB 1x1TB)


Well he's going with the quad core because...well I don't know why it's his money and I've tried directing him towards some better decisions but he is set on having the fastest AMD CPU he can get (for desktops of course). All I can do is pass on the great info you guys are providing.


Thanks to all of you!
Color me misinformed about not having to screw with the FSB. Sorry. . . 8^)
AMD BE (Black Edition) processors have unlocked multipliers. You don't have to mess with the FSB to overclock. You just turn up the cpu multiplier.

I bought the 720BE (3 core), used one of the F3 bios (Gigabyte) to unlock the 4th core and set the multi to 17.5 = instant quad core running @ 3.5Ghz.
See less See more
Getme, be sure your friend knows that many games do not take advantage of quad core CPUs right now. A dual core will be fine for the next year still, and maybe even for a couple years depending on how high of speed it can go. Games are just starting to make efficient use of quad cores now, but a high speed dual is still planty adequate for even those newer games that can use quads. It is much more dependant on the graphics card than the CPU. The difference between an AMD quad at 3GHz and an i7 at 3.2GHz is barely a single frame per second. The difference between a quad and a dual on the newest games that can make use of the extra cores is barely a frame per second as well. As long as the CPU is powerful enough to properly feed the data to the graphis card without the card being starved for data, then it is fine.


For a 4870, any dual core CPU at 3GHz or higher will do. AMD or Intel.
FSB? You guys are living in the past. Its HT,QPI and soon to be DMI.

GTA4 pratically requires a quad or a super clocked dual to playable so don't dismiss quads so quickly. SupCom made good use of it so maybe SC2 will too. Remedy made a lot of hype on how multithreaded Alan Wake is but MS gave us the finger. Plus AMD needs the money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRT Dude /forum/post/16883896


GTA4 pratically requires a quad or a super clocked dual to playable so don't dismiss quads so quickly. SupCom made good use of it so maybe SC2 will too. Remedy made a lot of hype on how multithreaded Alan Wake is but MS gave us the finger. Plus AMD needs the money.

Ghostbusters is also a very Quad-friendly game. Developers are more often recommending Quad-core processors for optimal gameplay with soon-to-be released games.


Resident Evil 5 is looking to heavily favor Quad-core processors. The benchmark often utilized over 50% of each core with my Intel Q9550 running at 3.4GHz.
WHile we're on this, what do you guys think about triple cores? I was looking at the prices, and they're pretty cheap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MSmith83 /forum/post/16884069


Resident Evil 5 is looking to heavily favor Quad-core processors. The benchmark often utilized over 50% of each core with my Intel Q9550 running at 3.4GHz.

So essentially it is using 2 cores but very inefficiently spreading itself out over 4 and causing any nackground apps to suffer on account of it? I wonder if you can set affinity to lock that program to less cores and have it still operate at the same level while still having processor time available for other apps?

Quote:
Originally Posted by fcorona76 /forum/post/16884665


So essentially it is using 2 cores but very inefficiently spreading itself out over 4 and causing any nackground apps to suffer on account of it? I wonder if you can set affinity to lock that program to less cores and have it still operate at the same level while still having processor time available for other apps?

Changing the number of job threads from 3 to 2 in the game's config file seems to significantly lighten the load on one of the cores, while increasing the load on two of the other cores and apparently leaving the fourth for rendering tasks.
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top