> Options For a Mobo / CPU combo?

[~Darkseeker~]

do you want an extra .1ghz or a L3 cache?

like said above, its a difference of about 20 bucks, personally .1ghz doesnt matter to me a whole lot.

2.9GHz is basially the same as 3.00Ghz.

 

[foothead]

do you want an extra .1ghz or a L3 cache?

like said above, its a difference of about 20 bucks, personally .1ghz doesnt matter to me a whole lot.

2.9GHz is basially the same as 3.00Ghz.

L3 cache will yield higher performance gains than the extra 100MHz. In fact, it would take more like a 500 MHz overclock for the 620 to catch up to the phenom.

That being said, an athlon II is 45nm, versus the phenom's 65nm, so there really isnt much overclock potential in a phenom, while there is in an athlon.

I doubt the OP knows how to overclock, and it is not something I recommend you just do to a new CPU if you have no idea what you are doing. It's best to get started on an old CPU that wouldn't much matter and learn there.

EDIT: lol looks like the athlon II actually is a bit faster due to its higher HT link clock. I guess because I had it OC'd when I compared benches of my phenom and a 620, that botched it.

In this case, get the 620. faster and cheaper.

 

[Mutant Corn]

^ Don't forget it also allows DDR3!

For the GPU, at the VERY LEAST get an HD 4670. That's still not very fast, but it's about the bare minimum for gaming right now. A 48xx would be good.

 

[foothead]

DDR3 isn't a huge performance gain over DDR2. In fact, my opinion is that the only reason its faster is because of the higher clocks, because the CPU isn't able to properly utilize the potential it has.

Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[nbrikha]

Ha, the newbie got it right!

 

[Mutant Corn]

DDR3 isn't a huge performance gain over DDR2. In fact, my opinion is that the only reason its faster is because of the higher clocks, because the CPU isn't able to properly utilize the potential it has.

Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

Totally depends on the sticks being compared. DDR3 1600 will absolutely give a performance boost over DDR2 800. Maybe not something that would show up in benchmarks, but the system will be snappier...similar to getting a faster hard drive, though maybe not quite as dramatic.

DDR2 1066 and DDR3 1333, however, won't be quite as different.

edit: Also, DDR3 usually is able to overclock better, which is a good thing if your CPU doesn't have an unlocked multiplier.

 

[foothead]

Ha, the newbie got it right!

Yes I guess so, though the difference was more caused by the Athlon II having a higher HT link clock than anything.

That would be why I thought the phenom was faster. The one I benched to compare to the 620 had an overclocked HT link, but stock for everything else.

Totally depends on the sticks being compared. DDR3 1600 will absolutely give a performance boost over DDR2 800. Maybe not something that would show up in benchmarks, but the system will be snappier...similar to getting a faster hard drive.

Exactly what I am saying. If you were to get DDR2 to the same clock speeds/timings, my opinion is that it would be exactly (or negligibly close to) the same performance.

 

[Remeniz]

DDR3 isn't a huge performance gain over DDR2. In fact, my opinion is that the only reason its faster is because of the higher clocks, because the CPU isn't able to properly utilize the potential it has.

Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

For AMD systems this is kind of true. The RAM only runs in dual channel mode. Unlike the x58 motherboards.

 

[Mutant Corn]

Exactly what I am saying. If you were to get DDR2 to the same clock speeds/timings, my opinion is that it would be exactly (or negligibly close to) the same performance.

True, but DDR3 normally operates at speeds that DDR2 can't hope to reach. 1600 is pretty standard in home-built rigs, and 1800 is not unheard-of. And again, overclocking.

There's also the issue of capacity. DDR3 offers much better expandability, which will be good as the platform ages.

 

[foothead]

True, but DDR3 normally operates at speeds that DDR2 can't hope to reach. 1600 is pretty standard in home-built rigs, and 1800 is not unheard-of. And again, overclocking.

There's also the issue of capacity. DDR3 offers much better expandability, which will be good as the platform ages.

I'm not saying that DDR3 isn't better, I'm just saying that my opinion is that the only reason it performs better is because of higher clocks and better latencies.

I forgot about triple-channel, though that really doesn't matter because the only CPU's that allow for DDR3 and DDR2 are AMD.