AMD X2 3800+ vs. Pentium D 920

garo · 2006-02-10, 11:58

I want to start by saying that for Prime95 there is no contest between the two processors listed. But I want to build a system that does more than just prime95.

The 920 is still priced substantially lower than the X2 3800+. Plus the new 65nm technology makes it cooler and more power efficient. But is this enough to make it more attractive?

Any comments, opinions and links to direct comparisons would be appreciated.

A related question pertains to motherboards. I have in mind the Asus A8Ne for the X2 and Asus P5ND2-SLI for the 920. Both are comparably priced and have similar features and are both based on the nForce4 chipset. Any comments on this selection?

xtreme2k · 2006-02-10, 12:33

From what I understand there maybe issues with 920 on NF4SLI chipsets.

Anyway my opinion is that if you are buying Intel CPU with non-intel chipset, you are wasting your time and might as well get AMD CPU + NF4 chipsets.

I got a 930. Overclocks great. Temps are alright.

930 should be roughly the same speed overall as a 3800+. Both can be overclocked madly. You really can't go wrong with either.

Obviously if you run Prime95 a lot there will be a huge difference.

garo · 2006-02-10, 12:40

Thanks! I have heard that the 920/930 runs very hot. To be honest, the price premium on the 930 does not justify taking that step up for me. I would rather go for the X2 3800 than the 930 as they are almost the same price. And your poitn about the intel chipset is noted. I was thinking of the Gigabyte 8I945GMF but it is micro-ATX. Another option is the Intel D945GNT. I've read bad stuff about 915 and 925 based chipsets.

My real question is what difference does 65nm and 2x2 MB L2 cache make?

xtreme2k · 2006-02-10, 12:45

If you like I can run some benchmarks for you. Tell me what you want to run.

920 would be a very cost effective CPU. I would've got it if it was available at the time as well. Its cheaper than a 3800+. For the AMD I dont feel like getting the 3800+ because of only 512K L2 per core. You can also consider Opteron 165 which are 1.8GHz/1M L2 per core.

If you aren't overclocking Intel boards are always reliable.

915/925 are NOT COMPATIBLE with Dual core CPUs.

I also had a 820, got it last August. It runs much hotter than the 930 I got here. Basically I can say that the 820 at stock, max loaded temp is about what I am getting now with my 930@3.6GHz. So 65nm does make a huge difference.

kaeptn_kork · 2006-02-10, 14:12

there are some interesting comparisons at lostcircuits.com, for instance power consumption - http://www.lostcircuits.com/cpu/intel_p4-955/11.shtml

presler is nice for p95 but despite 65nm still a power hog

Jeff Gilchrist · 2006-02-10, 15:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by garo

The 920 is still priced substantially lower than the X2 3800+. Plus the new 65nm technology makes it cooler and more power efficient. But is this enough to make it more attractive?

The 65nm makes it cooler and more power efficient than the X2 3800+ or than the previous Pentium D model? If you aren't using this box as a GIMPS cruncher I would definitely pick the X2 if you are doing SMP/multi-threaded stuff. I have found that the AMD's architecture gives me better multi-threaded performance than the dual-core Intels at least for my stuff.

Jeff.

garo · 2006-02-10, 17:39

Thanks for your responses. I'm sure the 920 is still a power hog compared to the 3800+. But it is significantly better than the 8xx series and has souble the L2 cache. Otherwise I would not even be considering an Intel CPU for a general purpose machine

Here in Italy the 920 is just becoming available and it is priced at 303 Euros whereas the X2 3800+ is priced over 350. A dual-core at 300 Euros is an attractive offer. But I am willing to pony up the extra 50 if there is a compelling reason to do so.

I haven't really seen any benchmarks for the 920 though there are lots comparing the 8xx series and X2 3800+ etc. And I think the X2 3800+ has better overall performance than the 830 which is about the same price. So does a 920 beat the 830 despite being 200MHz slower?

flava · 2006-02-10, 18:42

The X2 3800+ beats the Intel 920 by a large margin at almost all tasks.
Here is an article/benchmark ... in french but the timings and fps speak for themselves :)

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/607-...intel-amd.html

garo · 2006-02-10, 19:09

Merci beaucoup. Je parle francais.

garo · 2006-05-09, 12:45

With the latest Intel price cuts, the 920 is now over a 100 $/Euro cheaper than the 3800+. I think that pretty much settles it, no?

I am still on the lookout for a good motherboard.

Peter Nelson · 2006-05-11, 03:32

Rather than 920, think seriously about going 930. Assuming price drops got factored in you should find there is little if any difference in price. 920 will not be respun with the new stepping whereas the other 9xx will sometime. 920 will likely just disappear, while 950 is on roadmap a long time. 940 may be even better if you can afford the higher price than 930.

As for boards, tricky question, ideally 975 based but finding conroe ready ones is very hard (only Intel badaxe 975x board for sure if certain revs).

Maybe live with cheaper 965 board when they come onto market soon as those ought to support conroe if you want to upgrade in future.

2006-02-10, 11:58	#1
garo Aug 2002 Termonfeckin, IE 3²·307 Posts	AMD X2 3800+ vs. Pentium D 920 I want to start by saying that for Prime95 there is no contest between the two processors listed. But I want to build a system that does more than just prime95. The 920 is still priced substantially lower than the X2 3800+. Plus the new 65nm technology makes it cooler and more power efficient. But is this enough to make it more attractive? Any comments, opinions and links to direct comparisons would be appreciated. A related question pertains to motherboards. I have in mind the Asus A8Ne for the X2 and Asus P5ND2-SLI for the 920. Both are comparably priced and have similar features and are both based on the nForce4 chipset. Any comments on this selection? Last fiddled with by garo on 2006-02-10 at 12:00

2006-02-10, 12:45	#4
xtreme2k Aug 2002 10101110₂ Posts	If you like I can run some benchmarks for you. Tell me what you want to run. 920 would be a very cost effective CPU. I would've got it if it was available at the time as well. Its cheaper than a 3800+. For the AMD I dont feel like getting the 3800+ because of only 512K L2 per core. You can also consider Opteron 165 which are 1.8GHz/1M L2 per core. If you aren't overclocking Intel boards are always reliable. 915/925 are NOT COMPATIBLE with Dual core CPUs. I also had a 820, got it last August. It runs much hotter than the 930 I got here. Basically I can say that the 820 at stock, max loaded temp is about what I am getting now with my 930@3.6GHz. So 65nm does make a huge difference. Last fiddled with by xtreme2k on 2006-02-10 at 12:46

2006-02-10, 18:42	#8
flava Feb 2003 2×59 Posts	The X2 3800+ beats the Intel 920 by a large margin at almost all tasks. Here is an article/benchmark ... in french but the timings and fps speak for themselves :) http://www.hardware.fr/articles/607-...intel-amd.html Last fiddled with by flava on 2006-02-10 at 18:46

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Old pentium bug still alive?	ATH	Soap Box	8	2010-04-14 00:48
Pentium 90 // Pentium ][ 400 years	ValerieVonck	Programming	4	2006-12-12 17:06
Anthlon X2 3800+	Unregistered	Hardware	3	2006-08-11 22:12
Pentium M 740 performance?	Turre	Hardware	8	2005-11-13 20:13
Best version for Pentium III?	markhl	Software	5	2005-09-21 21:41

2006-02-10, 12:33	#2
xtreme2k Aug 2002 2·3·29 Posts	From what I understand there maybe issues with 920 on NF4SLI chipsets. Anyway my opinion is that if you are buying Intel CPU with non-intel chipset, you are wasting your time and might as well get AMD CPU + NF4 chipsets. I got a 930. Overclocks great. Temps are alright. 930 should be roughly the same speed overall as a 3800+. Both can be overclocked madly. You really can't go wrong with either. Obviously if you run Prime95 a lot there will be a huge difference.

2006-02-10, 12:40	#3
garo Aug 2002 Termonfeckin, IE 3²×307 Posts	Thanks! I have heard that the 920/930 runs very hot. To be honest, the price premium on the 930 does not justify taking that step up for me. I would rather go for the X2 3800 than the 930 as they are almost the same price. And your poitn about the intel chipset is noted. I was thinking of the Gigabyte 8I945GMF but it is micro-ATX. Another option is the Intel D945GNT. I've read bad stuff about 915 and 925 based chipsets. My real question is what difference does 65nm and 2x2 MB L2 cache make?

2006-02-10, 14:12	#5
kaeptn_kork Sep 2002 2³·3 Posts	there are some interesting comparisons at lostcircuits.com, for instance power consumption - http://www.lostcircuits.com/cpu/intel_p4-955/11.shtml presler is nice for p95 but despite 65nm still a power hog

2006-02-10, 17:39	#7
garo Aug 2002 Termonfeckin, IE 101011001011₂ Posts	Thanks for your responses. I'm sure the 920 is still a power hog compared to the 3800+. But it is significantly better than the 8xx series and has souble the L2 cache. Otherwise I would not even be considering an Intel CPU for a general purpose machine Here in Italy the 920 is just becoming available and it is priced at 303 Euros whereas the X2 3800+ is priced over 350. A dual-core at 300 Euros is an attractive offer. But I am willing to pony up the extra 50 if there is a compelling reason to do so. I haven't really seen any benchmarks for the 920 though there are lots comparing the 8xx series and X2 3800+ etc. And I think the X2 3800+ has better overall performance than the 830 which is about the same price. So does a 920 beat the 830 despite being 200MHz slower?

2006-02-10, 19:09	#9
garo Aug 2002 Termonfeckin, IE 3²·307 Posts	Merci beaucoup. Je parle francais.

2006-05-09, 12:45	#10
garo Aug 2002 Termonfeckin, IE 5313₈ Posts	With the latest Intel price cuts, the 920 is now over a 100 $/Euro cheaper than the 3800+. I think that pretty much settles it, no? I am still on the lookout for a good motherboard.

2006-05-11, 03:32	#11
Peter Nelson Oct 2004 23² Posts	Rather than 920, think seriously about going 930. Assuming price drops got factored in you should find there is little if any difference in price. 920 will not be respun with the new stepping whereas the other 9xx will sometime. 920 will likely just disappear, while 950 is on roadmap a long time. 940 may be even better if you can afford the higher price than 930. As for boards, tricky question, ideally 975 based but finding conroe ready ones is very hard (only Intel badaxe 975x board for sure if certain revs). Maybe live with cheaper 965 board when they come onto market soon as those ought to support conroe if you want to upgrade in future.