# 754 vs. 939



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 21, 2006)

does a 939 blow away the 754 or is only slightly better?


----------



## Ketxxx (Dec 21, 2006)

939 is faster, not by much mind. Absolutely slaughters a 754 in terms of features and quality overclocking tho.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 21, 2006)

it is pretty even unless you want dual vid cards and dual chnl ram but other than that clock for clock they are even


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 21, 2006)

*......*

one more question is there a difference in the 1600MHz FSB in the 754 to the 2000MHz FSB in the 939


----------



## Ketxxx (Dec 21, 2006)

short answer: no. saying that tho, with the option of 754 or 939, 939 wins every time, its just much more recent, better features, has awesome clocking boards available for the platform and is just the natural choice. hell, a good 939 rig can still keep pace with the best AM2 setups


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 21, 2006)

*............*

so for the future the way to go would be to get a 939....


----------



## Ketxxx (Dec 21, 2006)

it offers more longetivity if you cant stretch to AM2, yeah.


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 21, 2006)

*.............*

i would just go for the AM2 but it doesnt offer a DDR1 option, and requires u to upgrade to DRR2...which sucks!


----------



## Ketxxx (Dec 21, 2006)

DDR2 is actually pretty good  you just have to make sure you dont buy any of the masses of crap DDR2 thats out there.


----------



## tong (Dec 21, 2006)

Ketxxx said:


> 939 is faster, not by much mind. Absolutely slaughters a 754 in terms of features and quality overclocking tho.



Wouldn't agree, the chip sets for 754 weren't great ocers true.  However my old system was a 754 3000 mobile dtr that i had at 2.6 gig on water ( 1.8 stock) and then the 3400+ that went from 2.2 to 2.7 gig on water also.  both of these were on an abit board with a nforce4 chip set (allowed me to use socket 754 with pci-e).  therefore i concluded myself that the chip set made a diff (3000+ dtr hit 2.4 max on a nforce 3 board, the 3400+ did 2.5)

Only main difference with 754 and 939 is the integrated memory controler, 754 is single channel while 939 is dual.  

Between the chips anyways, the boards have more differences.  My 3400+ did superpi just as fast at 2.7 gig as my current opteron165 @ 2.7 gig.  Same thing on everest, something pretty much on all my benches.  Even with my 939 being a dual core and using dual channel.  Only thing is now i can do heavier multi tasking.

If you are going to upgrade to either one here's my opinion:
 If you are going to upgrade again (any part of the system) in the next 8 months or so go socket 754, u can get close to the same performance and save a ton and i mean TON of money.  Plus u don;t have to buy a new psu (most mobo's are 20 pin) and you can still use your same vidcard (agp for most)  therefore getting you the bigger power but not spending much $  I went from a socket A barton core 2.5 gig (250x10) to the mobile dtr 1.8 gig stock and i was impressed, not blown away but was impressed at that time.

Reasons: IF upgrading from an older system the only 2 components you will have to replace are: mobo and processor.  You can easily find a 3400+ 90nm venice (newer stepping for 754) in the forums used for about $40 and a board for that same processor for the same price.

But: 
If you are going to upgrade in 1 to 1.5 years, then take advantage of 939 and dual core.  Going to cost you more money but it will last you that length of time.  My opinion is that AM2 price for performance does not explain the cost.  That shit costs way too much money for the performance increase that you barely see/feel.

754 vs 939 vs AM2  = am2 with a maximum performance increase over the same counterparts in 939 of 10% and i mean maximum, average is 4% or less. (courtesy of anandtech.com and benching they did)
939 single core vs 754 = my opinion, maybe 5% maybe.  Dual core is a diff story obviously, i mean same benches same times almost, but u get the second core to multitask with.


Edit: the system specs in my profile are in fact my 754 specs, haven;t updated them to my 939 yet. so check ito ut.  I still ahve taht setup, in fact it sits in my server at 2.6 on air  handling my 2 tb of dvds archive


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 21, 2006)

*back to 478 vs. 754*

does the L2 cache matter..... the intel has 512KB while the AMD only 256KB


----------



## Ketxxx (Dec 21, 2006)

cache is quite important, allows more important data to remain close. a 512kb cache for an AMD is still quite enough. obviously if you can stretch it though, get a chip with 1mb cache


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 21, 2006)

*...........*

the chip i am looking at is crappier and only has 256KB L2 cache, THE INTEL HAS 512KB (2.6GHz) sould i get that chip or a new mobo for the older 478 socket intel....?


----------



## wazzledoozle (Dec 21, 2006)

stupidbiznitch9 said:


> the chip i am looking at is crappier and only has 256KB L2 cache, THE INTEL HAS 512KB (2.6GHz) sould i get that chip or a new mobo for the older 478 socket intel....?



L2 cache doesnt matter for AMD. The Sempron will smack around whatever 2.6 Ghz intel chip you have now.


----------



## Ketxxx (Dec 21, 2006)

tong said:


> Wouldn't agree, the chip sets for 754 weren't great ocers true.  However my old system was a 754 3000 mobile dtr that i had at 2.6 gig on water ( 1.8 stock) and then the 3400+ that went from 2.2 to 2.7 gig on water also.  both of these were on an abit board with a nforce4 chip set (allowed me to use socket 754 with pci-e).  therefore i concluded myself that the chip set made a diff (3000+ dtr hit 2.4 max on a nforce 3 board, the 3400+ did 2.5)
> 
> Only main difference with 754 and 939 is the integrated memory controler, 754 is single channel while 939 is dual.
> 
> ...




754 makes no practical sence. AGP is all but dead and 754 is dead so any money spent on 754 is a waste of money. Where 939 stuff can be picked up easier, and is much more futureproof. 939 also offers much better platform support and ultimately, any money spent on 939 is money well spent as when another upgrade comes along many parts from the 939 rig will be able to simply and easily ported over.


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 21, 2006)

*.......*

754 isn't dead yet and AGP can still hold its own vs. PCI-e even though that barrier is getting ever bigger


----------



## Ketxxx (Dec 21, 2006)

stupidbiznitch9 said:


> 754 isn't dead yet and AGP can still hold its own vs. PCI-e even though that barrier is getting ever bigger



1. Name the last date a manufacturer released a 754 board... I make my point 
2. You said it, that gap just keeps growing.


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 21, 2006)

*..........*

newegg.com......it has about 50 boards and YES people do still purchase them.......


----------



## Ketxxx (Dec 21, 2006)

thats not answering what i asked tho  i asked for the last date a manufacturer released a new 754 board


----------



## wazzledoozle (Dec 21, 2006)

If the 754 board has PCI-E, than its probably fine future-wise. 939 is just as dead as 754, there is just more variety to the parts already available (dual core, opterons etc.)


----------



## ktr (Dec 21, 2006)

skt 754 will die end of '07.. cpus for 754 is still manufactured by amd. as for 939, this is its last month. 

over all 939 > 754...and due to 939 last weeks of manufacture, it should be cheap now...

as for 939 and agp, that is a very rare and hard  combo. i was lucky to get my current board...to get something of quality 939 w/ agp, ebay is the only choice.


----------



## Ketxxx (Dec 21, 2006)

wazzledoozle said:


> If the 754 board has PCI-E, than its probably fine future-wise. 939 is just as dead as 754, there is just more variety to the parts already available (dual core, opterons etc.)



Thats the point, better choice and options with 939


----------



## bruins004 (Dec 21, 2006)

It would be nice if the prices def. dropped more for 939.


----------



## ktr (Dec 21, 2006)

wazzledoozle said:


> If the 754 board has PCI-E, than its probably fine future-wise. 939 is just as dead as 754, there is just more variety to the parts already available (dual core, opterons etc.)



http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813123257 <<<---SLI and 754

single pcie on 754skt. 
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...&Subcategory=22&description=&Ntk=&srchInDesc=


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 21, 2006)

*.........*

what about AGP.....?
is it dead too?


----------



## ktr (Dec 21, 2006)

stupidbiznitch9 said:


> what about AGP.....?
> is it dead too?



plenty of 754 and agp, but almost none 939 and agp...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813136167


----------



## Ketxxx (Dec 21, 2006)

not quite, but it may as well be.AGP = waste of money really. everybody has to jump to PCI-E sometime.


----------



## bruins004 (Dec 21, 2006)

Also, AGP cards are more expensive as well.


----------



## ktr (Dec 21, 2006)

bruins004 said:


> Also, AGP cards are more expensive as well.



agp is almost a "special order" these days...

but pcie v2 is something also comming...


----------



## JC316 (Dec 22, 2006)

ktr said:


> agp is almost a "special order" these days...
> 
> but pcie v2 is something also comming...



AGP-PCI-E- PCE V2  and the 754-939-AM2, it's all just a tech race, with each one delivering slightly better performance then the last. No real improvments to speak of.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 22, 2006)

Ketxxx said:


> 1. Name the last date a manufacturer released a 754 board... I make my point
> 2. You said it, that gap just keeps growing.



ans tonum 1 AMD uses s754 for mobile chips still and therefore last new board was pretty damn recent


----------



## AshenSugar (Dec 22, 2006)

tong said:


> Wouldn't agree, the chip sets for 754 weren't great ocers true.  However my old system was a 754 3000 mobile dtr that i had at 2.6 gig on water ( 1.8 stock) and then the 3400+ that went from 2.2 to 2.7 gig on water also.  both of these were on an abit board with a nforce4 chip set (allowed me to use socket 754 with pci-e).  therefore i concluded myself that the chip set made a diff (3000+ dtr hit 2.4 max on a nforce 3 board, the 3400+ did 2.5)
> 
> Only main difference with 754 and 939 is the integrated memory controler, 754 is single channel while 939 is dual.



ok first the 3000+ 754 is a 2gz chip(10x multi=good thing) and i got 2.65 on stock air out of my newcastle!!!!!(1.55v) 
the newer venice 754 chips can do 2.7 and up depending on ur cooling and luck, i got my buddys 2 3000+ chips both to 2.99gz ones and e3 the other an e6.




Ketxxx said:


> cache is quite important, allows more important data to remain close. a 512kb cache for an AMD is still quite enough. obviously if you can stretch it though, get a chip with 1mb cache


acctualy with amd 256k is plenty, 128 is a little low,  as long as you got decent ddr with decent clocks/latancy then your perfs still gonna kill inels p4/pd lineup!!!

due to the imc(mem controler on cpu) ram can and is uses like an l3 cache, has about the same latancy to!!!


now as to ddr2, well ket theres a way to get good clocking ddr2, not worrie about brand so much and grab low volt ddr2 with good timings, i have had my 533 ram at 830 at 2.3volts rock stable!!!!
rule of thumb if the rams rated at 1.8-1.9 volts with 4-4-4-12 or lower timings at 533 then its the exect same stuff being sold as ddr2-800 a 2.0-2.1v , they back the latancys out to 5-5-5-15 and volt up and bam it runs at the higher speeds, funniest part, i can edit the spd to make the 533 into the 667 or 800 sticks people spend so much extra on!!!!!

we did some checking with the masses of ddr2 at one of the ships i under the counter for(work without being an employ or paying taxes for those outside the states) we had 4+ versions of some brands, less of others, what we found was that ram rated at XXX clock with 4-4-4-12 timings@1.8-1.9v was the EXECT SAME pcb and chips as the stuff at XXX(higher clock) rated at 5-5-5-15@2.x volts, so all 533 we had would do 800, but all 800 we had wouldnt do 1066, but the 4-4-4-12@1.8-1.95 v rated 800 would do 1066!!!!! this is a huge thing, to overclockers, and anybody who dosnt want to buy uber overpriced ram.

acctualy some of the best overclockers where cheap value ram kits, corsair value ddr1 dosnt overclock for shit, the ddr2 version, well the 533 and 667 kits both did 800+ at 2.1v, get it to 2.3-2.4 and most of the kits did 1066(or close to it) same was true of other value ram kits rated at low latancy at low clocks!!!!  the cheap pqi and gskill stuff clocked almost as well overall tho some kits wherent as clockable(tested multi kits of the same stuff) probbly due to the modules some kits use vs others, some of the pqi kits for example are samsung others inferion other still are hynix or eliptia, (acctualy the last one, if you can find them clock GREAT in my exp)


----------



## AshenSugar (Dec 22, 2006)

pretty much after the x1950pro agp i dont think you will see any new agpcards, but the x1950 pro would last longer then any agp rig you built these days!!!!


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Dec 22, 2006)

isnt the 1950pro the last of the ati/amd agp?


----------



## AshenSugar (Dec 22, 2006)

yes, and nvidia dosnt plan another agp card, they only made the 78/9 cards because ppl spent alot of time bitching at them about it!!!!


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Dec 22, 2006)

so its safe to say that AGP is dead?


----------



## AshenSugar (Dec 22, 2006)

yeah it is !!!!


----------



## ktr (Dec 22, 2006)

AthlonX2 said:


> so its safe to say that AGP is dead?



not really...but if you have a choice, get pci-e

the agp variant of the 1950pro is not a product of ati, but a product created by third party manufactures. I doubt there is going to be NONE agp dx10 cards. i bet there is gonna be a few, but dont suspect to be high end and all...


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Dec 22, 2006)

i have never ran agp myself i went from a Toshiba Satellite lappy to my 7600GT PCIe.....now my uncle has a pc that is running a Nvidia Mx 100 agp card that can barely run the desktop...lol


----------



## AshenSugar (Dec 22, 2006)

get an agp 9550 card, it will run alot better and caust you very little

agp is dead, they wont make more agp boards, the cards they make will be uber low end at best, its time to admit defeet and accept that agp died b4 its time but is quite dead!!!


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 22, 2006)

decided to go with the 754 mobo and proc combo, hope that i am not dissapointed, it arrives next week


----------



## blacktruckryder (Dec 22, 2006)

I don't think you will be disappointed. 

I went from an Asus socket 754 Nforce 3 mobo and an Athlon 2800+ @ 2.4 to an Epox socket 939 mobo and an Athlon 3200+ @ 2.6. I could hardly tell a difference between the those two setups.


----------



## Mussels (Dec 22, 2006)

I cant be arsed reading this entire thread, but i want to correct a few things...

754 does come in PCI-E. They use the Nforce-4 chipset.

939 vs. 754 only differs in two ways. 939 can have SLI/crossfire, and 939 has dual channel ram (so yeah, ram is faster)

I have two 754 systems with sempron 64's (256k cache) and X1600PRO cards, and they are awesome budget gaming systems. I also have sold quite a few recently with A64 3000+ (512k cache, its a new chip) and X1650's.... and they're damn fast as the 3000+ is a 2GHz chip, the same as a 939 3200+.

939 is quite dead, as no new boards or CPU's are made for it, 754 is going to outlive it because of the mobile/budget market.

Oh and P.S: one of my 2800+ systems does 275 FSB, the other does 310. a 1.6GHz CPU upto 2.4GHz stock volts on stock cooler.... let me tell you, its freaking awesome


----------



## wazzledoozle (Dec 22, 2006)

Yeah semprons can be amazing overclockers, I used to run a Sempy 64 2600 @ 2.4 GHz, 50% clock increase (from stock 1.6). If only I could have raised the multi...


----------



## Tatty_One (Dec 22, 2006)

tong said:


> Wouldn't agree, the chip sets for 754 weren't great ocers true.  However my old system was a 754 3000 mobile dtr that i had at 2.6 gig on water ( 1.8 stock) and then the 3400+ that went from 2.2 to 2.7 gig on water also.  both of these were on an abit board with a nforce4 chip set (allowed me to use socket 754 with pci-e).  therefore i concluded myself that the chip set made a diff (3000+ dtr hit 2.4 max on a nforce 3 board, the 3400+ did 2.5)
> 
> Only main difference with 754 and 939 is the integrated memory controler, 754 is single channel while 939 is dual.
> 
> ...



You have some good and valid points there, however some of your logic does not make sense at all, you say they can get close to the same performance?  Whats the fastest available cpu for socket 754?  then compare it with what you have on offer for S939, lets not even go dual core here, what you got on socket 754 that will do 3.25Gig on just average air cooling for the £69 i paid for this 4000+, as far as I see it, the point is not if a 754 can match a 939 in speed board for board, it's morre about how much speed is available to your system with each of the boards, with s754 you have limited CPU availability and generally slower models and also because of that VERY rewstricted cheap future upgrade paths, with s939 he could get a 4000+ today and upgrade next year to an opteron 185 dual core which will run as fast as an FX60.


As for price and AGP, the Asrock Dual sata 2 which is both AGP and PCI-E is an excellent budget mainboard and with a simple voltmod would give 1.55V on the core, thats enuff to get me to 3.25Gig, couple that with a 4000+ bargain at £69 and you show me a decent s754 mobo and chip that will get close.


----------



## mikek75 (Dec 22, 2006)

My Opty 165 has been doing dual prime for 3 hours at FX60 speed (2.6ghz) no problem, and cost me £100. s939 may be obselete, but anything you buy these days is after a few months.


----------



## Tatty_One (Dec 22, 2006)

mikek75 said:


> My Opty 165 has been doing dual prime for 3 hours at FX60 speed (2.6ghz) no problem, and cost me £100. s939 may be obselete, but anything you buy these days is after a few months.




I know and agree but the 185 runs at those speeds at stock and is much cheaper than the FX60, well it is here anyways.


----------



## mikek75 (Dec 22, 2006)

Just out of interest, how much is the 185 then? (shameless hijack, soz!)


----------



## WarEagleAU (Dec 22, 2006)

Some folks say AGP is dead. Yet, I still see Nvidia and ATI making decent mid to mid high cards for the socket (7950GT AGP and Radeon 1950 Pro) So in my opinion, no its not dead, just more folks concentrating on PCIe than AGP.

939 is better than 754 in most instances. The performance delta is like 7% so its not huge. I knoew 939 is fixing to end its EOL of being Manufactured but 754 already has from what Ive seen (read I believe) If you want to stay AMD, got skt 939 and get an Athlon x2 3800=. Great overclockability and great for anything you need, including gaming. Also, as was stated, L2 cache doesnt really matter in an AMD, the memory controller is integrated, whereas Intel still has to saturate the FSB and such with data. When the FSB is saturated, I think the cache comes into play, or vice versa. Either way, it doesnt matter. If you get 1mb l2 cache on an AMD, thats good, if not, then 512k is the norm and doesnt hurt performance one bit. Someone on here actually posted in a thread with the cache doesnt hurt, but helps.

-The Eagle


----------



## Tatty_One (Dec 23, 2006)

mikek75 said:


> Just out of interest, how much is the 185 then? (shameless hijack, soz!)



Cheapest I have found is £200 for the 180, £320 for the 185, cheapest FX60 I can find is £460.  Pricey if you live in the USA because of the strong £ exchange rate but the 180 even looks a good buy, it stocks at 2.4 and is capable of 3.2 on air supposidly for not much more than the 4800 which usually maxes at 2.9 on air.


----------



## mikek75 (Dec 23, 2006)

Ouch, thats a lot of money, think I'll stick with my 165 for £100 @2.6ghz (so far!) which looks like more and more of a bargain every day!


----------



## cdawall (Dec 23, 2006)

hey they sell 4000+ on s754 they are mobile varients and a tuned down sandy core (no dual chnl) so this arguement on how s754 offers no highend chips is BS plus you can even get dual core turion mobile chips work on certain s754 setups as long as you get the ddr1 version


----------



## Tatty_One (Dec 23, 2006)

cdawall said:


> hey they sell 4000+ on s754 they are mobile varients and a tuned down sandy core (no dual chnl) so this arguement on how s754 offers no highend chips is BS plus you can even get dual core turion mobile chips work on certain s754 setups as long as you get the ddr1 version



It aint bullshit, I read a review on those 4000+ and they barely make 2.8Gig  (probably cause they are tuned down)so again its well behind and where are all these FX60's and other dual cores then?  I didnt say the offered NO highend chips....read again, I said they offered a lot less choice and generally lower rated chips and in fact....., if you want to count up how many mainstream socket 754 chips there are and then count up all the 939's, and then dual cores, and then Opterons etc etc I think you will find my "opinion" fairly accurate.

On the 4000+ for socket 754, see how many retailers have them in stock for sale and compare that with the same for s939 4000+ as I mentioned availabiity also!


----------



## cdawall (Dec 23, 2006)

true but s754 isnt bad its is just not used as much  i mean hell an extra 200mhz a chip and for the same price as you can get a sempron set up on s939 or sAM2 you can get a solid Athlon setup on s754


----------



## AshenSugar (Dec 23, 2006)

the neward 4000+ will work on most 754 boards with bios that support venice, and the dual core turions do work in boards with updated bios in most cases as well, tho many of them do volt up the turion(no a problem if ur gonna oc it  )

and yes u can get 754 SLI, check newegg and pricewatch, i have setup 4 systems with sli, none with crossfire tho, there was only 1 754 crossfire board i ever saw and it used the old 480southbrige also was over priceed!!!


----------



## cdawall (Dec 23, 2006)

you can soft mod the sli setups to do crossfire if it had the ULI southbridge


----------



## Tatty_One (Dec 23, 2006)

Well Ok, did I ever say socket 754 was bad? No and I also didnt even mention SLi!!!  My opinion was that S939 would be a better option is all and I still beleive it would, do you think socket 754 is a better option then?  I doubt whether in a year you will be even able to find s754 CPU's in retail outlets TBH.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 23, 2006)

ha micro center still has socket A chips hell they are running a sale on them right now antyone want a duron 1800 or XPm 2800 $50 and $80 respectably oh and they come with mobos and fans to so i doubt that s754 shit will runout anytime soon


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 24, 2006)

what does ne one think of a geforce 6600gt as a video card??


----------



## AshenSugar (Dec 24, 2006)

for the price the x1300xt/x1600 or an x800/850 gto or xt is a better buy!!!


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 24, 2006)

well im getting it for free so.....


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 24, 2006)

besides that if i were to buy a GPU..then a x1600pro would mop the floor with tha 6600gt?


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 24, 2006)

check this sick x1600pro i found and for only $90

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814161001


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 24, 2006)

what about that vs. the 7600???? (roughly the same price)


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Dec 24, 2006)

calm down dude.......you have made 4 or 5 consecutive posts...it may be easier to just edit your old ones?


----------



## DOM (Dec 24, 2006)

i was going to say the samething, look at his post avg maybe thats why


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Dec 24, 2006)

we cant let this kinda stuff get outta hand,because then every thread will be spammed to h*ll...:shadedshu


----------



## Random Murderer (Dec 24, 2006)

stupidbiznitch9 said:


> what about that vs. the 7600???? (roughly the same price)



meh, you could get a x800/x850 for that price, and the 800/850 will mop the floor with both of those cards....


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 24, 2006)

k thnx, srry bout the double posting, but i got more of a responce on the video card portion when i realized there was one, lol


----------



## Mussels (Dec 24, 2006)

Tatty_One said:


> Well Ok, did I ever say socket 754 was bad? No and I also didnt even mention SLi!!!  My opinion was that S939 would be a better option is all and I still beleive it would, do you think socket 754 is a better option then?  I doubt whether in a year you will be even able to find s754 CPU's in retail outlets TBH.



I'm a PC builder/seller (a pro, not a DIY) and i cant even get 939 from my suppliers anymore. 754 will outlive 939 by a year, check AMD's roadmap. 754 are the budget/old mobile market, and will stay so until the end of this year (when it will swap to AM2/AM3) - AMD are keeping two sockets on the market at the same time, and it seems 939 isnt well liked.


----------



## Tatty_One (Dec 24, 2006)

Mussels said:


> I'm a PC builder/seller (a pro, not a DIY) and i cant even get 939 from my suppliers anymore. 754 will outlive 939 by a year, check AMD's roadmap. 754 are the budget/old mobile market, and will stay so until the end of this year (when it will swap to AM2/AM3) - AMD are keeping two sockets on the market at the same time, and it seems 939 isnt well liked.



OK, cant argue with that but in the UK, my main 3 or 4 e tailers have a big variety of s939 CPU's and little or nothing s754 so perhaps things are just different here, most of them will have 1 or 2 754's and 8 or 10 939 chips.


----------



## mikek75 (Dec 24, 2006)

Yeah, Komplett has 100 3700Sandiegos, 30 Opty 165 and 9 3200's so no shortage in Blighty, all s939. They onle show sempron 2600's and says Stocked at supplier


----------



## cdawall (Dec 26, 2006)

AthlonX2 said:


> calm down dude.......you have made 4 or 5 consecutive posts...it may be easier to just edit your old ones?



hey thats the same thing i told you when you first joined


----------



## candle_86 (Dec 28, 2006)

Just a few things 754 is not dead actully, AMD and board partners are still making parts for these boards. 754 Sempron will end Production Q3 07, so its not dead, Athlon64 754 and 939 ended production in July 2006, and X2 ended production in August 06. Opterons will end production on the 31st of this month for 939, so 939 is dead, its gone the way of 462 and will be out lived by 754. The enthusiats will have to move to AM2 by next summer or to 775 and there isnt really a choice, 939 chips are ceasing prodution 100% at the end of this month and they will become rare and hard to find CPUs.


----------



## stupidbiznitch9 (Dec 28, 2006)

i got my 754 up and running, its crazy and it blows the pants off of my 3.0 HT pentium 4 proc, unfortunately tho, my 3.0 can handle more programs running at one time, while my 754seems to freeze up a little.....


----------



## Tatty_One (Dec 29, 2006)

candle_86 said:


> Just a few things 754 is not dead actully, AMD and board partners are still making parts for these boards. 754 Sempron will end Production Q3 07, so its not dead, Athlon64 754 and 939 ended production in July 2006, and X2 ended production in August 06. Opterons will end production on the 31st of this month for 939, so 939 is dead, its gone the way of 462 and will be out lived by 754. The enthusiats will have to move to AM2 by next summer or to 775 and there isnt really a choice, 939 chips are ceasing prodution 100% at the end of this month and they will become rare and hard to find CPUs.



Noone is doubting that, all I said, contrary to these facts is that S939 CPU's in the UK are much more readily available and with a much wider choice, it may well be that in a few months time it will be the opposite but if upgrading today there is a wider choice of more powerful chips available in 939, inclucing especially dual cores!


----------



## peach1971 (Dec 29, 2006)

Here´s some more food for the war:  
http://www.frazpc.pl/artykuly/358/SOCKET/754/vs/939/Niskobudzetowy/pojedynek/plyt/A64

They compared a MSI K8T-FSR Neo (754) to a MSI K8T Neo2-F (939).


----------



## xman2007 (Dec 29, 2006)

bruins004 said:


> It would be nice if the prices def. dropped more for 939.



prices arent that dear imo for 939?  mobos = dirt cheap, cpu's= dirt cheap and the rest is the same as the 754, memory agp/pci-e etc ? the only reason 754 maybe cheaper is that its discontinued now, there not making any more cpu's or mainboards for 754? no? 

imo 939 will be here longer and has more upgrade options than 754 so its the only logical choice, 754 was amd's first 64bit platform and was good i can say that but 939 has moved on from 754 and thats not that 754 wasnt as good as 939 it was on the earlier cpu's ie: 2800-3400+ /3700+ etc but then came dual core and A64 3800+ and thats where 754 lost the ball, not due to the fact it couldnt compete, it was locked out of the market deliberatly by AMD (fact!! as 939 was there new baby)  and since then 939 has seen more innovation, features, and performance as im sure am2 will/does over 939  

scuse my rantings 1.5 bottles of wine so far but hopefully you get my point  


e6300 here i come


----------



## cdawall (Dec 29, 2006)

xman2007 said:


> prices arent that dear imo for 939?  mobos = dirt cheap, cpu's= dirt cheap and the rest is the same as the 754, memory agp/pci-e etc ? the only reason 754 maybe cheaper is that its discontinued now, there not making any more cpu's or mainboards for 754? no?
> 
> imo 939 will be here longer and has more upgrade options than 754 so its the only logical choice, 754 was amd's first 64bit platform and was good i can say that but 939 has moved on from 754 and thats not that 754 wasnt as good as 939 it was on the earlier cpu's ie: 2800-3400+ /3700+ etc but then came dual core and A64 3800+ and thats where 754 lost the ball, not due to the fact it couldnt compete, it was locked out of the market deliberatly by AMD (fact!! as 939 was there new baby)  and since then 939 has seen more innovation, features, and performance as im sure am2 will/does over 939
> 
> ...



they will still be making s754 until Q3 of NEXT YEAR s939 dies after the 31st buddy and looking at that performance review 939 won in the mem intensive and that was s754 did better on games, cpu intensive etc.


----------



## xman2007 (Dec 29, 2006)

peach1971 said:


> Here´s some more food for the war:
> http://www.frazpc.pl/artykuly/358/SOCKET/754/vs/939/Niskobudzetowy/pojedynek/plyt/A64
> 
> They compared a MSI K8T-FSR Neo (754) to a MSI K8T Neo2-F (939).



yet another example of lower end cpu's being benchmarked as comparison, of course 754 is going to compete with 939 on a A64 3000+ but truth be told most people are using or intending to upgrade to more than a meagre athlon64 3000+ cause that is a low-end budget chip now (kinda like the athlon xp 220 when the 3200+ was daddy  that brings back memories... anyway) and thats where 754 cant compete in the higher cpu models, why ? is it because 754 wasnt good enough ? no not at all its because higher end cpu's havent been brought out for 754 and as i said before thats down to amd themselves, they chose to discontinue 754 maybe it would have been a good contender if there where dual core/amd fx cpu's for 754 but there isnt. 754 is a dying/dead breed


----------



## xman2007 (Dec 29, 2006)

cdawall said:


> they will still be making s754 until Q3 of NEXT YEAR s939 dies after the 31st buddy and looking at that performance review 939 won in the mem intensive and that was s754 did better on games, cpu intensive etc.



still making 754 ? enlighten me

how old is the cpu it was benchmarked on ? wheres today's real benchmarks ? a top o the line 754 cant compete with top o the line 939 and if you cant understand that maybe ur hardware is blinding you  n your 754 system 


deja vu didnt we have this conversation already ?


----------



## cdawall (Dec 29, 2006)

xman2007 said:


> yet another example of lower end cpu's being benchmarked as comparison, of course 754 is going to compete with 939 on a A64 3000+ but truth be told most people are using or intending to upgrade to more than a meagre athlon64 3000+ cause that is a low-end budget chip now (kinda like the athlon xp 220 when the 3200+ was daddy  that brings back memories... anyway) and thats where 754 cant compete in the higher cpu models, why ? is it because 754 wasnt good enough ? no not at all its because higher end cpu's havent been brought out for 754 and as i said before thats down to amd themselves, they chose to discontinue 754 maybe it would have been a good contender if there where dual core/amd fx cpu's for 754 but there isnt. 754 is a dying/dead breed



your starting to piss me off go run sandra and pcmark check the cpu scores against mine both will be run @ 2.4ghz and we will see which is better, yes i know there will be variations do to diff ram diff videocards etc. but if mine wins will you just SHUT UP 

and go run a turion 64 2ghz dual core against the 3800x2 see which wins and run a a64m 4000 against an fx55 there you go high end chips MATCHED for comparo


----------



## cdawall (Dec 29, 2006)

here is sandra XI for the tests http://www.sisoftware.net/index.html?dir=dload&location=sware_dl_3264&langx=en&a=
and here is PCMARK05
http://www.futuremark.com/download/pcmark05/


----------



## xman2007 (Dec 29, 2006)

cdawall said:


> they will still be making s754 (semprons  ) until Q3 of NEXT YEAR


----------



## Tatty_One (Dec 29, 2006)

Thats a crap test and VERY misleading....for a start, the Socket 754 Athlon 3000+ stocks at 2Gig and the socket 939 3000+ stocks at 1.8Gig!!!!  how can that be a fair test, of course its gonna win all but the memory test (Socket 939 = Dual channel), thats not about the board/socket speed its about the processor speed.

Here is the specs from AMD's site.....  you can compare the 2:

http://www.amdcompare.com/us-en/desktop/Default.aspx


----------



## xman2007 (Dec 29, 2006)

cdawall said:


> here is sandra XI for the tests http://www.sisoftware.net/index.html?dir=dload&location=sware_dl_3264&langx=en&a=
> and here is PCMARK05
> http://www.futuremark.com/download/pcmark05/



what cpu are they using ? a 3 year old 3000+ again im not even gonna entertain you and look at your links cause thats all the benchies you throw up, a a64 3000+ 754 at the height of its reign whoopdidoooo, we now have dual core (soon to be quad core) and fx cpu's were not living 3-4 years ago and where is your precious 754 cpu's today?. infact i admit defeat i admit that a 3-4 year old 754 system would kick a 3 yr old 939 system all over the park.


any recent benchmarks ? no didnt think so


----------



## cdawall (Dec 29, 2006)

Tatty_One said:


> Thats a crap test and VERY misleading....for a start, the Socket 754 Athlon 3000+ stocks at 2Gig and the socket 939 3000+ stocks at 1.8Gig!!!!  how can that be a fair test, of course its gonna win all but the memory test (Socket 939 = Dual channel), thats not about the board/socket speed its about the processor speed.
> 
> Here is the specs from AMD's site.....  you can compare the 2:
> 
> http://www.amdcompare.com/us-en/desktop/Default.aspx



im trying to remove that me an xman2007 can run ours at 2.4ghz which is the same oc on the 2 chips the only diff will be in the ram


----------



## xman2007 (Dec 29, 2006)

cdawall said:


> im trying to remove that me an xman2007 can run ours at 2.4ghz which is the same oc on the 2 chips the only diff will be in the ram



he's benching a 754 system from 3 years ago to a 939 system 3 years ago, i want some MODERN day bench's, whats that i hear you say ? there are none ? whys that ? because there are no 754' systems that can keep up with a 939 system today


why are you fighting me lol, 939 is better here and now, right or wrong ? kk 754 might have been a contender 2 years ago but its not and cant ever be FACT.

just as some n00b will be having the same conversation with me in a year or so about am2/socket f over 939. ill prolly defend my 939 but i know in a year or so it wont be able to compete with the next "big thing" from amd.

p.s did i just call me a n00b ?


----------



## Tatty_One (Dec 29, 2006)

cdawall said:


> im trying to remove that me an xman2007 can run ours at 2.4ghz which is the same oc on the 2 chips the only diff will be in the ram



Fair one, am not denying either or in your little combat session, just making the point that the test above would appear to be flawed from what I can see.

I understand your point CD but you didnt need to tell him to "shut up" because you were actually proving your point and didnt need to get unpleasant with him albeit we can all get a bit frustrated   I think his point is that even if chip for chip the S754 wins which it may well do, the choice and higher end chips generally are tied to s939.

There, could I get a job with the diplomatic service?


----------



## cdawall (Dec 29, 2006)

Tatty_One said:


> Fair one, am not denying either or in your little combat session, just making the point that the test above would appear to be flawed from what I can see.
> 
> I understand your point CD but you didnt need to tell him to "shut up" because you were actually proving your point and didnt need to get unpleasant with him albeit we can all get a bit frustrated   I think his point is that even if chip for chip the S754 wins which it may well do, the choice and higher end chips generally are tied to s939.
> 
> There, could I get a job with the diplomatic service?


way to put it and your right s939 offers more choices no arguement there but honestly clock for clock they are even and thats what i want to prove and if pcmark05 and sandra XI are not recent enough for him i want him to find something recent enough cause those are someof the NEWEST benchies out there

and the 2 chips are clocked the same in all mean i SHOULD LOSE the test his chip is newer 90nm vs my older 130nm NewCastle there is no reason he shouldnt win every part on his list is better than mine


----------



## cdawall (Dec 29, 2006)

oh and here are my sandra XI scores






and this is all the info on my chip oc etc.


----------



## xman2007 (Dec 29, 2006)

heres mine although havent posted cpuz but can do it again with cpuz if you like

edit: dont know what these mean though


----------



## cdawall (Dec 29, 2006)

xman2007 said:


> heres mine although havent posted cpuz but can do it again with cpuz if you like
> 
> edit: dont know what these mean though



was that with your cpu at 2.4ghz? ha nvm your dual core wins hands down way to go

oh and here is my cpu score in PCMARK05


----------



## xman2007 (Dec 29, 2006)

cdawall said:


> was that with your cpu at 2.4ghz?
> 
> oh and here is my cpu score in PCMARK05



yeah 2.4ghz cpu  ram at 220mhz thru systool (set to 180fsb before oc)  ill run pcmark if you like ?


----------



## cdawall (Dec 29, 2006)

xman2007 said:


> yeah 2.4ghz cpu  ram at 220mhz thru systool (set to 180fsb before oc)  ill run pcmark if you like ?



nah its cool i just realized yours was dual core do you have nbench?


----------



## xman2007 (Dec 29, 2006)

cdawall said:


> nah its cool i just realized yours was dual core do you have nbench?



just about to dl pcmark 95 lol which one you want that or nbench? 

oh btw even tho mines dual core i still scored MORE than double your points and apparently dual core it as good as single core :shadedshu


----------



## cdawall (Dec 29, 2006)

xman2007 said:


> just about to dl pcmark 95 lol which one you want that or nbench?
> 
> oh btw even tho mines dual core i still scored MORE than double your points



better ram and dual core  use nbench it doesnt care about dual core or ram i think oh and the 4th link on the majorgeeks page is the fastest


----------



## xman2007 (Dec 30, 2006)

cdawall said:


> better ram and dual core  use nbench it doesnt care about dual core or ram i think oh and the 4th link on the majorgeeks page is the fastest



france link ? yea figured that :shadedshu


----------



## xman2007 (Dec 30, 2006)

cdawall said:


> better ram and dual core  use nbench it doesnt care about dual core or ram i think oh and the 4th link on the majorgeeks page is the fastest



still on sandra i scored more than twice yours which more than makes up for the dc


----------



## erocker (Dec 30, 2006)

I run a s754 Athlon 64 3400 venice core that runs @ 2.4 stock.  I have it running at 2.6 w/ 2g ddr 400, and it runs just as fast as my friends s939 Athlon X2 4000.  We both have the same video card.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 30, 2006)

here is my nbench


----------



## xman2007 (Dec 30, 2006)

my scores, clock for clock, apparently nbench doesnt care for dual core or better mem as you said.
but 3dmark 05/06/sandra pcmark all seem to disagree.  but still scored 2702 so not too bad although all other benchies would rate me higher


----------



## Tatty_One (Dec 30, 2006)

Lol, try the SuperPi 1M test, that is not biased either way, just both run at 2.4....its raw speed.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 30, 2006)

it is mem biased he has ddr400 dual channel me ddr2100 single


----------



## cdawall (Dec 30, 2006)

39sec anyway
http://forums.techpowerup.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3412&d=1155940421


----------



## xman2007 (Dec 30, 2006)

cdawall said:


> 39sec anyway
> http://forums.techpowerup.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3412&d=1155940421



36 1 instance, thats crap tbh goddam e6300/e6600 users at 3.9ghz make me sick  (and a lot envious)

btw tell the truth thats not a bad oc on ur 754 setup cdawall lol  goddam puters, who needs um anyway :shadedshu


----------



## xman2007 (Dec 30, 2006)

pi


----------



## cdawall (Dec 30, 2006)

xman2007 said:


> 36 1 instance, thats crap tbh goddam e6300/e6600 users at 3.9ghz make me sick  (and a lot envious)
> 
> btw tell the truth thats not a bad oc on ur 754 setup cdawall lol  goddam puters, who needs um anyway :shadedshu



lol thanx the stepping has been taken up to 2.9ghz but that was chilled (plus i cant seem to get this damn thing to excede 2.45ghz even @ 1.75V it is pissing me off it wont even post @ 2.46ghz)


----------

