| LinHES Forums http://forums.linhes.org/ |
|
| AMD 3800+ 35 Watt Processor $59.99 http://forums.linhes.org/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=17230 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | TVBox [ Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | AMD 3800+ 35 Watt Processor $59.99 |
New Egg has AMD 3800+ Socket AM2 Dual-Core 35 Watt Processor for $59.99 and free shipping. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103066 Model ADD3800IAA5CU The last one of these I watched on Ebay went for $170.00 just for reference 3800 AM2 came in many model numbers. The vast majority where 65 and 89 watt processors ADA3800-----62 or 89 watts ADO3800-----65 watts ADH3800-----45 watts ADD3800-----35watts Every watt you don't produce is one that you don't have to provide cooling for. 50% less cooling = a drastic noise drop. This is by far the easiest way to quiet a machine and have that green feeling for a day. TVBox |
|
| Author: | Liv2Cod [ Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Indeed, a good price. Note that it does not come with a fan, tho. Oddly enough, that processor is only sold as "OEM" on the NewEgg website. |
|
| Author: | grante [ Mon Nov 12, 2007 9:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AMD 3800+ 35 Watt Processor $59.99 |
TVBox wrote: New Egg has AMD 3800+ Socket AM2 Dual-Core 35 Watt Processor
for $59.99 and free shipping. Damn. A few weeks ago I wanted one of those but you couldn't find them anywhere. I settled for a 45W version of the faster BE2400 (2.3GHz vs. the 2GHz 3800+). It came with a heatsink/fan, but I'm probably going to replace those anyway (the fan is a bit too noisy). |
|
| Author: | finger51 [ Tue Nov 13, 2007 2:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AMD 3800+ 35 Watt Processor $59.99 |
How's that 3800 going to do on HD playback? I had a 3700 that didn't really cut it. It could playback if nothing else was going on (recording or commflag) but it was usually pretty choppy. Might be ok for a BE machine. the clock on standard def is running out. We already see Hi-Def commercials with full surround sound! I have always believed in building big to go long. |
|
| Author: | cecil [ Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'd think a 3800+ dual core should handle HD w/o issue. |
|
| Author: | novellahub [ Tue Nov 13, 2007 5:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have a AMD Opteron 165 and it is essentially rated at about a 3600+ dual core. Handles high def with no issues. |
|
| Author: | TVBox [ Wed Nov 14, 2007 1:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | AMD 3800+EE |
A little history here. There was a change made in ether Myttv 18 or 19 that seem to bring the commercial flagging problem to light that never existed previous to that. All of this time from R4V5 until today R5F27 I have run the same hardware a AMD 3200 . I think the commercial flagging problem started after R5A22, around the end of 2005. I have been lucky to be in a area of the country where all of the OTA channels went HD very early and have never used a analog card. With R5A22 and earlier I could simultaneously record 3 HD channels, commercial detect, and watch a HD show all at the same time without any problems. After that point I gave up on commercial detect. With the new release of R5F27 I tried it again with still no luck until I made this change in Mythtv. http://mysettopbox.tv/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=16990 Now everything works like it did two years ago. I now have commercial detect start when it starts recording a show and I run about a 98% CPU utilization all night during prime time with no problem. It doesn't seem to require high horse power to reduce your file size by 30%, if you cut the commercials and use lossless transcoding . I just transcoded House, it went from 5.4 GB to 3.7 GB and took 8 minutes with nothing running. The way it sits now I am happy with my machines performance but the 754 processors all consume about 90 watts which gives me a system consumption of 126 watts idle and 146 watts under full load. I have a 35 watt chip for a new build with the hopes to cut my consumption in half or more. For a dose of reality here if I left my 754 machine on 24 hours a day it would use 1200 KWH a year and at my current utility pricing that would be $113 a year without air conditioning (+25%) cost figured in. Also these numbers are calculated with the lowest KHW charges found in the US. Most of you guys can double these figures. To think some of you out there complained about the $20 Schedules Direct. I think the 3800+EE should make a great build, I will post when I get the numbers. TVBox |
|
| Author: | marc.aronson [ Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
What motherboard are people thinking of using for this chip? Marc |
|
| Author: | finger51 [ Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
cecil wrote: I'd think a 3800+ dual core should handle HD w/o issue.
ah! the dual core portion of the show went right over my head. duh. As Foghorn Leghorn might say "Your built too low son!" |
|
| Author: | novellahub [ Thu Nov 15, 2007 5:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
marc.aronson wrote: What motherboard are people thinking of using for this chip?
Marc I am going to pick up one of these processors and use a Biostar Tforce 550 SE board. It has 4 PCI slots with plenty of expansion. http://www.directron.com/tforce550.html |
|
| Author: | marc.aronson [ Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: I am going to pick up one of these processors and use a Biostar Tforce 550 SE board. It has 4 PCI slots with plenty of expansion.
Looks interesting. I notice it doesn't have on-board video. My understanding is on-board video is more energy efficient than using a separate card -- does anyone know if this is true? Marc |
|
| Author: | TVBox [ Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
From what I have read a 3800+ dual core is nothing more that two 1900 cpu's together on the same piece of silicon. Also the sharing mechanism may make them slower than a single core of the same type on single loads. Here is one of AMD's statements. AMD will use the two cores to run multiple tasks at once. The key word is multiple. The only reason they make dual cores are the frequency limitations of the silicon chip. The difference between 400 DDR and 800 DDR2 is that you have two chips of silicon in parallel. Over clockers know this, up the voltage you can up the frequency. The only problem is that when you up the voltage the power consumption goes up dispositional and efficiency goes down. ADA3800-----89 watts ---- 1.35-1.40 V ADO3800-----65 watts ---- 1.20/1.25 V ADH3800-----45 watts ---- 1.25-1.40 V ADD3800-----35watts ---- 1.025/1.075 V If all you where doing was transcoding that single core 3700 probably would be faster. I am going to try the Biostar TFORCE 7050-M2. It looks like they got most of the bug worked out of the bios now and there is at least one person on this list that is running it successfully. I might have to get a HDHomerun to makup for the lack of PCI's. |
|
| Author: | novellahub [ Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:23 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
marc.aronson wrote: Quote: I am going to pick up one of these processors and use a Biostar Tforce 550 SE board. It has 4 PCI slots with plenty of expansion. Looks interesting. I notice it doesn't have on-board video. My understanding is on-board video is more energy efficient than using a separate card -- does anyone know if this is true? Marc I am not sure but I will not be using a high end video card. Gigabyte has some nice passive cooled video cards. Here is the one I will be using again: http://www.gigabyte-usa.com/Products/VG ... uctID=2551 I am using this one in my current Knoppmyth box. |
|
| Author: | novellahub [ Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I was looking at a Power consumption chart on Wikipedia for the Geforce 7 series cards and I found that the Geforce 7300 / 7200 series of cards uses 8.7 to 10 Watts of power. It also state that the performance of the 7200 GS cards are 50% greater than onboard video. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_7_ ... ce_7200_GS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_7_ ... e_7800_GTX |
|
| Author: | marc.aronson [ Thu Nov 15, 2007 9:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
TVBox wrote: From what I have read a 3800+ dual core is nothing more that two 1900 cpu's together on the same piece of silicon. Also the sharing mechanism may make them slower than a single core of the same type on single loads.
If all you where doing was transcoding that single core 3700 probably would be faster. I am not as familiar with AMD, but my intel 3ghz dual core has two 3 ghz cores, not two 1.5 ghz cores. I would be interested in reading more on the AMD line -- can you point me to the article / material that explains the an AMD 3800+ is actually 2 1900+ cores? I find multi-core very beneficial for my box, as I frequently have multiple tasks running concurrently. It is especially helpful when running CPU-intensive jobs concurrently with doing hidef playback. Marc |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 6 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|