venice or san diego

[guess2098]

well, if you want to get a 3800+, i think you better buy 2 3000+ V core from different store and keep the better oc one. sell another one on ebay.

3700+ SD core is good too but just a bit hot than 3000+ V core

at the same platform and xp120, 300*9 1.36v, SDcore is around 36~38 idle and Vcore is around 29~32 on idle

[Merlin4458]

why would one v core be different to another v core. please dont tell me there are different types of V core. If so i am completly lost . im jsut getting my head around v and sd cores :s

[oralpain]

Every single chip is different.

There are different stepping and manufacture dates of venice (and every other) core chips and even when those are the same ther are still a multitude of variables. One chip that is identical to another in every single way, except that it was cut from the wafer one cm over, may overclock better or worse. These things are not assembled atom by atom, no two dies will be identical.

[StormPC]

oh my bad then. I always thought san diago was the STRONGER chip, like the winchester over the newcastle, got that one wrong. Venice it is then 3800venice i will go for. These can overclock if i wanted to later on?

The San Diego is the stronger chip overall. Read my first post with the benchmarks.

Anyone with a Venice who wants to post benchmarks for comparison feel free!

Cache matters greatly in some applications (like I said earlier) and not in others.

As far as how much more a 4000+ will overclock than a 3700+ goes, it's the luck of the draw. I've seen some 3700+'s that overclock better than some 4000+'s. They'll ALL do 2400MHz+ without a problem. I've seen an average of about 100MHz difference in my overclocking tests. The 4000+ will often overclock better but not always.

And guess2098 is not correct about the heat. The extra cache causes extra heat but the process variations cause more. I've seen 3000+ Venice chips run hotter than 3700+ San Diegos, especially at high clocks.

[oralpain]

SD cores do produce more heat, but the die has proportionatly more surface area as well. Unless you are using a crap cooler, it would be rare for there to be much of a temperature difference.

[guess2098]

yes SD core is good but the base price is high too
and can't really tell the different if u just "using" it!!

if buy two of 3000+, you have very chance to hit 300*9 or least 300*8
and sold another on ebay or return it

for under $200 u have a good CPU.
and don't even thing to oc over 3G
i have 3 FX55 sd core, the best one i can hit for 1.45v to 3G and never go to 3.1g with up to 1.7v
3G is like the well.
so if a 3000+ can do 300*9
is really good deal already!

[StormPC]

yes SD core is good but the base price is high too
and can't really tell the different if u just "using" it!!

if buy two of 3000+, you have very chance to hit 300*9 or least 300*8
and sold another on ebay or return it

for under $200 u have a good CPU.
and don't even thing to oc over 3G
i have 3 FX55 sd core, the best one i can hit for 1.45v to 3G and never go to 3.1g with up to 1.7v
3G is like the well.
so if a 3000+ can do 300*9
is really good deal already!

First it's too hot and now two expensive? Rubbish!

The 3700+ is an incredible value. The 4000+ is a bit high but not when compared to the FX-55, and the 4000+ 90nm is as good or better than the FX-55 130nm in many ways.

[guess2098]

my FX55 is .09 SD core
the price for 3700+ is just not worth it i believe
all SD core is too hot and too expensive

and if you check the watt that all SD core it use
it is same as 0.13 core which is 89W
and 3000+ max watt is only 67W
http://fab51.com/cpu/guide/opn-64-e.html#s939

i can tell this
3000+ oc 300*9 1.4v v-core
prime 95 CPU max load is 44C max with XP120
FX55 oc 300*9 1.32v SD-core
prime 95 CPU max load is 56C max with XP120

all hardware are same when it tested

[StormPC]

More rubbish.

You must have gotten an exceptional Venice AND a POS San Diego. I told you it's the luck of the draw. The process is everything!

[guess2098]

no no
personal i love SD core better
but just for the price and oc ratio
3000+ is best one

most 3000+ at least can do 300*8 with 1.36v
r you agree with me on this?
v core has lower temp than SD-core
r you agree with me on this too?

[StormPC]

All CPUs with less cache are cheaper. That's why Semprons and Celerons are cheap. Of course they're also slower, in many cases substantially.

[guess2098]

that's right
but however, V-core and SD-core is only around 5~10% difference
with Super Pi 32M 2.7G
V-core is like this
http://home.pchome.com.tw/club/qk472...2/270032m1.PNG
and
SD-core is like this
http://coolaler.nil.com.tw/images/fx57/2702_32M.gif
that's y i think using 3000+ have best oc and price ratio

pictures are coming from
http://www.coolaler.com/ipb/index.php?showtopic=52184

[StormPC]

That's great if all you do is calculate Pi.

So what you're saying is the San Diego is not as good as a Venice? I disagree.

I think I like the Toledo better than both even though they don't overclock quite as well. Can you say 37 minutes per BOINC SETI WU on a single CPU?

[suryad]

From what I have read, the Venice seems to be a great deal...there are subtle enhancements and it is slightly more efficient...

[StormPC]

Venice is great but the 3700+ San Diego is a better deal than a 3800+ Venice, just as the 4400+ is a better deal than a 4200+. The 3000+ Venice is incredible bang for the buck.

[suryad]

Ok ok lets end this debate...go ahead and grab an FX 57 and thats it then everyone is happy and then oclock it to 3 ghz...thats what I would do.