basically im torn between a 3700 SD and a 3800 venice, venice is more, but if its worth it i wll get it.
Veiws please
basically im torn between a 3700 SD and a 3800 venice, venice is more, but if its worth it i wll get it.
Veiws please
Rig: Amd 64 3700+ San Diego | Abit AT8 | 4x512 Corsair XMS3200C2PRO | PowerColour X850XTPE / Arctic Cooled | Samsung Spinpoint 250Gig | Enermax NoiseTake 485w | Arctic Freezer 64 Pro | Coolermaster Wavemaster Silver | Dell 2405FPW | Logitech G5 / Everglide Destrukt Monstermat |
id go for the sd as you will be able to clock it to 3800+ speed pretty easily (most likely) performance wise the 3800+ is a little better in games, the 3700+ slightly better in other stuff (AFAIK)
3700+ is faster and will llikely overclock just as well.
I always go for L2 cache as it does make a difference. For instance on an old rig with 3200+ C0 Clawhammer (@ 2.1) and an X800 Pro ViVo -> XT PE I got 25k odd. With a Newqy 3000+ @ 2.5GHz I was getting 24k odd.
In games it was smoother with the extra cache and helps video and dvd encoding.
.: Predator :.
- Shuttle SN25P - A64 3700+ San Diego @ 2.7GHz - 1GB PQI Ultra DDR - X850XT - Asus DVD-ROM - 200GB Maxtor + 2*80GB SATAII -
If the speeds were set in stone, I would take the 200 extra MHz, but as has already been said the 3700+ could very well endup running at identical MHz, and it's cheaper, with more cache.
Yes it should be noted that not everyone overclocks, although in these forums it is expected.
is it frowned upon if u dont storm , although im very interested in it, would love to try it with some guidance. Just dont wannablow up a 250 quid cpu
Rig: Amd 64 3700+ San Diego | Abit AT8 | 4x512 Corsair XMS3200C2PRO | PowerColour X850XTPE / Arctic Cooled | Samsung Spinpoint 250Gig | Enermax NoiseTake 485w | Arctic Freezer 64 Pro | Coolermaster Wavemaster Silver | Dell 2405FPW | Logitech G5 / Everglide Destrukt Monstermat |
Hardware doesn't fail from overclocking alone unless it is faulty. You do have to exercise caution though if you don't like BIOS flashing and OS reinstalls.
It's not frowned upon but this IS the Hardware AND Overclocking section, not Hardware OR Overclocking, so it should be understood when people often give answers with this in mind.
yeh i know m8, just messing with ya. I think i will give it a go though, with a little help from hexus
Rig: Amd 64 3700+ San Diego | Abit AT8 | 4x512 Corsair XMS3200C2PRO | PowerColour X850XTPE / Arctic Cooled | Samsung Spinpoint 250Gig | Enermax NoiseTake 485w | Arctic Freezer 64 Pro | Coolermaster Wavemaster Silver | Dell 2405FPW | Logitech G5 / Everglide Destrukt Monstermat |
yorkieben u said 3800 runs better in games. This rig is only going to be for games, no editing, numebr crunching, jsut games. So if i want to slightly overlock the 3700 to a 3800, would a 3700 SD (@3800) be faster than a 3800 venice?
Rig: Amd 64 3700+ San Diego | Abit AT8 | 4x512 Corsair XMS3200C2PRO | PowerColour X850XTPE / Arctic Cooled | Samsung Spinpoint 250Gig | Enermax NoiseTake 485w | Arctic Freezer 64 Pro | Coolermaster Wavemaster Silver | Dell 2405FPW | Logitech G5 / Everglide Destrukt Monstermat |
At the same MHz a San Deigo will be faster than a Venice. They are identical except for cache size.
The 3800+ is only faster if you run both at stock speeds (and in games it's not much faster because games like cache). The 3700+ is a better deal.Originally Posted by Merlin4458
I agree... I was benchihng my 3500+ venice @ 2.83Ghz on games (FC, DOOM3, HL2 etc) and... well.. it does have very high overall frame rate... very high actually... but fps takes really deep dives when you say, load into a new area, or when a large amount of articles are drawn immediately..
I'm guessing the 512Kb L2 just isnt keeping up well enough with some games which redraws sprites and render new articles all the time. The 2.83Ghz only raises the overall frame rate... not the horrid fps dives during the heat of an online battle... or offline...
If you're really going for venice, 3800+ would be a bomb for your wallet... 3500+ or 3200+ would be a better choice.. 3000+ is identically good, but from what I've heard... its really a russion roullette to see whether you got a good working core or not.. all clocks pass 2.4Ghz with ease.. at least my 3500+ and 3000+ did.. 3500+ peaks at 2.83Ghz while 3000+ peaks at 2.65Ghz, all tested at 10 hr prime stress test..
Me want Ultrabook
To be honest, I'd go with the 3700 sd (as long as you are intending on overclocking), as you would get an FX57 for a fraction of the price (assuming you could hit 2.8mhz). If your not overclocking, I'd go with the cheapest (as the extra cache would offset against the extra 200mhz).
Hope this makes sense ?!?
C2Q6600 @ 3.15GHz
ThermalTake MiniType90
EVGA 680SLI
4GB OCZ Reaper 1066MHz @ 1000 4,4,4,15
EVGA 8800GTX 768MB
Raptor 150GB
NEC ND4550 16x16 DVD±RW
Coolermaster 850W x3 12V
Antec P180
Custom built by $aunder$
I'm five for five with 3700+ San Diegos hitting 2830MHz 24/7 stable.
I think youd be better getting the cheapest AMD64, a 3200+ for example, would suffice for games and should overclock almost exactly the same (mine hits 2.5ghz).
Is this for use with the pc in your sig? becuase a ti4200 isnt going to be any good for games... A new gfx card would help a lot more. If your buying both cpu and gfx card.. spend less on cpu but more on gfx... (or less on gfx aswell so you have some to spend in a year or two when it need replacing)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)