Venice VS San Diego

[autopilot]

Just wondering which was best A64 type really. I thought San Diego was the newest and best, but an article in CustomPC seem's to say the Venice is best.

[drunknmunky]

Go for San Diego, has 1MB L2.

[mike_w]

San Diego is essentially Venice with more cache - San Diego has 1MB, while Venice has 512KB.

[autopilot]

Just as i thought, cheers. I think the CustomPC article may have been writen a while back and was out of date by the time it was published, in typical magazine style.

[Smokey21]

At the same speeds, the San Diego is faster, but similar priced chips between the to, are not similar speeds.

The 3800+ Venice is faster than a 3700SD.

[herulach]

At the same speeds, the San Diego is faster, but similar priced chips between the to, are not similar speeds.

The 3800+ Venice is faster than a 3700SD.

BUt not by a lot, and cache will help you out a lot more once you overclock it as in theory you should be able to get both up to around the same speed.

[autopilot]

At the same speeds, the San Diego is faster, but similar priced chips between the to, are not similar speeds.

The 3800+ Venice is faster than a 3700SD.

How much faster? Significant? That was the exact choice i was try to decide between.

[Nick F]

Glad this post is here I was just about to ask the same question

[BAcon]

here is how i see it when selecting a chip

cache cannot be added once you've bought it, but clock speed can as you can OC

as both chips will clock simulary it would be a good idea to go with the extra cache and slightly cheaper price and just OC

tho tbh i dont think cache helps that much, so if you dont OC get the 3800

for example my 3000 venice is at 2.85ghz and is by no means a slouch compared to 1mb cache diego's

[herulach]

here is how i see it when selecting a chip

cache cannot be added once you've bought it, but clock speed can as you can OC

as both chips will clock simulary it would be a good idea to go with the extra cache and slightly cheaper price and just OC

tho tbh i dont think cache helps that much, so if you dont OC get the 3800

for example my 3000 venice is at 2.85ghz and is by no means a slouch compared to 1mb cache diego's

It depends how you bench things, cache doesnt have much of an effect in games, but in things where the entire app will fit in 1 meg, (office basically) then its much much faster. That said due to the lower latency and high speed of the HT it doesnt matter so much on amd as Intel, but id still say go with the san diego. Just because the 3800 is the fastest venice, so chances of getting a good clocking chip arent as high.

[TooNice]

Can the additional cache on the SG be detrimental to OCing in any way?

[webbyman]

the 3700+ san diego's are cheaper and better than the venice 3800+'s in my veiw, they are much easier to clock too in the sense that they are already 200mhz below the 3800+ clock speed most of the san diegos can reach 2.6 ghz without any problems at all 2.7 and 2.8 can usually be achived to but this depends on the cooling.. and the money you save can go towards better air cooling e.g xp120 or go towards some nice watercooling

[autopilot]

3700SD it is then