Opteron 146 or AMD 3700+

[psychy]

Rightio,

I've never overclocked in my life. But am building a cheapo PC, and trying to get most bang for buck.

My options are either a 146 CAB2E or a Venice 3700+. Can someone tell me which is better to get? Both are S939 so will need a mobo but have already have some normal PC3200 Ram.

Is it hard to OC the opty? Do i just change the voltage in bios etc?

146 = £55
3700+ = £45

Worth it?

Thanks.

[chuckskull]

The 146 is very easy to overclock. Presuming all the other component are up to the job.

[Clunk]

i would go for the opty as well, quite often more room for overclocking

[leeglf]

The 146 is very easy to overclock. Presuming all the other component are up to the job.

as chuckskull says the opteron would be the easiest and you will probably get a slightly higher overclock out of it!

[BUFF]

I would go for the 3700+ - same core as the Opty & usually a very good overclocker, extra multi & it's cheaper too

[sawyen]

yes.. multi can be very important if u have a relatively rubbish board (like me). 11x multi will get you to 2.8Ghz alot faster (250ish) compared to 10x (280).. Some boards such as the AX8 will hit walls harder than a titanium shield when it reaches 245-250MHz. So the multi helps alot..

[dfour]

If you have a decent overclocking board (abit/asus/dfi etc) I would go for the opty. If not the 3700+ is your better bet bec asue of the 11* multi. I just took my frinds to 2.750 gig stable as a rock because of the 11* multi and kept his ram running at 200 fsb 2.2.2.6 Corsair ram kicks arse.

[harry1]

opty every time, mine went 2.8 easy as pie on my asus sli board, only thing stopping me being the fact that it has a snapped pin. so to hot.loil

[oralpain]

I've had my 3000+ at 2.71 GHz for over a year on a 9x multiplier (running 301MHz external clock) with an 80 dollar DFI NF4 infinity.

The 3700+ is really not that good of an overclocker. I doubt the final speed would be any better than what you could get on the 146, but yes, you would need a motherbaord with some kind of overclocking capability.

Regardless the 3700+ is less expensive, and the differences in final speed are going to be minimal. I would get the 3700+ in this situation.

Also the 3700+ is a san diego, not a venice.

[BUFF]

The 3700+ is really not that good of an overclocker.

oh yes it is ...
2.8GHz would be fairly typical on air (same as Opties) so you only need 255 external clock.

[oralpain]

2.8 from 2.2 Ghz is a rather mediocre OC, percentage wise. Especially when cheaper AMD chips can do 50% OCs no problem and some of the lower end Core 2s manage 90-100% overclocks.

2.8GHz is practically a given with most chips 3500+ and above and any S939 opteron.

Also, it's not very difficult to find S939 motherboards, even budget ones, that will do over 300 external clock.

Maybe I'm just spoiled. My last three A64s have all managed 40%-50%+ OCs.

[BUFF]

2.8GHz is practically a given with most chips 3500+ and above and any S939 opteron.

actually it's not, plenty of Opties (& other A64s) only hit around 2.6GHz - the real stormers were the very early ones with the later ones not so good.
Bottom line imo is that unless he has specific information on the exact overclocking ability of those 2 CPUs it's fairly safe to assume that they will both hit roughly the same but the 3700+ has another multi (which most would agree is useful) & it's 20% cheaper.

[scrandman]

I'm more interested to know where he can get a 146 for £55. Link please.

[BUFF]

I'm guessing that both are s/h as a 3700+ for £45 is pretty good too ...

[scrandman]

I'm guessing that both are s/h as a 3700+ for £45 is pretty good too ...

Ah - the joys of ebay. Never been a chancer myself

[BlindMelon7]

Sorry to butt in but I was just wondering... is there any difference between say... an AMD 3000+ and an AMD 3200+ other than the fact that they are set at a different speed?