• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

3500? 3700? 3800? HELP!!!!

G

GMTG

Junior Member
I am rebuilding my puter, used mainly for gaming, and am trying to decide on an AMD CPU. I will be attempting mild, air-cooled OCing. I don't trust the obvious, and wish your advice.
Is a 3700 San Diego 2.2 GHz 1Meg L2 ($104) better then a 3500 Venice/Orleans (haven't decided on 939/AM2 yet) 2.2 GHz .5Meg L2 ($92)? While the cache is twice the size, I know that the core can make all the difference.
Then again, for $5 more then the 3700, I can get a 3800 Venice/Orleans 2.4 GHz .5meg L2. Is the speed more important then the cache?
Any feedback will be greatly appreciated.

GMTG
 
The 3700 San will OC much better than the 3800.

Go with it. I have both, my 3700 OC better and stays cooler than my 3800.

Let me find a link that shows something else, one sec...

EDIT: Oh I have a 3500 too and the 3700 did better than that also.

Look here LINK you can see that the 3700 performs better than the 3800 at stock speeds possibly due to the 1m L2 vs the 512b L2 of the 3800.

I would recommend the 3700.
 
You wouldn't consider a bit more money on a dual core? I think that would be a better investment for the long haul unless you plan to build cheap and upgrade again soonish?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top