3700+ San Deigo or 3800+ Venice at stock speeds: Which one?

[Boris the Spider]

So running completely stock (sorry I am just not into OC'ing), what would perform better for gaming? I have heard of several threads where people with San Deigos were experiencing 18-20% boosts in performance over a similarly clocked Venice/Winchester/etc. This sounds a bit odd and may have been a fluke, but I don't know. So running completely stock, and not including price (I don't mind the extra couple bucks for the 3800) which would be the better gaming processor? Also will this processor at stock speeds be enough to feed a single high-end G70/R520 when they are released? I don't want to bottleneck the system but you can't go much higher at stock speeds than that without going FX (not doing that.)

 

[Elfear]

My personal preference out of the two would be for the 3700+. I think the extra 512k of cache is worth it for gaming even with 200MHz less core speed. Even if you don't like to oc or don't know how a 200-400MHz overclock is easy and painless, probably wouldn't even have to increase the vcore. A 3700+@2.4-26GHz would be very fast.

I think an oced 3700+ would probably be up to the task of feeding an R520 or G70. Even if it isn't sufficient for one of those monsters, it doesn't matter since you don't want to go FX anyway so basically your stuck with either the 3700+ or 3800+ (4000+ is almost as much as an FX).

 

[Zenoth]

I would simply go with the 3700+ San Diego, then, over-clock it by a minimum of 200 Mhz. It'd be easy with that San Diego core, very stable.

 

[sangyup81]

whichever one is cheaper for you

 

[Boris the Spider]

The 3700+ is cheaper. So you are saying that I could get probably 200-400 extra MHZ out of this processor without any extra voltage? I plan on running it with the stock HSF if that matters too. So basically all I would probably need to do to hit 2.4-2.6 GHZ is increase the HHT/FSB or whatever it is referred to on A64's? Would I have to change around my memory timings or something of that nature? Also I was a bit worried about OC'ing because I am running it with this RAM

 

[sangyup81]

That's some good RAM. If it becomes a problem, just kick in a divider since CPU speed gives you much more real world gain than memory speed/timing. When you increase your HTT, drop your LDT multiplier to 4x so you keep the bus speed under 1000mhz.

Just overclock enough so that your CPU temps don't go over 60c under load.

 

[Dadofamunky]

I dunno, if he doesn't want to overclock, I'd probably suggest the 3800. It has 2.4G core speed. I jsut don't think you can go wrong either way. But with AGP, buy a high-end video card or you'll be disappointed.

 

[anandtechrocks]

The 3800+ is obviously rated higher for a reason. The extra cache does so little... My vote goes to the 3800+ Vience.

 

[Boris the Spider]

I wouldn't mind a little overclocking, but I have never done it before so I don't want to ruin my new hardware. How far do you think that 3700+ could go on stock Vcore?

 

[aatf510]

Originally posted by: Boris the Spider
I wouldn't mind a little overclocking, but I have never done it before so I don't want to ruin my new hardware. How far do you think that 3700+ could go on stock Vcore?

Overclocking w/o increasing voltage CANNOT ruin your hardware.

 

[Painman]

What % increase you get off of stock voltage will vary from chip to chip. I :heart: my SD chip, I don't care what the benchmarks say, I get a smoother ride in my day to day computing from this CPU than I did with the 512K cache CPUs. I recommend it totally.

 

[Canterwood]

If not overclocking then go for the extra 200mhz of the 3800+ > extra cache of 3700+

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Originally posted by: Boris the Spider
I wouldn't mind a little overclocking, but I have never done it before so I don't want to ruin my new hardware. How far do you think that 3700+ could go on stock Vcore?

My 3700+ will run Prime95 overnight at 2746mhz on stock vcore, I,m currently running it at 2805mhz with +10% vcore. As long as your temps are under 60c everything is good.

With the new CPU drivers that AMD just released that enable Cool n' Quiet on NF4 boards it is a fantastic tool if you use it in conjunction with a tool like RMClock from RightMark to throttle the CPU. I'm currently running mine throttled to 1.5ghz with 1.1vcore and the chipset and other fans throttled back also and my temps are 33-35c. But when I launch a game or anything CPU intensive, it instantaneously jumps to 2805mhz with 1.45vcore. This is a fantastic tool because 95% of the time when your surfing the web, doing spreadsheets ect.. your machine is idling at 1.5ghz and very quiet using a lot less electricity. And I'm not subjecting the machine to my max overclock settings 24/7 anymore, only maybe 5-10% of the time. And the effect on performance is almost nothing. I tested SuperPI and my scores with Cool n' Quiet enable are about a 1/2sec more on a 1m or 32m run, I assume because of the slight time it takes the CPU to ramp up from 1.5mhz to 2.8mhz.

IMHO running in this manor, my CPU will likely last longer than one running at stock 24/7. This is the best of both worlds as far as I'm concerned, because my average CPU speed and voltage over time will be at less than stock. But I have the power of an FX-57 when I run something that needs the CPU power.

I upgraded to the 3700+ SD from a very nice Winnie 3200+ that ran 2.6ghz, and the improvement is quite noticable. This is a very fast chip

 

[Painman]

^^

I'm gonna try that out GD, I've been worried about the effect of summer heat on my rig. I'm already using dynamic OC on my X850 to keep from roasting it, I came home from work today to find my CPU idling at 38 C!!

 

[christopherzombie]

3700+ is what I'd go for. The 3800+ is a fast chip, but the 3700+ SD is on a newer core technology. Plus it's a bit cheaper; think: poor-man's-FX. I'm considering upgrading my 3500+ NC to a 3700+ SD after the X2 comes out and the mainstream chips drop in price.

 

[FirNaTine]

^^ Both cores are brand new.

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: Painman
^^

I'm gonna try that out GD, I've been worried about the effect of summer heat on my rig. I'm already using dynamic OC on my X850 to keep from roasting it, I came home from work today to find my CPU idling at 38 C!!

Mine idles @ 38C and I am very happy with that.. Are you implying that 38C is TOO warm for you..

 

[coomar]

whats the lowest you can go on air, 34-35, he must have been talking about water

 

[GuitarDaddy]

No, I'm talking about air. But with the CPU throttled down to 1.5ghz and using only 1.1 CPU volts, using Cool n' Quiet and RMclock

 

[ssvegeta1010]

If not OCing, 3800+.

If willing to OC a little, 3700+.

 

[Jeff7181]

I'd always go for the higher clock speed over the larger cache. With the memory latency of the A64 as low as it is, more L2 cache doesn't make THAT big a difference unless what you want to do is run the 1 MB SuperPi test as fast as possible.

 

[Painman]

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: Painman
Mine idles @ 38C and I am very happy with that.. Are you implying that 38C is TOO warm for you..

CPU: 38º PWMIC: 47º NF4: 55º

Yep, I consider that kinda hot overall I run a quiet PC and the tradeoff is more heat buildup. Unfortunately I can't treat this PC to any air conditioning other than a window fan for the room it's in, so a good throttling scheme should keep it from bluescreening or bursting into flames on me.

 

[Painman]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
I'd always go for the higher clock speed over the larger cache. With the memory latency of the A64 as low as it is, more L2 cache doesn't make THAT big a difference unless what you want to do is run the 1 MB SuperPi test as fast as possible.

Test drive a SD machine sometime, you'll understand what I'm talking about. Being able to cache another 512k of Windows DLL snippets makes routine, mundane Windows tasks and navigation (what most of us do, most of the time) a lot more snappy and makes you say to yourself, "Hey, this machine is responsive as hell, this is cool." I stand behind my endorsement of this chip. I've been through 2 Winchesters, a Venice and now the SD, and I won't be going back to 512 land. Period.

 

[ryanv12]

Imagine what a 4400+ would do for snappiness with 1MB per core

 

[imported_Otter]

When running several applications and background geegaws, will the extra 512MB cache significantly reduce the need to reload the cache from RAM when switching processes? Or will the code needed by each process usually be overwritten by the time that process gets its next turn at the CPU?