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

[imported_Starman]

I like the 3700+ in this matchup. Come on, at stock? Who're you kidding? You know you're going to O/C that 3700+ monster 😛

 

[shoRunner]

clockspeed > cache in most applications.

 

[imported_Starman]

Originally posted by: shoRunner
clockspeed > cache in most applications.

It all depends on the software being used. For instance, cache is king in my primary application, Cubase SX3. Overall clock speed can't hold a candle to the lightning access provided by L2 cache and it really shows when I'm loading up tons of virtual instruments.

 

[theMan]

ok, 3800 is a bigger number than 3700, right? or am i mistaken.

 

[shud]

You can save $45 and OC it with extremely minimal knowledge to 3800 speeds. There's almost no reason NOT to OC. Even if you aren't that interested in it, it takes 30 seconds of your time at bootup. You can OC it to 3800 speeds and have extra cache. I think that's easily worth saving $45.

 

[fstime]

Ahem,

the 3700 is the better cpu.

It is equal to the 3800 venice at stock speeds, I have seen reviews.

When the 3700 is at the same clock as the 3800, it is faster.

Bottom line, 3700 is much more effiecient.

Better cpu.

/thread.

 

[theMan]

yes, but it isnt. it would obviously be better at the same clock. the advantage is, lets say with each ship, you can get a max of 2.8ghz. then the SD would be faster. but, i dont know which one will overclock more.

 

[fstime]

Like I said, lets say you get 150 mhz more out of the venice but that does not matter.

The SD is more efficient making it just as fast, even if the Venice has a higher clock.

Bottom line, SD is equal to the 3800 at stock

Faster at the same clocks

Around the same ocing potential

Most likily will oc the same