754 Clawhammer or 939 Winchester?

[boatillo]

3400+ clawhammer with the 1mb cache or 3500+ winchester? I will probably overclock either moderately, prolly 200mhz so its not really a concern.

Anyone got a link that benchmarks these exact cpu's against one another? There are many arguments for both sides, but I don't think any argument adds up to more than 2% performance or $30

(Prolly go DFI board for 754, Asus for 939 -- AGP versions)

 

[CheesePoofs]

I'd get the winchester, its slightly faster, runs a lot cooler, uses less power, and the motherboard will be able to be reused with future CPU's, because AMD isn't making any new A64's for Socket 754.

 

[JBT]

The winchester should be cooler and faster. It should OC highier with out problems as well. Also if you decide to upgrade later the 939 chip would more than likely bring in a bit more money than the 3400.

 

[Zebo]

they are the same speed stock.

Flip a coin.

 

[Neptune3000]

Originally posted by: Zebo
they are the same speed stock.

Flip a coin.

:thumbsup:

P.S.

DFI is a great board. Lots of features and very sexy

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: boatillo
3400+ clawhammer with the 1mb cache or 3500+ winchester? I will probably overclock either moderately, prolly 200mhz so its not really a concern.

Anyone got a link that benchmarks these exact cpu's against one another? There are many arguments for both sides, but I don't think any argument adds up to more than 2% performance or $30

(Prolly go DFI board for 754, Asus for 939 -- AGP versions)

Here is the review I was looking for. Sorry for french but benchmarks we can all understand.

Look at 3400 1mo vs. 3500.

they are identical performers.


They wrap up every review with normalized results (last graph) which is most useful in comparing overall performance between processors. I really wish more sites would do this instead of me having to do the math....

Granted this is a 130nm 3500 but I think they perform same as 90nm.