90nm Processors: 3200+ and 3500+

[mrBA1105]

Would I be able to notice a big difference between the 3200+ and 3500+ 90nm processors? I'm looking to build an awesome all around computer, but don't want to spend more than I need. No OCing here either.

 

[SrGuapo]

It really won't be much of a difference in today's apps. If you plan on keeping the PU for a while, you may want to get a 3500+, especially since you won't be overclocking.

What kind of stuff will you be doing? Gaming, Internet, Word processing, calculating the 1.5638576x10^43526873 digit of PI?

 

[ts3433]

If you're completely opposed to overclocking (it's honestly not that hard, even with stock cooling) and are set on a 3500+, get the Newcastle, which [[EDIT: was]] usually considerably cheaper. You can also go the S754 route and get a 3400+ Newcastle, which will actually outperform the 3500+ in most everything because of its extra 200MHz.

 

[fixxxer0]

prices are about the same now, $250 for a 3500+ winchester oem at monarch, $15 u can get a 3 year warranty.... and thats shipped.

 

[anox3]

Was just playing with my new Winchester 3200+. No working with it yet hit 2.4 easily with stock mobo settings. Left everything on auto booted up and acted fine. CPU was made 47th week of 2004. temp 35C with a thermalright XP90, And thermaltake 90mm fan.

 

[Icepick]

Originally posted by: mrBA1105
Would I be able to notice a big difference between the 3200+ and 3500+ 90nm processors? I'm looking to build an awesome all around computer, but don't want to spend more than I need. No OCing here either.

IMO you won't notice a performance difference in games or any other apps between these two processors. 200MHz is only a 6% increase in speed. The performance gain this provides in games is only a few fps.

 

[MadDog31]

*bump*

Any other benefits here? I'm actually in that dilemma now myself. I won't be afraid to upgrade down the line to a new CPU if they get cheaper, as long as I'm in the "platform" so to speak, being upgraded to the 939.

Ian