a 64 skt 939 3200+ vs 3500+

[Ripwalk]

is there much of a difference between the two.

 

[BitByBit]

The 3200+ runs at 2.0GHz , while the 3500+ runs at 2.2GHz, which is a 10% increase.
There are countless Anandtech reviews including both of these chips.

 

[Ripwalk]

so that's it just speed difference, im not missing out on any features?

 

[ryanv12]

nope. in my opinion, the only reason to get a 3500+ would be if you like the higher model number

 

[Icepick]

This is absolutely correct. The only two differences between these to Venice CPUs are 200MHz and $$. The only reason I got my 3500+ Winchester is because at the time the 3200+ were sold out everywhere (10/2004). The 3200+ can be overclocked to 3500+ with very little effort and has just as much max overclocking headroom as the 3500+.

 

[Ripwalk]

i have no overclock experiance but im sure i could learn.there's qiute a bit of guide out there...so would that mean the 3200 is the better buy? for overclock. or would the 3500 be a better clocker? but i still gotta learn

 

[Icepick]

Well, the point of overclocking is to get more out of your purchase then what you paid for. The 3200 potential to reach the same max overclock as the 3500 IMO. The 3200+ is 2.0 GHz and the 3500+ is 2.2 GHz at stock speed. That's only a 10% difference.

Current Newegg prices:
3200+ Venice (retail): $190
3500+ Venice (retail): $267

At these prices the 3500+ is 40% more expensive than the 3200+ for 10% more speed. Even if you do no overclocking and run this CPU at it's stock speed for the life of the processor the 3500+ is not worth the extra cost IMO.

 

[Polyonic]

The 3000+, 3200+, 3500+, 3800+ all have the same overclocking headroom, what is the point of the last three? Maybe its psychological 3.8 ghz P4 VS. 3800+...ooooo

 

[govtcheez75]

Originally posted by: Polyonic
The 3000+, 3200+, 3500+, 3800+ all have the same overclocking headroom, what is the point of the last three? Maybe its psychological 3.8 ghz P4 VS. 3800+...ooooo

it's true that all these have the same "overclocking headroom", but I would say that it depends on what you like. I'm not saying that this justifies paying 1.5 or 2x the price of the 3200+, but I bought my 3800+ used for less than the price of a new 3200+. I had pretty much given up on overclocking, because I thought that it took up too much of my time. Also...keep in mind that the 3000 has only the 9X multiplier, and the 3200 has the 10X. I think the 3500 has 11X and my 3800 has 12X. The higher multipliers are great if you want to run low latencies and still want to overclock. For example...most people can't run their 3000, or 3200 1:1 while running 1T at 2-2-2-5 at 2.6ghz. I can do this, since it would mean that my memory is only running 217mhz (or a 9% overclock).

 

[MADMAX23]

Originally posted by: Ripwalk
so that's it just speed difference, im not missing out on any features?

Well, you are missing one thing; THE OVERCLOCKING POTENTIAL OF THE 3200+ compared to the ridiculous OC capabilities of the 3500+!!

 

[MADMAX23]

Originally posted by: Ripwalk
i have no overclock experiance but im sure i could learn.there's qiute a bit of guide out there...so would that mean the 3200 is the better buy? for overclock. or would the 3500 be a better clocker? but i still gotta learn

GET THE 3200+ WITH NO DOUBT!!