Athlon 64 questions

[Trizzay]

Well it's been 4 years so it's time for me to build a new system since Hl2 and Doom3 are about to come out. I'm pretty set on getting an Athlon 64 3200+, but I have a few questions.

What gives better performance for gaming...the Clawhammer or Newcastle? I've read some people say the 512 cache is faster, some say the 1mb is faster. From what I can tell the 512 version is 2.2 ghz, as opposed to 2.0 ghz for the 1mb version. I'm just not sure what is more important...the extra 200mhz, or the extra cache.

Also, what are the real competitors of these chips? The average person defines cpu speed by the ghz. How is it that these chips which only run at around 2ghz, are competing with Intel chips running at 3.0 ghz?

Thanks in advance for any help!

 

[Zebo]

1. Clawhammer since it has more cache at same speeds.

2. They are Even with newcastle 200 more Mhz

3. A pentium 4 northwood @ 3.6 in games = a 2.2 clawhammer.

4. They A64's have half the pipeline as P4's meaning the A64's execute instructions much faster per clock. Also they have on die mem controller which reduces latency signifigantly... Way oversimplified but you can read the thoery here http://arstechnica.com/cpu/index.html

In general the A64's are superior to P4 netburst in every way. Features, Performance, low heat, and power consumption. The new pentium-m is another story altogether and is just awesome like the A64.

 

[Trizzay]

so you're saying a clawhammer is just as fast at 2.0, or if it is overclocked to 2.2? Also, don't most of the Newcastle have the more updated and superior core?

 

[OnEMoReTrY]

Newcastle is faster because the extra 200mhz does more for AMD's then an extra 512k cache. Not to mention the newcastle has the new CG revision meaning they run cooler and can overclock farther. Lot's of people can get it to 2.5ghz ezily on stock speeds. The most you cold hope for on the ClawHammer is 2.2ghz