barton vs venice

[pacho108]

i currently have a barton at 11.5x200 (2.3 ghz) and i'm planning to get a 3000+ venice with a nf3 mobo

how are they compared in performance with the settings i have for the barton and the 3000+ venice at stock speeds? and if i overclock it?

would appreciate any responses

 

[TechHead99]

almost all venice will clock higher than 2.3 i think. Venice's architecture's also more advanced than the barton and it supports sse3. bottom line, get the venice, u won't regret it

 

[Shenkoa]

Your comparing K7 to K8, Venice is much much better.

 

[n7]

I think you'd have to have your Barton around 2.6 GHz before it'd be close to the Venice 3000+ at stock.
But of course, who would want to leave a Venice at stock 😛

 

[Leper Messiah]

Originally posted by: n7
I think you'd have to have your Barton around 2.6 GHz before it'd be close to the Venice 3000+ at stock.
But of course, who would want to leave a Venice at stock 😛

not quite that bad. at the same CPU speeds my winchester (basically the same performance, venice may be 2% faster 'cause of SSE3), 2.2GHz, I was about 20 to 25% faster. So at stock, I'd say they'd be pretty close, but those venice's OC quite well, so its a good upgrade.

 

[coomar]

when i got the k8, it felt faster than a 2.6 xp-m, however some of that was the 9600xt-->x700 vanilla

 

[pacho108]

im gettin' the 3000+venice then and overclock it to 2.7-2.8, by the way what settings r u guys using on ur venices? fsb, htt multiplier, voltage, divider, etc.

 

[mdzapeer]

Originally posted by: n7
I think you'd have to have your Barton around 2.6 GHz before it'd be close to the Venice 3000+ at stock.
But of course, who would want to leave a Venice at stock 😛

I would read my thread

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=28&threadid=1659597&enterthread=y

plz somebody help me out.

 

[Ronnie]

Fsb-340, Htt-3, Multiplier-9, voltage-1.6v cpu and 2,9v vdimm, memory divider 9/10.

by the way what settings r u guys using on ur venices? fsb, htt multiplier, voltage, divider, etc.

 

[imported_Kensai]

Originally posted by: coomar
when i got the k8, it felt faster than a 2.6 xp-m, however some of that was the 9600xt-->x700 vanilla

They aren't too far off. The x600 and x700 are underperformers but you can get them cheaply.

 

[BitByBit]

For general usage, AT's benchmarks show a 1.8GHz K8 roughly equal to a 2.2GHz XP.
For gaming and other memory-intensive tasks, the difference can be far more pronounced, with a 1.8GHz performing as a 2.4GHz+ XP would.

 

[Munky]

From a pure number crunching perspective, a 2.3 ghz Barton is actually slightly faster than a 1.8ghz venice. But because the A64 has a much lower memory latency, in most applcations, especially games, an A64 would be much better than a higher-clocked Barton.