ClawHammer vs Newcastle

[birdog]

The AMD Athlon 64 3000+ processor for both is about $10 diff and the ClawHammer has more cache. On Newegg the Newcastle has more reviews and votes but the ClawHammer seems the more obvious choice to me. I am ready to upgrade form XP2500 barton and am going to overclock. I was wanting anyones opinion on which processor and mother board should I go with? Any input is appreciated.

 

[christopherzombie]

I'd say NewCastle over ClawHammer, But I think the 939 pin Winchester core is the best bang for buck.

 

[ts3433]

Going to overclock? A Socket 939 Winchester is a no-brainer. Those will overclock higher than any other A64 at the moment except maybe the FX-55. Some Week 48s have seen 2.7 GHz on stock voltage, and up to 3 GHz on air cooling (according to a post Zebo made yesterday). 2.6 should be easily achievable with any Winchester.

CH vs. NC: The 3000+ and 2800+ Clawhammers actually had 512K cache like their NC brethren, but NCs overclock better than CHs.

 

[birdog]

Thanks for the advise, I will go with a Winchester then. So the increased l2 cache isnt that big of a boost in performance then

 

[chinkgai]

amd compensates 200mhz for the lack/addition of 512 L2 cache

 

[fbrdphreak]

Newcastle has an improved memory controller over the Clawhammer in addition to an extra 200MHz. Thus, in general, Newcastle performs slightly better than Clawhammer stock. Also, from what I hear, the Newcastle's (especially the CG variant, like mine ) OC especially well for S754.

However, if you are purchasing now, S939 is a NO BRAINER. They OC exceptionally well (the 90nm ones do anyway) and generally have slightly higher performance than the S754 models, mainly due to dual-channel RAM. GO S939!

 

[MegaWorks]

NewCastle

 

[drpootums]

ya, newcastle chips are better than clawhammer. You will benifit much more from an extra 200mhz than u will from an extra 512kb of cache.