Confused about AMD processors..

[SandTiger]

Ok.

So which is faster? The 3500 or the 3400. In all the benchmarks I could find, Anandtech,Tomshardware,HardOCP. They either chose 1 or the other. None had both at the same time.

The 3500 is 939pin. Is that the way of the future? If thats the case why did anandtech review the 3400 in todays comparision? Because the 3400 is 754pin.

Both are 2.4 Ghz? Both have 512k L2? Are both 64 bit or is the 3500 128? Why are they dif pin sizes? Just to confuse me?

Also which is faster? The 3700 or the 3800? Both are 2.4 Ghz. But the 3700 has 1mb L2 where the 3800 has 128bit. Also the 3700 is 754 vs the 3800 being 939

Are they all going to be 939 eventually? Is the 754 just going to phaze out and not be converted to 939? Will all be converted to the .09 micron?

ARGH. This is worse than Intels naming scheme.

I miss the days of "my 1.13 Ghz is faster than your 800mhz BEOTCH!!!"

My head hurts and the walls are spinning. Please help.

 

[uOpt]

I don't like AMD's designations either. Just for starters there are three different Athlon 3400+:
- high clockspeed and small cache and socket 754
- low clockspeed and big cache and socket 754
- low clockspeed and small cache and socket 939

Almost always, the higher clockspeed with the 512 MB cache will be faster as most applications are developed with 256-512 KB cache in the reference machines.

The Socket 939 will allow you to run dual-channel memory, but that means you need two modules. The mainboards for Socket 939 are generally better, with 4 RAM slots, and the CPU doesn't ask you to downclock memory to 333 MHz when using 3 modules.

Which application does what is often difficult to say.

For example, three game with entirely different chracteristic:

1) Doom3 will work best on the higher clockspeed chip with 512 KB cache because it is very carefully written not to overrun the cache (option 1 above)

2) Unreal Tournament is generally a cache hog and will run faster with the bigger cache even with the lower clockspeed (option 2 above)

3) What I have seen from Half-Life 2 it is trashing even the 1 MB cache and will run best on the dual-channel platform. Not sure it makes up for the lower clockspeed but it is the game making most use of high memory bandwith (option 3 above)

But the Doom3 category is the one where most applications and games are in, so that is what I will get (the 3400+ with 2.4 GHz and 512 KB cache in a 754 platform). I also don't want to buy two RAM modules. I also expect that a lot of games with use the Doom3 engine, but that is difficult to predict as that engine is super-expensive.

 

[SandTiger]

That answers some questions.

But still leaves me with 754 vs 939. Both will be prevalent in the future? Meaning If I want to swtich CPU's I have to buy a New Mobo? Or is one taking over?

And where does .09micron fit in to this.

 

[Nyati13]

Socket 939 is the main socket moving forward, Socket 754 will become the budget PC platform (Sempron) for a while, and then that too will move to Socket 939.

With the new 90nm chips just coming out, the S939 3200+ or S939 3500+ in 90nm are my suggestions to just about any "Which CPU?" question.

 

[SandTiger]

Bing That did it for me. Thanks

I had suspected that 939 was the forward step, but was not sure if it was my imagination or not.

Thx

 

[uOpt]

I will get a 754, it is so much cheaper for a 2.4 GHz Ahlon 64. I won't give up clockspeed for the socket. And AMD announced that the socket will live at least through 2005.

I know that my applications do not really benefit from more than 400MHz RAM (I tested single and dual channel with my Pentum-4).

I also don't want to buy two RAM modules, one big one is much better for me now.

The only thing is, as I said, the mainboard for 939 are generally better.

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

A 3000+ 939 or a 3500+ 939 90nm overclock to FX-55 speeds for either 180 or 280 bucks a chip plus some for a good air cooling (I have water yippee). Plus next year you can get the 90nm 4200 or 4400 when they come down to sane prices on the 939. The 754 stops at 2.4 for the AMD64, that to me speaks of a dead chipset for future performance cpus (not to mention dual cores)

 

[flawlssdistortn]

no kidding - the 90nano socket 939s have a ridiculous overclocking potential... that + dual channel + their falling prices... you gotta go 939 man. There are also some new 939 mobos coming out soon with support for pci express.

 

[iwantanewcomputer]

3400 is better than 3500, but a 90 nm socket 939 3000 or 3200 overclocked to the max is better