• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Not sure about difference between San Diego and Venice cores

B

bovinda

Senior member
I've been out of the game for a little while, and I'm looking to build a new HTPC. Both these processors look to be in my price range...somewhere from 200-250, and like a "3500-3700" sort of thing. But what is the difference between the San Diego and Venice cores (other than 512 kB extra of L2)? 😕

The only article I found comparing them was from Phoronix last July. (Admittedly I haven't looked too hard yet--I'm really short on time these days, which is why I turn to all you knowledgable people.) Anyone know of any other benchmarks comparing San Diego and Venice CPUs?

Or does anyone have any other suggestions for that price range? I really haven't even looked at mobo or RAM or anything else yet. I'm just starting with the CPU, trying to learn a little.

Thanks for any suggestions/links/readings. :beer:
 
Yeah, I noticed the price difference...that's partly why I was wondering. Especially looking at the difference between the Venice 3500 and the San Diego 3700...is there much of a difference? It's just a 30$ difference or so.

Anyone else have any thoughts, or know of any benchmarks/reviews/readings?
 
The SD's have more cache and utilize a newer improved silicon technology.
For the small price difference the 3700+ is a better buy IMO than the 3500+
 
If this is strictly an HTPC, there's no advantage to the SD over Venice. For that matter, there's no advantage in a 3500 over a 3000 in that application. Sink the money into something else that will give you a noticeable improvement - better audio, video, etc.
 
Thanks for the thoughts guys...yeah, I know the cache difference. I think I'm leaning towards the San Diego 3700, I guess.

It won't be just an HTPC, that will be probably 1/4 it's main function. It will also double as a standard home office computer, as well as be used for some photoshop type stuff and light gaming.

Anyone else have any opinions? Anyone know of any benchmarks or articles?
 
BleedinEdge Review

And I'm a SD 3700+ owner myself, btw. I've had it since May. It's true that the SD 3700 @ 2.2 GHz isn't incredibly faster than Venice 3500 @ 2.2 GHz in most tasks, but I've always felt that it had more 'snap' than the Venice 3500 when it comes to day-to-day farting around in Windows. (Yes, I've used that chip too.) I'm very satisfied with mine, and since the price difference between the two is now down to about $32 I'd say go for it.
 
Thanks Painman, that's exactly the sort of info and feedback I was looking for...that makes the decision easy, 3700 SD it is.

What mobo are you using with it? That's the next piece I need to consider...I won't be doing any overclocking, I just need something stable and reliable. Any suggestions there?
 
I'm using the DFI Ultra-D so I can gank mine up (2750 right now) but that may not be the ideal board for you. I'll leave mobo recommendations to others, because I haven't kept up with them over the last 6 months or so. There might be something out there that's perfect for you, and I don't know about it. But for HTPC, you probably want passive NB cooling for starters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top