Really Quick Yes or No Question About 3500+

[mrBA1105]

Ok, the question is: Is there any reason AT ALL that I should put out the $50-70 more on an Athlon 64 3500+ Winchester if I'm not gonna overclock whatsoever? I have no interest at all in overclocking and just want a PC with stable performance that will last a couple of years. The other option, of course, is the 3500+ Newcastle. A simple yes or no is all I need, should be ordering soon. Thanks a lot guys.

 

[ts3433]

Go ahead and get the Newcastle.

 

[CheesePoofs]

If you mean why should you get the winchester 3500 over the newcastle 3500, its because the Winchester runs slightly cooler and is slightly faster, but not enough to make up for its price. Get the newcastle.

If you mean why should you get the 3500 over the 3200 or 3000, the only reason to get the 3500 is the slight performance increase. I'd say go with a 3200.

 

[mrBA1105]

I am going to be gaming a lot, won't the 3500 have more lasting value than the 3200? Also, would it be a better value to get a 3200+ Winchester over a 3500+ Newcastle? Man, I really hate thinking about this stuff, haha.

 

[ts3433]

Yeah, a 3200+ Winchester would be a better value. You'll also be able to overclock a Winchester farther than a Newcastle, should you ever get into that (it's not going to make your computer blow up unless you have a bad power supply or do something really stupid). 2.4 is not uncommon without a voltage increase, and you can usually top out around 2.6-2.7 GHz. These speeds can often be achieved with the stock cooler, though you can still get an aftermarket unit to go with that if you want.

 

[amheck]

Isn't another reason to get the Winchester (socket 939, right) is to be more future-proof? I thought that was the socket of the near future for AMD. That along would be worth $50-$75 to me. Especially if you could potentialy put a dual-core CPU in your current 93 MB.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Both the Winchester and Newcastle 3500's are skt 939

If you aren't going to OC, get the Newcastle 3500

If you are going to OC, get the Winchester 3000 or 3200


My choice is the 3200 and overclock the $%&$ out of it. You can get FX55+ speeds for $200, and your not going to fry anything

 

[ts3433]

The whole thing about being more future-proof is only when you're comparing S754 to S939. Winchester, Newcastle, and Sledgehammer (FX) don't take different kinds of S939 mobos, so if the dual-cores are indeed 939 drop-ins, you're fine either way.

 

[DEredita]

The winchester also uses less power to run - I think it uses about approx 20 watts less than the newcastle.

Advantages of the winchester:
Runs cooler
slightly faster
uses less power
supposedly more overclockable


- Mike

 

[Wisey]

"My choice is the 3200 and overclock the $%&$ out of it. You can get FX55+ speeds for $200, and your not going to fry anything"

How do you do this? I supposed you have to pay more for PSU and faster memory and it means you still have to pay more right?

I am very keen to OC but I still doing all the homework.

Would be great if all I have to do is to get the AMD64 3200+ and OC to FX55 and my system is still stable.

Please tell me more...

 

[DEredita]

I find it funny how everyone said "oh get the 3xxx+ and you could overclock it" when the original poster said they didn't want to overclock whatsoever.

- Mike

 

[ts3433]

I was throwing the ideas out there in case he changes his mind. I don't see any harm in that.

Wisey: Read the 939 Memory Matrix sticky in this forum. You don't need to pay more for RAM. You don't need a really fancy PSU either (unless you have a heavy overclock, SLIed 6800s, and 5 hard drives), just one that is of good quality with maybe a little more headroom than usual.

 

[Jassi]

Dual-Core will most likely not use skt 939.

 

[TheStu]

???

uh haven't you read anything from the CES where Intel said their dual core will most likely not be supported by current chipsets whereas AMDs will and most likely WILL use socket 939, and in fact does!!!!????!!!!???!!?!?!?!?

"AMD's dual core socket 939 processors were also running in a back room on ASUS' A8N-SLI Deluxe motherboards - without modification. Although we had known for some time that dual core would only require a BIOS update on AMD motherboards (at worst), the knowledge that off-the-shelf motherboards running AMD's newest gave us a further boost of confidence for the future. This is also in stark contrast to Anand's report that Intel dual-core will not run on current 915/925 chipset motherboards."

nuff said

 

[amheck]

Originally posted by: amheck
Isn't another reason to get the Winchester (socket 939, right) is to be more future-proof? I thought that was the socket of the near future for AMD. That along would be worth $50-$75 to me. Especially if you could potentialy put a dual-core CPU in your current 93 MB.

Sorry for the mis-information, guys. I am just starting to read up on A64 setups, and I thought Winchester vs. Newcastle was socket 939 vs. 754. Never mind me........

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Originally posted by: Wisey
"My choice is the 3200 and overclock the $%&$ out of it. You can get FX55+ speeds for $200, and your not going to fry anything"

How do you do this? I supposed you have to pay more for PSU and faster memory and it means you still have to pay more right?

I am very keen to OC but I still doing all the homework.

Would be great if all I have to do is to get the AMD64 3200+ and OC to FX55 and my system is still stable.

Please tell me more...

You don't need expensive memory. I do recommend a high quality PS, regardless of wether you O/C or not. PS is the most critical component in any system, and too often people try and save money in this area. (bad idea).

IMO you are much safer overclocking your CPU, than trusting your expensive components to an off brand PS. Stay with the proven PS manufactures Antec, Fortron, PC&C etc...

Check out the Overclocking Guide sticky in the CPU section of this forum

95% of the time if you overclock your system beyond its limits, it will just cause the system to freeze or reboot and you have to lower your overclock. Worst case scenario is you corrupt your hard drive and have to repair or reinstall window, or in rare cases have to reformat your hard drive. You should always backup any critical data before overclocking. (You should be doing this anyway).

The theorectical downside to overclocking is that you reduce the life of your CPU. But most CPU's have a life of 10+years, which is much longer than most people keep a computer anyway. I seem to upgrade every 2-5 years. The computer I just upgraded from has run 3 1/2 years overclocked without a single problem. And the upside is obvious, performance levels = $1000 chip from a $150-$200 chip. Another way to look at it is you could kill(won't happen) 3 or 4 3200's and still have saved $ vs. FX55. If my 3200 died tomorrow(it won't), I would gladly buy another one and overclock it.

My current settings with a 3200 beats benchmarks I've seen posted for stock FX55's

282 x 9 = 2543mhz with voltage set in bios to 1.6375 (temps 42c idle, 52c with 100% CPU load)
ram = 232mhz 2-3-3-5 1T, ddr volts 2.85 (DDR333)
HTT 3x