Originally posted by: JBT
If OCing the Clawhammer is better if sticking to stock the Newcastle is better.
Originally posted by: RobJ
Newcastle is better. The FX-53 is the fastest proc out there for consumers. If you're trying to decide between the 3400+ and the 3500+, I guarantee you that you will not notice a difference in speed, although one will exist. The 3500+ will edge out the 3400+ in many applications, but it is very slight. I personally went with the 3500+ because I realistically think that I'll be able to upgrade the processor in a year and add some life to my computer. The Clawhammer is dead after the 3700+ in terms of AMD coming out with higher performing processors.
It depends on what your budget is and what kind of person you are. I felt like I'd regret going with the older platform even though I probably wouldn't have noticed a diffference. I paid $122 for the MSI K8N Neo2, arguably the best mobo for the price. And I got the 3500+ for $370 from Monarch. I could have saved about $70 on the proc, and no money on the mobo if I had gone with an equivalent Clawhammer solution. To me, it's worth the $70 of "wasted" income to have the option to upgrade next summer.
Some people may argue that they could have saved $100 bucks buying a Clawhammer, OCed it, and had a better performing system than I have for cheaper. And they're prolly right. But I am content with my choice, and I think I chose prudently. It all depends on your spending, overclocking, and usage habits/threshold.
Originally posted by: nitromullet
Originally posted by: RobJ
Newcastle is better. The FX-53 is the fastest proc out there for consumers. If you're trying to decide between the 3400+ and the 3500+, I guarantee you that you will not notice a difference in speed, although one will exist. The 3500+ will edge out the 3400+ in many applications, but it is very slight. I personally went with the 3500+ because I realistically think that I'll be able to upgrade the processor in a year and add some life to my computer. The Clawhammer is dead after the 3700+ in terms of AMD coming out with higher performing processors.
It depends on what your budget is and what kind of person you are. I felt like I'd regret going with the older platform even though I probably wouldn't have noticed a diffference. I paid $122 for the MSI K8N Neo2, arguably the best mobo for the price. And I got the 3500+ for $370 from Monarch. I could have saved about $70 on the proc, and no money on the mobo if I had gone with an equivalent Clawhammer solution. To me, it's worth the $70 of "wasted" income to have the option to upgrade next summer.
Some people may argue that they could have saved $100 bucks buying a Clawhammer, OCed it, and had a better performing system than I have for cheaper. And they're prolly right. But I am content with my choice, and I think I chose prudently. It all depends on your spending, overclocking, and usage habits/threshold.
I'm not saying you went the wrong way here, but your logic is flawed... If your mobo is compatable with both the Newcastle and the Clawhammer, how can choosing one over the other give you a greater or lesser ability to upgrade next year?
Originally posted by: BW86
i would probably go with the clawhammer. Only if your overclocking. if u had a 3200 Clawhammer and a 3200 newcastle both at 2.4ghz the clawhammer would have better performance