whats the diff, and which is better?

[Gunsmokez]

AMD ATHLON 64 3700+ PROCESSOR S939 SAN DIEGO 2.2GHZ 1MB L2 CACHE 90NM RETAIL BOX


AMD ATHLON 64 3800+ PROCESSOR S939 VENICE 2.4GHZ 512K L2 CACHE 90NM RETAIL BOX


whats the diff? and whats better?

 

[imported_Kensai]

The only difference is corespeed and cache. Otherwise it's the exact same. I would go with the 3700+, but that's just me.

Here.

 

[Gunsmokez]

why would u go with the 3700 when the 3800 is actually faster core speed? plus it cost more , so i would assume its faster stock.

 

[drwngflies]

I would, and will choose the 3700 SanDiego over the Venice any day, it has way more top end for OC'ing.

 

[snomunki]

Who says SD has more top end for OC'ing? I keep hearing people say that, but I have seen nothing in print on this...especially with the Venice being so new.

 

[cryptonomicon]

Originally posted by: snomunki
Who says SD has more top end for OC'ing? I keep hearing people say that, but I have seen nothing in print on this...especially with the Venice being so new.

its not that, its just that both chips will probably have the same ceiling, thus you have more potential value out of the lower clocked chip.

lately, AMD chips from the same generation (process), regardless of the model, seem to hit the same ceiling. that is why my 130nm (1.8ghz) sempron hits the same ceiling as most other 130nm A64 chips, even though they may have stock speeds of 2.2ghz.

 

[Appledrop]

ya, that and, overclocked to the same ceiling, the 3700 will always win (1m cache.)

 

[snomunki]

I would still like to see what the Venice will overclock to before saying it has the same ceiling as all the rest...