Which CPU...or wait?

[orwell84]

I am trying to decide between the AMD 3700 San Diego and the AMD 4000 San Diego. At first it was a no brainer, then prices came down a lot on the 4000. Is there any reason other than price to go with the 3700. I have never tried overclocking, but would like to keep that option open.

Also, I was wondering if there was any reason to wait for the new M2 socket processors. How long is it likely that AMD will continue to make faster processors for socket 939 or support 939?

Thanks for the help.

 

[KoolDrew]

Get the 3700+. It will easily reach 4000+ speeds.

 

[Bona Fide]

I would say get a dual-core. If you're keeping them as transitional CPU's until M2 comes out, just get a 3000+ Venice for now. But if you intend to keep them, get an X2. You'll be happy you did it, I think.

 

[Gamingphreek]

X2 3800+

 

[imported_Kensai]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
X2 3800+

 

[Hacp]

Yes, if you willing to pay for the 4000+, might was well get the X2 3800+
To me, the choice is between the Venice 3000+, Sandiego 3700+ and the X2 3800+. Just depends on how much cash your willing to spend, 125,280,380 respectivly...

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: Kensai

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
X2 3800+

shamoh

i mean yeah, get a 3800+ X2 now ..as this will suffice until next upgrade aka M2 .. when it has matured

 

[wanderer27]

It really depends on what you're planning to use it for.

If you're going to be doing alot of Multitasking, then maybe the x2 3800+ is the way to go.

On the other hand, if you're going to use it a lot for gaming, then the 3500+ can actually outperform it. Plus the Dual Cores can be a little quirky when playing some games.

http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/cpu/article.php/3261_3524426__7
http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/cpu/article.php/3261_3524426__8

I'm also looking at the 3700+ and 4000+. The 1M Cache seems to give gaming an extra boost from some of the threads I've seem on here as well.

I'm probably going to go with the 3700+ an do a minor OC to bring it in line with the 4000+, unless the 4000+ drops to an even more compelling price

 

[Gamingphreek]

If you have the money, there is absolutely no reason to go with a single core chip over a dual core chip.

-Kevin

 

[n7]

X2 3800+ or SD 3700+.

4000+ = teh waste for the most part.

 

[Furen]

Personally, I'd go for an X2 3800+.

Now, to answer your question, I have one of my own: do you plan on overclocking? If so then there's no reason to get a 4000+, since the 3700+ will probably overclock just as high. If you dont plan on overclocking then the 4000+ is the best bet.

EDIT: Ok, to answer your second question: If you can stick with your current system for another year then wait for M2. I wouldnt expect more than one speed bump on socket 939 (but s939 cpus should stay in production for a while) and I'm guessing the initial K10s will be socket M2 as well (hopefully compatible with a bios upgrade).

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: orwell84


I am trying to decide between the AMD 3700 San Diego and the AMD 4000 San Diego. At first it was a no brainer, then prices came down a lot on the 4000. Is there any reason other than price to go with the 3700. I have never tried overclocking, but would like to keep that option open.

Also, I was wondering if there was any reason to wait for the new M2 socket processors. How long is it likely that AMD will continue to make faster processors for socket 939 or support 939?

Thanks for the help.

As stated by others, it depends on what you do on your computer...
As to waiting for an M2, it will be at least 9 months before you'll get one at any price and 12 months before they are reasonably priced...
The 939 chips will continue to be supported well after M2's introduction (years), the only difference will be what memory you want to buy.

 

[JEDIYoda]

I say Blow the Budget now!!
Motgage the house in order to get your dream CPU!!!
Extravagence at it best!!!
The creme de la creme!