x2 3600 vs x2 3800 - performance difference ?

[TheMafioso]

Hi guys,

I'm building a dual core rig on a tight budget.....I wanted to know how much difference of performance would be there between x2 3600+ and x2 3800 AM2, is it very big especially after being overclocked to the same amount(I intend to overclock to 2.4~2.5Ghz)....

I'm thinking of pairing up the chip MSI k9n-ultra motherboard..
Regards,

 

[gOJDO]

0. Get a 90nm 3600+/3800+. They are more overclockable and faster clock for clock than the 65nm.
1. The difference of the performance between the X2 3600+ and the X2 3800+ is 5%
2. Clock for clock, the difference of the performance between the 90nm overclocked 3600+ and 3800+ is 5%. The 65nm 3800+ & 3600+, OC-ed at same frequency are performing same.

 

[TheMafioso]

^^Hmm, that was nice tip
How do i make sure i get the 90nm one...as i won't be buying online and hardware dealers here rarely have a clue about all this stuff....is it written on the packing ?

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: gOJDO
0. Get a 90nm 3600+/3800+. They are more overclockable and faster clock for clock than the 65nm.
1. The difference of the performance between the X2 3600+ and the X2 3800+ is 5%
2. Clock for clock, the difference of the performance between the 90nm overclocked 3600+ and 3800+ is 5%. The 65nm 3800+ & 3600+, OC-ed at same frequency are performing same.

Actually, the performance difference, at stock speeds, between the X2 3800 and the X2 3600 is 11% (2000/1800=1.111). Now, when overclocked to the same speed, the 3600 will be slightly faster. Why? Because the 3600 will have a higher HTT (AMD's equivalent of an FSB). That assumes that you're able to use the same memory divider with both processors. If the 3800 is able to use a higher memory divider (speed), then that would negate the speed difference of the 3600's higher HTT. Got it?

 

[Sunbird]

Dude, they are both 2GHz processors. The x2 3600 just has half the cache...

 

[f4phantom2500]

i'm pretty sure 90nm are windsor and 65nm are brisbane

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Sunbird
Dude, they are both 2GHz processors. The x2 3600 just has half the cache...

No, they aren't. We were both wrong, the 3600 has the same amount of cache, but is 1.9 Ghz.

edit: And @ 1.9 Ghz, there would only be a 5.5% difference, at stock speed. Sorry about that, gOJDO.

 

[TheMafioso]

Hmm.....actually it seems the 90nm one Windsor core based x2 3600+ came with 2x256KB L2, 2x64KB L1 cache and 2.0ghz while the new 65nm brisbane one has 2x512KB L2, 2x128KB L1 Cache and 1.9Ghz

Hmm, after looking at that, I think the 65nm would be faster 90nm, maybe not in benchmarks a gODJO said, but in real world applications since l2 and l1 cache are doubled...
Does any1 else also think the same..?

 

[Furen]

Originally posted by: TheMafioso
Hmm.....actually it seems the 90nm one Windsor core based x2 3600+ came with 2x256KB L2, 2x64KB L1 cache and 2.0ghz while the new 65nm brisbane one has 2x512KB L2, 2x128KB L1 Cache and 1.9Ghz

Hmm, after looking at that, I think the 65nm would be faster 90nm, maybe not in benchmarks a gODJO said, but in real world applications since l2 and l1 cache are doubled...
Does any1 else also think the same..?

All K8s have the same amount of L1 PER CORE, that's 128KB (or 2x64KB or 64KB data, 64KB instruction, these are the different way of writing the same damn thing).

I'd tend to give the nod to the 1.9GHz Brisbane over the 2GHz Windsor because the 2x256KB L2 cache sounds remarkably anemic to me. Also, the 65nm parts should have better (lower) power draw, which is always a good thing. The one thing that is a bit of a downer is the increased L2 latency of the 65nm parts.

 

[A554SS1N]

The 65nm parts are performing slower clock for clock - I've seen the 65nm 4000+ x2 easily beaten in the anandtech review of Intels E4300 by the 90nm 3800+ x2 - it just doesn;t have the same raw power, so I'd be tempted to think a 3600+ x2 on 65nm (brisbane) would be slower than the x2 3600+ with half the cache.

 

[Diogenes2]

Originally posted by: A554SS1N
The 65nm parts are performing slower clock for clock - I've seen the 65nm 4000+ x2 easily beaten in the anandtech review of Intels E4300 by the 90nm 3800+ x2 - it just doesn;t have the same raw power, so I'd be tempted to think a 3600+ x2 on 65nm (brisbane) would be slower than the x2 3600+ with half the cache.

Where is the 65nm 4000 mentioned in the 4300 article ? I don't see it ..

 

[TheMafioso]

All other models other than the x2 3600+ have same amount of cache in 90nm and 65nm variants, so comparing other models(like x2 4000+) may not be true in case of x2 3600+

 

[yh125d]

3600 brisbane = 65nm, 1.9gHz, 2x512 cache
3600 windsor = 90nm, 2gHz 2x256
3800 windsor = 90nm 2gHz 2x512

I'd go with the 3800, double the cache for ~$10 is a good buy

 

[Smartazz]

Why wouldn't 65nm overclock better? Isn't that usually the case?

 

[KDKPSJ]

Originally posted by: Smartazz
Why wouldn't 65nm overclock better? Isn't that usually the case?

That should be, but for now, not the case for X2. And it's slower as the others mentioned due to slower L2 latency. It eats up lower power though. It seems like AMD is putting all the effort into Barcelona.

 

[TheMafioso]

Originally posted by: yh125td
3600 brisbane = 65nm, 1.9gHz, 2x512 cache
3600 windsor = 90nm, 2gHz 2x256
3800 windsor = 90nm 2gHz 2x512

I'd go with the 3800, double the cache for ~$10 is a good buy

Yes, i'm also thinking of going in for x2 3800 too instead of 3600

One more thing the 3800 is available in 2 flavours 65W and 89W and both are 90nm i've found from net...
Which one is better OCing wise?

 

[myocardia]

The people who have bought the 65w 3800 say it doesn't overclock as well as the 89w version. Take that with a grain of salt, maybe. I know that I'd be buying the 89w version, since that's already fairly low. For instance, AMD says that every dual-core Skt. 939 Opteron is a 110 watt part.

 

[Smartazz]

Originally posted by: everydae

Originally posted by: Smartazz
Why wouldn't 65nm overclock better? Isn't that usually the case?

That should be, but for now, not the case for X2. And it's slower as the others mentioned due to slower L2 latency. It eats up lower power though. It seems like AMD is putting all the effort into Barcelona.

Is Barcelona the K8L chip?

 

[Smartazz]

I have the 89 watt version of the X2 3800+ and it is a great chip, it overclocked pretty well(2745MHZ), but I keep it at 2600MHZ and it runs pretty cool, around 45C max on core temp.