AMD 3500+ Winchester vs. 3800+ Newcastle

Where are you from ? (The Somewhere Else Version)

  • Europe

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Asia

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Ociania

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Africa

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Middle East

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Somewhere else

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Status
Not open for further replies.

YanBooth

Daemon Poster
Messages
874
Hi,
I wanted to see what people think, whether the AMD 3500+ w/Winchester core, or the 3800+ w/Newcastle is better for a user who does not intend to overclock.

Thanks guys!

Yan
 
i would say the 3500 becuase te price difference is huge and the performance difference is only small.
 
$100 is still £100, and for not a noticeable difference is that worth it? better off spending it on a better cooling system so u get less noise :)
 
I'm having the same problem but I overclock so if anyone can hit me up with a PM telling me what I should get please do or leave one here
 
Personally, I would not pay the extra $100 for a minimal gain in performance. You would see a difference in benchmarks, but I highly doubt that you would notice a difference between the two CPU's in real world computing.
 
A Custom PC enthusiast magazine did a test on about 20 CPU's the other month and the top chip with the 3500 Winchester core, one because it's incredibly O/C-able and also because it provides great performance for the price.
 
aj2003 said:
$100 is still £100

No Euro is way better right now. 100 USD is worth about 50 Euro.

And the 4000+ will of course provide better performance, it is a FX-53 with locked multiplier, and i think it has 1mb cache - which is good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom