AMD Processors??

[Todd0]

Im buyin a new cpu. im tossin up between
Athlon 64 - 3700 (san diego core)
athlon 64 3800 (venice core)

the san diego has the 1mb l2 cash and i wont be overclocking the processor, coz i have really cheap ram. im just thinkin how they will perform compared 2 each other. any ideas?

 

[Flanker]

Neither of them will be a bery big upgrade from the 3000+ that you have right now, I don't think it'll be very noticeable.

The 3800+ will outperform the 3700+ in raw computing power (the 1M L2 cache only makes like .1 GHz difference), but for tasks that require the CPU to use a lot of cache, the 3700+ is better.

You don't need good RAM to overclock a PC, memory dividers.

 

[Todd0]

so what sorta programs use a heap of cash,
it'd have 2 make a diference....

 

[Todd0]

cache* haha i keep spellin it wrong

 

[003]

get the 3700+ easily overclocked to 2.4 on stock cooling, even with cheap ram, you can lower the ram:fsb ratio.

 

[ZeroStrife49]

Although mem dividers give a further OC, its not advisable to have memory and CPU running at different frequesncies, theres chances of errors...lol everyone does it tho

 

[Flanker]

Actually, Zerostrife, you're wrong on that count. Running with a memory divider on an Athlon 64 produces no problems and no decrease in performance at all. Its due to the integrated memory controlled on the Athlon 64. Pentium 4s still use the northbridge to talk to the memory, so running with a memory divider on Pentium 4s is not advisable, but on an Athlon 64, its perfectly fine.

I run with a memory divider myself.

 

[PZEROFGH]

i used to run a memory divider, but now my ram can do 265FSB