Proc Comparrison - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > Hardware Repairs and Troubleshooting
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 11-02-2006, 07:52 PM   #1 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 424
Default Proc Comparrison

Alright, i'm going to be doing alot of gaming and I was trying to compare these 2 proc, now I heard not many games support the dual proc mode so..

AMD Athlon 64 3700+ Processor San Diego 2.2GHZ 1MB L2 Cache

OR

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ Manchester 2.2GHZ 512KBX2

I used to have the Venice version of the 3700+ how much faster will it be if I get the San Diego version, cuase i'm pretty sure mine just crapped out lol..
__________________

raiden_nrl is offline  
Old 11-02-2006, 08:03 PM   #2 (permalink)
G33K P0W3R!!!!
 
bmxfreakrider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: HickTown, California (hesperia), and West Hollywood
Posts: 2,068
Default

go for the 4200. just a little info if u dont know, a 3700+ compares to a 3.7ghz p4, and the 4200 would = a 4.2ghz p4. if you wanted to go for a single core, go for the 3800+, they have better oc'ing capacity. but if you wanted to go all out, get a E6300, or a E6600 if u got the $$$(theyre both in the $xxx pricerange tho)
__________________

__________________
Listen to my music! and random/funny videos XD
Need a HDTV? Come find me at BestBuy #108 in Victorville XD
:D-----v Just pwnt my cpu, 900mhz OC v-----:D
bmxfreakrider is offline  
Old 11-02-2006, 08:24 PM   #3 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 424
Default

Yeah I was looking at Proc under $250 CAN, and those were the two that stuck out the best..
But i heard that it would only run in dual core mode with certain games.
raiden_nrl is offline  
Old 11-02-2006, 08:44 PM   #4 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 424
Default

Alright so would this be considered better then the San Diego?

AMD Athlon 64 3800+ Processor Venice 2.4GHZ 512K L2 Cache

The San Diego has 1MB L2 cache but the venice is a 3800...
raiden_nrl is offline  
Old 11-02-2006, 11:23 PM   #5 (permalink)
Newb Techie
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: SC, USA
Posts: 34
Default

The 3800+ would beat out the 3700+ and X2 4200+ in most single-threaded apps because of the higher clock speed, until games and apps start taking advantage of the dual core. As far as gaming is concerned, the two chips are between 5-7 fps of each other, so not a major difference. I still would say go with the 4200+ , just because more programs will be written for dual core chips in the near future.
Behemoth is offline  
Old 11-03-2006, 12:18 AM   #6 (permalink)
Do work.
 
molsen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 1,177
Send a message via AIM to molsen
Default

if you're going to overclock at all, you might as well get the 3700+ sandy instead of the 3800+ venice because the sandy has 1mb cache and will EASILY get past 2.4ghz. besides you wouldn't notice any difference between 2.2 and 2.4ghz.

out of all 3, however, i'd get the dual core.
__________________
http://mattjolsen.tumblr.com
flickr

Intel E8400 @ 3.78ghz
8gb (4x2gb) G.SKILL DDR2 1600 @ 420mhz, 5-5-5-12
ASrock P43Twins1600 (hates RAM dividers)
WD Caviar 500gb + 250gb hdd, 32mb cache
eVGA 7900gs @ 585/1700mhz
OCZ GameXStream 600w PSU
Sound Blaster X-Fi Platinum
Cooler Master Centurion 5 case
molsen is offline  
Old 11-03-2006, 12:46 AM   #7 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 424
Default

Well, the 3800+ venice with 512 L2 cache is $140 CAN

And the 3700+ San Diego with 1MB L2 cache is $280

So $140 difference for not much performace change..
I think i'll go with the 3800+ and overclock that.
raiden_nrl is offline  
Old 11-03-2006, 12:48 AM   #8 (permalink)
Do work.
 
molsen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 1,177
Send a message via AIM to molsen
Default

oh holy crap. thats an odd price difference. yea good call
__________________
http://mattjolsen.tumblr.com
flickr

Intel E8400 @ 3.78ghz
8gb (4x2gb) G.SKILL DDR2 1600 @ 420mhz, 5-5-5-12
ASrock P43Twins1600 (hates RAM dividers)
WD Caviar 500gb + 250gb hdd, 32mb cache
eVGA 7900gs @ 585/1700mhz
OCZ GameXStream 600w PSU
Sound Blaster X-Fi Platinum
Cooler Master Centurion 5 case
molsen is offline  
Old 11-03-2006, 05:02 PM   #9 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 424
Default

For $25 more I can get a
AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ Manchester 2GHZ
Are the manchester cores slower then venice?
And also if it was only using one proc in a game it would perform at 3800 right?
raiden_nrl is offline  
Old 11-03-2006, 05:03 PM   #10 (permalink)
Do work.
 
molsen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 1,177
Send a message via AIM to molsen
Default

well it's 2ghz vs. 2.4ghz, so, yes they're slower....but only in single-thread mode. if you plan on overclocking, you can probably OC the 3800x2 to maybe 2.4ghz
__________________

__________________
http://mattjolsen.tumblr.com
flickr

Intel E8400 @ 3.78ghz
8gb (4x2gb) G.SKILL DDR2 1600 @ 420mhz, 5-5-5-12
ASrock P43Twins1600 (hates RAM dividers)
WD Caviar 500gb + 250gb hdd, 32mb cache
eVGA 7900gs @ 585/1700mhz
OCZ GameXStream 600w PSU
Sound Blaster X-Fi Platinum
Cooler Master Centurion 5 case
molsen is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.