what processor...... - Page 2 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > Monitors, Printers and Peripherals
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 05-06-2005, 02:01 PM   #11 (permalink)
Him
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,190
Send a message via AIM to Him Send a message via Yahoo to Him
Default

so you cannot change the multiplier on the 32 and 3500?

If that is the case, is upping the voltage the only way to OC it?
__________________

Him is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 02:02 PM   #12 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Nubius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,600
Default

monarchcomputers.com

http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merch...ory_Code=AMD64

That's the 3200+ Venice Retail.

Senseless - FX-55 isn't using the same core, believe it is a clawhammer, or newcastle, can't remember off hand, but it's still using 130nm architecture

EDIT: No upping the FSB is the only way to OC it, voltage doesn't OC it, only stabelizes and OC
__________________

Nubius is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 03:49 PM   #13 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,013
Send a message via AIM to DJ-CHRIS
Default

You raise the FSB to overclock, but this requires good ram, mobo and power supply.

And a 3200+ is not guarnteed to run at 3500+ speeds, it's just likely.

All the CPU's start off the same (for the core) Than they get tested at a speed and if it passes, it will say lets go into the 3500+ bin. If another CPU doesnt pass 3500+ speeds, it goes into the 3200+ bin.

But since AMD owns soo much, all their CPU's go into the 3500+ bin for the main part, so they do a little switch and put them in the 3200+ bin, same for intel (on a lesser scale)

And because AMD still owns, you can overclock it even higher than a 3500+
DJ-CHRIS is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 04:25 PM   #14 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,790
Default

Quote:
Because the 3500 and the 3200 and the FX-55 all use the exact same core.
Just to clarify, they do not use the same core.

Athlon 64:
Newcastle
Winchester
Venice

Athlon 64 FX:
Clawhammer
Sledgehammer
San Diego

Cache size is again quite clever marketing and is an attempt to compensate for lower clock frequencies. Having larger cache size is somewhat important, but generally speaking, especially the hyoertransport bus on the CPU, clock speed is more important.
__________________
Intel C2D E6320 / AMD Athlon X2 3800+
Gigabyte 965P DS3 / DFI nF4 Ultra-D
2GB OCZ Gold PC2-6400 / 2GB OCZ Gold PC4000
eVGA 8800GTS 320MB / eVGA 6800GS 256MB
150GB Raptor / 74GB Raptor
2x500GB / 320GB
OCZ GameXStreme 850w / OCZ StealthXStream 600w
gaara is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 04:27 PM   #15 (permalink)
Him
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,190
Send a message via AIM to Him Send a message via Yahoo to Him
Default

Which is better: The 64 series, or the 64FX series?
Him is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 04:34 PM   #16 (permalink)
I Rule You
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 543
Send a message via AIM to FadingTheory Send a message via Yahoo to FadingTheory
Default

FX, without a doubt. The only 64 that comes close is the 4000.
__________________
Iraq... whee.
FadingTheory is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 04:34 PM   #17 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Nubius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,600
Default

well both are good. FX-55 is still a monster in terms of performance, but the venice's and san diegos are pretty damn good especially with OC'ing and their SSE3 instructions.

If a lot of programs started using SSE3 instructions then obviously a venice or san diego core would come out on top
Nubius is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 04:41 PM   #18 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,790
Default

The Athlon FX processors are the top end AMD processors.

The Athlon 64 FX processors were originally intended for servers, but migrated to desktop use and inherited a bit of unique architechture. The Athlon 64 FX-55 is the faster processor on the market right now. Infact, AMD is shifting the Athlon 64 series to the Athlon 64 X2, or dual core processors, but are leaving the FX series as powerful single threaded processors because they're simply the best of the best.

Just for even more clarity, I should mention a few things about the cores:

The Clawhammer and Sledgehammer cores found in the FX processors are basically Newcastle cores with a larger 1MB cache. Also, the older Athlon 64s on socket 754 were also Clawhammer and Sledgehammer.

The San Diego and Venice cores are basically the same thing, the San Diego simply has a larger cache and will be found in Athlon 64 processors such as the 3400+, 3700+ and 4000+.
__________________
Intel C2D E6320 / AMD Athlon X2 3800+
Gigabyte 965P DS3 / DFI nF4 Ultra-D
2GB OCZ Gold PC2-6400 / 2GB OCZ Gold PC4000
eVGA 8800GTS 320MB / eVGA 6800GS 256MB
150GB Raptor / 74GB Raptor
2x500GB / 320GB
OCZ GameXStreme 850w / OCZ StealthXStream 600w
gaara is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 05:13 PM   #19 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 587
Send a message via AIM to Sport1031
Default

3200+ or 3500+. Your call.

Venice Core.
__________________

Sport1031 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 10:03 PM.


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