This is the 3500 listed on new egg for details specs. Core Venice Name Athlon 64 3500+ Op Freq. 2.2GHz FSB 1GHz L1 Cache 64KB+64KB L2 Cache 512KB Process 90 nm Hyper-Transport Support Yes 64 bit Yes Multimedia Instruction MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, 3DNOW! Professional Voltage 1.35/1.4V This is the detailed specs listed on new egg for the 3700 Core San Diego Name Athlon 64 3700+ Op Freq. 2.2GHz FSB 1GHz L1 Cache 64KB+64KB L2 Cache 1MB Process 90 nm Hyper-Transport Support Yes 64 bit Yes Multimedia Instruction MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, 3DNOW! Professional Voltage 1.35/1.4V So based on those specs there is only 2 differences. The L2 cache of the 3700 is 512Kb more resulting at 1MB total and the Core is a San Diego over a venice. I know that the San Diego core was used on one or two of the FX series of processors but does that core offer any additional benefits over the Venice core or is the price difference pretty much the cache only? The price difference is only $40 between the two chips so I want to know if im going to see a difference in getting one over the other or if its just data on paper. Its for a system on a client but ive never realized how close in price these two are untill recently. Thanks for the help! edit: I do realize that the extra cache is going to add a little more kick to this processor but im not sure how much and if thats about the only thing that the $40 extra is for.
The extra cache is worth a little in performance terms, you probably wont notice it in realy life though. If you can afford the extra then go for it, if you cant then dont bother... You probably wont notice the extra cache... Could always plump for a 146/144/148 opteron instead... 1mb cache as standard, and should be a little cheaper
No point unless the price difference really is marginal because the extra 512k makes almost no difference in real-world useage. The Venice will run cooler and probably overclock better, too.
so there is not really a difference in the cores in terms of layout and perf? I think ill go for the venice if thats the case though.
Overclocking is just chance on what chip you're going to get - just because one gets 2.7GHz doesn't mean another will. I reckon that between those two cores, you'll see about a ~5% difference in performance during everyday use, which is below the human threshold of perception. Go for the 3500+ Venice - it'll probably overclock slightly better and run cooler too.
yeah im not concerned for overclocking on this chip becuase its going to a client so it will run at stock speed for warranty purposes. Ill probably go with the 3500 or maybe look into an opteron as hes going to be doing mostly office work.
Go for the 3700+ coz i bought one from overclockers and it looks like they may be 148 opt's in them, coz mind clocked up to 2.750GHz on stock volts and stock HSF!
Every chips different, as noted in another thread the stepping has a big bearing on the chips overclockability
Go for the 3700+, I've clocked mine to... wait, I haven't clocked it. I would imagine it to be somewhat more efficient per clock, hence rated as 3700+ with the same core speed. But if your customer can wait a few extra seconds/milliseconds for something to render/convert/compile then you may as well go for the 3500+. The extra cache would only come useful in cetain situations, and even then it wont make a huge difference.
sorry if this is old, I have the 3700 and i have heard the 3500 would have to be clocked at 2.4 to match the 3700 2.2 at stock
Incorrect - the extra cache makes a ~8% difference or so,and that's in compression tasks, not for gaming or general use - the actual performance disparity is practically nothing for those tasks.
I thought of a good analogy for this. imagine a 3500 with its 512kb of cache is cake, with sprinkles and it costs £1.45. now, a 3700 with its 1mb of cache is the same cake, but double the sprinkes and it costs £1.60. at the end of the day, you are still getting a cake, but having to pay a fair bit more for extra sprinkles. Now I'm stuck because you cant compare overclocking on cakes. [edit] One could say you could put aftermarket cream inside the cake, and the point at which the cake splits is the limit of the chip. With more sprinkes the overclocking will be slightly dampened as the sprinkes would cause the cake to rupture more easily. No nevermind that sucked.
According to AMD's PR system, a Venice running at 2.4GHz is branded a 3800+, so, that makes it faster overall than a 3700+ SD @ stock.
