ComputerForum.com ComputerForum.com  
Go Back   Computer Forum > Computer Hardware > CPUs and Overclocking

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-14-2004, 03:30 PM   #1 (permalink)
Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 46
Default amd 64 socket 939 - 3000 vs 3500

i noticed there is a socket 939 model of the 3000+. what would you guys do? 3500 or 3000 performance to cost ratio?
tboski123 is offline   Reply With Quote


Old 10-14-2004, 09:26 PM   #2 (permalink)
Silver Member
 
ThePCmaN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Huntington, WV
Age: 20
Posts: 179
Default

3500+.. if ur gonna go S 939.. go for the 3500+ at the lowest!! thats my opinion
__________________
OCZ GameXStream 700Watt PSU
Lite-On 20x DVD-Burner
Seagate 320GB SATA HD
MSI K9A2 Platinum AM2+ AMD 790FX
AMD Athlon 64 x2 5000+ 2.6GHz BE
EVGA nVidia 8800GTS 512MB 256-bit GDDR3
HT Omega Claro 7.1 PCI Sound Card
Mushkin 4GB (1GBx4) DDR2 800 (PC2 6400)
Zalman 2Ball CPU Cooler
Logitech THX Z-5300e 520Watts 5.1 Speakers/Plantronics GameCon1 Headset
ThePCmaN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2004, 04:26 PM   #3 (permalink)
Administrator
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Canada
Age: 25
Posts: 19,954
Default

The 3500 is the midrange Athlon64 for the moment; the boarder between the 3800/4000 and the lower 3000/3200s which run the Winchester core. The 3500 comes as both Winchester (.09) and Newcastle (.13) cores
__________________
ASUS P5K Premium WiFi-AP, Q6600@3.7 / ASUS P5ND, E6400@3.8
4GB OCz Platinum XTC 8500 / 4GB CorsairXMS2 6400
5x500GB Seagate 7200.10 / 2x500 Seagate 7200.10
OCz 8800GTX 768MB @ 630/800 / 2x Galaxy 8800GT SLI
Praetor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2004, 10:27 PM   #4 (permalink)
Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 46
Default

so i take it that the newcastle is the better core?
tboski123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2004, 06:26 PM   #5 (permalink)
Administrator
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Canada
Age: 25
Posts: 19,954
Default

By technicality yes. BUt not for long. The only reason the Newcastle is "better" is because they come in higher clocks (i.e., the 3500, 3800 as opposed to 3000, 3200 etc). Its not confirmed what the status of the A64-4000 is although it seems to be a remarked FX53 in almost all respects.
__________________
ASUS P5K Premium WiFi-AP, Q6600@3.7 / ASUS P5ND, E6400@3.8
4GB OCz Platinum XTC 8500 / 4GB CorsairXMS2 6400
5x500GB Seagate 7200.10 / 2x500 Seagate 7200.10
OCz 8800GTX 768MB @ 630/800 / 2x Galaxy 8800GT SLI
Praetor is offline   Reply With Quote


Old 10-18-2004, 10:45 AM   #6 (permalink)
Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 46
Default

i saw one of those aquamark test graphs and the 90nm scored better then the 130nm. any thoughts?
tboski123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2004, 04:20 AM   #7 (permalink)
Administrator
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Canada
Age: 25
Posts: 19,954
Default

What do you want me to say? Its the same chip with minor tweaks ... noth that theres a massive difference in stock perf.
__________________
ASUS P5K Premium WiFi-AP, Q6600@3.7 / ASUS P5ND, E6400@3.8
4GB OCz Platinum XTC 8500 / 4GB CorsairXMS2 6400
5x500GB Seagate 7200.10 / 2x500 Seagate 7200.10
OCz 8800GTX 768MB @ 630/800 / 2x Galaxy 8800GT SLI
Praetor is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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 On

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:43 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0 ©2008, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 2002-2008 Computer Forum and Web Design Forum