3500 - 4000

[Ku-sama]

yup, 1.45V then 1.5V@3GHz

 

[Pancakes]

CORRECTION, he did not say clawhammer 3400+, read the posts before you make such a big mistake

I actually did say that.. why don't you read the posts before you say something stupid.

Right now i have a 3400+ clawhammer
L1-64 +64
L2- 1 gig
socket 754
out of mine, the 4000+ clawhammer and the 3800 newcastle which is the best and which is the worst?

notice the "out of mine"

 

[Filip]

I actually did say that.. why don't you read the posts before you say something stupid.



notice the "out of mine"

WTF??? who is this related to?

u said which is better, the 4000+ clawahmmer or the 3800+ newcastle, if this was related to me than you are seriously messed uo

 

[Pancakes]

Scroll up and look at what i said dude!
I said OUT OF MINE, the 4000+ clawhammer and the 3800 newcastle which is the best and which is the worst?

THATS THREE OPTIONS

now shut up and stop making a fool of yourself

 

[Filip]

Scroll up and look at what i said dude!
I said OUT OF MINE, the 4000+ clawhammer and the 3800 newcastle which is the best and which is the worst?

THATS THREE OPTIONS

now shut up and stop making a fool of yourself

u didnt say nothing about your processor, u only said you have 3400+ clawhammer, u didnt ask if it is good or not, u aked between 4000+ clawhammer and 3800+ newcastle, what the hell, im not going to open this thread again

 

[Praetor]

Dude... Jan just posted basically ever freakin Athlon ever made...can you not read it or something?

But thanks to how THG likes to leave out some information from time to time that list is far from complete. Far from

theres also two 3800s ones e3 the others e6, i dont know what that means.

Then you wont notice the difference (and really there isnt mcuh of one)

Does anyone know what the ones i posted before are?...
4000-sandiego or clawhammer?
3800 e3 or e6?

Ok theres also a friggen 4000+ thats a san diego 12th line down

Yes but yours is a Clawhammer

san diego is more known and in my opinion better

It's also factually better

out of mine, the 4000+ clawhammer and the 3800 newcastle which is the best and which is the worst?

In terms of absolute performance, the 3800 Newcastle.

Which is more important?
having a processor with 2.4 instead of 2.2
or having a processor with L2 cache of 1024 instead of 512?

CPU 101

listen, my Duron applebred has only 64KB of L2 cache, overclocked to 2.25Ghz from 1.8GHz it gets higher score than Athlon XP 3200+ with 512KB of L2 cache (2.2Ghz) in PCMark05.

Id like to see that Duron outpace the AthlonXP in a video encode.

so i would say get a cpu with 512KB of L2 cache cuz the extra 512KB isnt worth it IMO,

However both are clocked the same, so the extra 512K is a better decision.

CORRECTION the clawhammer is worse because 1. it runs hotter (130nm) and 2. it runs at 2.2ghz not 2.4ghz, i OWNED A 3400+ i would know! and yes, 200mhz is a better performance increase than adding 512kb!

If your correction was in fact correct that would be neat however
1. Clawhammer and Newcastle are both 130nm
2. The 4000+ runs at 2.4GHz

please, dont make such stupid mistakes again

Heh ive been saying that for a long time lol

i dont get it, my 4000+ is 400MHz slower then the FX-57, same core, only diffrence is the speed... yet im running 1.4V and the 57 is at 1.3V???

Is this the magical 3.4GHz chip?

I said OUT OF MINE, the 4000+ clawhammer and the 3800 newcastle which is the best and which is the worst?

1. For the record, the ADA3400AEP4AR is a Socket754 Clawhammer running at 2.4GHz so there ARE clawhammers running at those clocks
2. Your hostility will cease.

u didnt ask if it is good or not, u aked between 4000+ clawhammer and 3800+ newcastle, what the hell, im not going to open this thread again

Actually unfortunately, he did say so:

out of mine, the 4000+ clawhammer and the 3800 newcastle which is the best and which is the worst?

 

[Pancakes]

Lol thanks for the summary of the thread.
(no sarcasm intended)
filip-matijevic was about to rip my head of for no good reason.

 

[Praetor]

Now to address your issue more directly, thanks to AMD's brilliant (sarcasm intended) naming scheme we've got the following chips with the numbers 3400, 3800 and 4000 respectively.

• AMD Athlon 64 3400+ [Clawhammer512[Clawhammer], Socket 754 Lidded OmPGA, 2400MHz, ADA3400AEP4AR]
• AMD Athlon 64 3400+ [Newcastle, Socket 754 Lidded OmPGA, 2400MHz, ADA3400AEP4AX]
• AMD Athlon 64 3400+ [Clawhammer, Socket 754 Lidded OmPGA, 2200MHz, ADA3400AEP5AP]
• AMD Athlon 64 3400+ [Clawhammer, Socket 754 Lidded OmPGA, 2200MHz, ADA3400AEP5AR]

• AMD Athlon 64 3800+ [Venice, E3[Venice], Socket 939 Lidded OmPGA, 2400MHz, ADA3800DAA4BP]
• AMD Athlon 64 3800+ [Newcastle, Socket 939 Lidded OmPGA, 2400MHz, ADA3800DEP4AW]
• AMD Athlon 64 3800+ [Venice, E6[Venice], Socket 939 Lidded OmPGA, 2400MHz, ADA3800DEP4BW]

• AMD Athlon 64 4000+ [San Diego, Socket 939 Lidded OmPGA, 2400MHz, ADA4000DAA5BN]
• AMD Athlon 64 4000+ [Clawhammer, Socket 939 Lidded OmPGA, 2400MHz, ADA4000DEP5AS]

If you're looking for something to help you with making a purchase decision the following are what matter:
1. Socket: you'll want Socket939 over Sockeyt754
2. For identical clock speeds, you'll want more L2 cache
3. For non-identical clock speeds, 200MHz is more than enough to make up for 512K of L2 cache


For future reference, to avoid confusion, please be more specific with the chips in question; AMD's naming convention is messed up enough as it is

 

[Pancakes]

Thanks Praetor

Can i get a specific answer from you though, im not very good on making decisions on my own.lol

1) AMD Athlon 64 3800+ [Newcastle, Socket 939 Lidded OmPGA, 2400MHz, ADA3800DEP4AW]

2)AMD Athlon 64 4000+ [Clawhammer, Socket 939 Lidded OmPGA, 2400MHz, ADA4000DEP5AS]

-unfortunatly both are 130nm(if im correct)
-unfortunatly both are 1.50 volts (if im correct)
-only difference between them are the L2 cache (if im correct)
-50 bucks price difference between them (where im buying them)
-I want to spend minimum for very high performance

 

[Praetor]

-unfortunatly both are 130nm(if im correct)
-unfortunatly both are 1.50 volts (if im correct)
-only difference between them are the L2 cache (if im correct)
-50 bucks price difference between them (where im buying them)
-I want to spend minimum for very high performance

1. I would get the 3500 Venice (512K, 2.2Ghz)
2. Of those two chips I would probably get the 3800 myself.

 

[Pancakes]

Okay thanks a bunch