Clawhammer / San Diego

C

CmoAMD

New Member
Clawhammer and San Diego... I got questions. Im so stumped about which CPU to get, I want alot of power, but I know I dont "NEED" a WHOOOLE bunch.

I was thinking of the X2 4400.... but this dual core doesnt really impress me that much. Its going to come down to the 4400, or one of the 4000 Claw/San for sure. I would get the FX57, but its alot of money. Please help me with my questions.

What is the difference between Clawhammer and San Diego?

Why do more people choose Claw over San?

Why does San cost more? (They both same clock/cache)

Is the AMD 4000 the best of these 2?

Is liquid the COOLEST method of cooling your CPU?

How high could I OC the Claw/San 4000 with a nice cooling setup? 2.7?
 
What is the difference between Clawhammer and San Diego?
Click to expand...
The Sandy's based on the 90 nm process, the Clawhammer the 130 Nm. As such the Sandy runs cooler and can (theoreticly) obtain higher clocks. It also suports SSE3. Generly it is considered "better".

Why do more people choose Claw over San?
Click to expand...
I didnt know that was true, but the Claw's been out longer so thats why more people have it.

Why does San cost more? (They both same clock/cache)
Click to expand...
Because its based on more advanced tech.

Is the AMD 4000 the best of these 2?
Click to expand...
I assume you mean the 4400 and the 4000. It depends what your doing. I would pick the 4400 over it because games are becoming multithreaded and you can always OC.

Is liquid the COOLEST method of cooling your CPU?
Click to expand...
Liquid nitrogen is... :rolleyes:

How high could I OC the Claw/San 4000 with a nice cooling setup? 2.7?
Click to expand...
No one can say, you could end up with a killer chip that goes to 3.2 gigahertz, or you could get a dud that refuses to boot 1 Mhz over stock. Both of these scenario's are very rare and 2.7 gigahertz sounds about right, but you get the point.

get the SD core, not the Claw, the SD core with the 4000+ is THE EXACT SAME PROCESSOR AS A FX-53
Click to expand...
The FX-53 was a clawhammer and it had unlocked multi's.
 
You 2 done having battle of the platinum members? lol jk....

Hey you didnt answer me... "Nitrogen" lol. Would it be better to air cool or liquid cool the CPU... or both?
 
oh yea... and 3.2?!?!??!?! Is that possible witout nitrogen... jesus. Thats 800Mhz increase aint it? If I get a dud im sueing.... someone.... something.
 
CmoAMD said:
You 2 done having battle of the platinum members? lol jk....

Hey you didnt answer me... "Nitrogen" lol. Would it be better to air cool or liquid cool the CPU... or both?
Click to expand...
"Better" generely liquid cooling runs cooler... but its more expensive and can leak. Good air cooling can give results comparable to some (crappy) water units.
 
Really you wont be needing water cooling just stick with air.
You may want to get an aftermarket HSF though.
 
Is the AMD 4000 the best of these 2?

34erd said:
I assume you mean the 4400 and the 4000. It depends what your doing. I would pick the 4400 over it because games are becoming multithreaded and you can always OC.
Click to expand...

What I meant was, is the AMD 4000 the best of the Claw / San's. Could it be the 3700/3500's or...

Also, you said the 4400 was probably better.... is that a better chip? Can I OC it just as well? I dont know why I just dont see dual core as such an improvement, im probably wrong and its the best thing since.
 
CmoAMD said:
Is the AMD 4000 the best of these 2?



What I meant was, is the AMD 4000 the best of the Claw / San's. Could it be the 3700/3500's or...

Also, you said the 4400 was probably better.... is that a better chip? Can I OC it just as well? I dont know why I just dont see dual core as such an improvement, im probably wrong and its the best thing since.
Click to expand...
A heatsink will be good enough for most overclocks.

The 4000+ is the fastest, so yes, it is the best non-FX.

The thing about dual core is that games arent multithreaded yet, so they aren't using both of the cores. Once they are multithreaded, the dual cores will be a mojor boost even if the CPU has a slower clockspeed. Dual cores dont clock as fast because of heat and power limitations. So you're going to get a lower overclock because of heat and voltage. Basicly go dual core if you want to prepare for the future.

But if you do alot of video and photo editing, CAD, video encoding, or multitasking then the dual core CPU will help you out now...

Sorry I'm not a very good explainer lol it took my 2 paragraphs to explain the advantages of dual core.
 
Last edited:
I see entirely what you mean, Praetor also posted a link which was... phenomenol about the X2 and the 4000. In a way I want to get the 4000 SanD to OC the crap out of it... since its a FX at heart.

I also want to get the X2 for multitasking, does this fall under multitasking?

Playing music while having 2 messengers on with conversations while designing a website, downloading small files and browsing the web? Thats about as much multitasking as it goes for me... 4000 SanD capable of that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top