|
|
|
AMD Athlon-64 3200+ 512KB or 1MB?
|
|
|
XxWTFxX
Newbie
|
16. July 2004 @ 21:13 |
Link to this message
|
I'm wondering what I should get. The processor with 512kb cache or the one with 1MB. On newegg, they are actually about the same price. Problem is, the 1MB one is either refurbished or "OEM" (can anyone explain what this is and if it is still high quality plz?). Here are the links
1MB, OEM
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=19-103-413&depa=0
512kb, Retail
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=19-103-483&depa=0
Praetor once told me that having the 1MB Cache would be nice...so I'm wondering if I should go for the non-retail one. I don't usually trust stuff thats refurbished though >_<.
Oh, and by the way...The 512kb one has a Newcastle core, and the 1MB has a Clawhammer core. What's the difference, and which one is better? :)
Thanks a lot
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
16. July 2004 @ 23:02 |
Link to this message
|
I wouldnt go for refurbished although Ive never really encountered problems with refurbished parts and stuff. OEM just means u get the chip, no HSF, not fancy box with instructions, just a chip. If you have the option of getting a non-refurbished, OEM 1MB chip go for it .. the HSF that it ships with isnt adquate anyways :) A good comment about the smaller cache sizes (courtesy of ZDNet)
Quote:
Generally, a larger cache or pool of memory located close to the processor core, will deliver greater performance when all other features are the same. But AMD has several ways, including manipulating cache size and clock speed, to get the amount of performance it wants out of its Athlon 64s. And analysts say that smaller cache size could help boost AMD's manufacturing output by allowing the company to switch off a section of the cache in some chips if they include flaws.
Most PC customers aren't likely to notice the changes in cache and speed in a Newcastle chip versus the original Athlon 64 as the performance of each chip remains the same. While they each have 512KB of cache, the Newcastle Athlon 64 2800+ chip runs at 1.8GHz, the Newcastle 3000+ runs at 2GHz and the Newcastle 3200+'s clock speed is 2.2GHz. In contrast, AMD's original Athlon 64 3200+ model with 1MB of cache runs at 2GHz, while its 3400+, also with 1MB of cache, runs at 2.2GHz.
If I dont have my names alll mixed up the Newcastle is the more advanced chip and the extra half-MB of cache doesnt make significant gains to performance (partially because of the much shorter pipeline design of AMD as opposed to the sheer size of the P4 design)
|
|
XxWTFxX
Newbie
|
17. July 2004 @ 00:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
So since the 512kb one has the newcastle core, I should just get that instead? Also, the jump in cache won't affect my speed so much right?
btw, whats an HSF
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
17. July 2004 @ 04:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
Unibonger
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
27. July 2004 @ 12:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
I have the Athlon 64 3200+ Clawhammer with 1mb L2 cache.Got it from Newegg as a matter of fact, it's a very fast processor my games have never run faster or looked better with the addition of a ATi Radeon X800 Pro all sitting on my new MSI K8N Neo Platinum MB.I debated getting the Newcastle processor as well for 2 days before deciding to get the clawhammer.I wouldn't do it any differently I used a better then stock HSF and Artic Silver 5 thermal paste something you still won't see from the factory, and I lapped my HSF to a nice reflective surface before installing as well.
You can't go wrong IMHO getting either processor, AMD is making great stuff now, I think of mine as my li'll pentium killer LOL
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. July 2004 @ 12:13
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
27. July 2004 @ 13:13 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
I debated getting the Newcastle processor as well for 2 days before deciding to get the clawhammer.I wouldn't do it any differently
Any particular reason? The Newcastle is more advanced :)
Quote:
You can't go wrong IMHO getting either processor
Very true
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Unibonger
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
27. July 2004 @ 19:00 |
Link to this message
|
|
It was more of a gut feeling to go with the clawhammer more then anything else, besides I have never had a cpu with 1mb of L2 cache on it before.
I love how this cpu responds in games.I don't know if my ram is holding me back as it was not rated for this MB or cpu.I currently have 1gb 2x512mb of PC3500
Mushkin Level 2 BH-5 ram, the black pcb. It worked well for on the NF2 board I originally purchased it for running in dual channel mode.I haven't tried an overclock yet since I need some more burn in time before I mess with it.Besides my games run very smooth boot up quickly.
if you can't decide which cpu flip a coin, LOL
|
|
