Athlon 64 3200+ - Newcastle or Clawhammer?

doczenith1

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
144
0
18,680
I'm looking to buy a new chip to replace my 2500+. Would y'all recommend the 3200+ in a newcastle or clawhammer core. Or is the 3000+ newcastle a better buy at a $45 savings?

Thanks,
Al
 

darko21

Distinguished
Sep 15, 2003
1,098
0
19,280
please see <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=186763#186763" target="_new"> this </A> inorder to make an informed decision

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.
 

TheRod

Distinguished
Aug 2, 2002
2,031
0
19,780
Check this graphic : <A HREF="http://www.hardware.fr/medias/photos_news/00/07/IMG0007917.gif" target="_new">http://www.hardware.fr/medias/photos_news/00/07/IMG0007917.gif</A>

This chart came from this french review :
<A HREF="http://www.hardware.fr/articles/496/page1.html" target="_new">http://www.hardware.fr/articles/496/page1.html</A>

You will have your answer! Basically, the 1Megs Athlon 64 is slower than the 512K Athlon 64. The extra cache do not compensate the extra 200MHz.

--
A7N8X / <font color=green><b>AMD Sempron 2800+</b></font color=green>
Kingston DDR333 2x256Megs
<font color=red>Radeon 8500 128Megs</font color=red> @ C:275/M:290
 

BeyRevRa

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2004
183
0
18,680
darko thats like the worst topic ever haha

AMD 64 3400+
MSI K8N Neo Platinum
1 GB Kingston HyperX PC3200
ATI AIW 9600XT
WD Raptor 74GB
 

endyen

Splendid
This may sound dumb but... You do know that the clawhammer and newcastle chips are A64, socket 754, and wont fit a socket A board, right.
The 3200+ nerwcastle runs 10% faster than the 3000+. Ten percent for $45 seems good to me at that end of the chip lineup.
 

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
If you overclock, I've heard the Clawhammer and Newcastle will hit the same speeds, which would put the Clawhammer at the advantage because of larger cache.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
 

doczenith1

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
144
0
18,680
You do know that the clawhammer and newcastle chips are A64
Yep. I'm leaning towards the ASUS K8N-E DELUXE mb. A little off topic but, can someone confirm that the nVIDIA nFORCE3 250 CHIPSET does <b>not</b> handle dual channel memory.

The 3200+ is about 27% more expensive than the 3000+, so by my math the 3000+ is a better deal.

I do plan to try to overclock a bit and that is part of my leaning towards the ASUS mb.

Thanks,
Al
 

Mephistopheles

Distinguished
Feb 10, 2003
2,444
0
19,780
That's quite an informative gif you pointed to there. It's very simplistic, but it does give you a general idea.

For those unwilling to read more reviews and look through a trillion benchmark scores, that pretty much sums one or two things up.

And more cache is always worse than more clock, that's for sure.
 

BeyRevRa

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2004
183
0
18,680
You could have the best of both worlds and get the 3400 :)

AMD 64 3400+
MSI K8N Neo Platinum
1 GB Kingston HyperX PC3200
ATI AIW 9600XT
WD Raptor 74GB
 

Mephistopheles

Distinguished
Feb 10, 2003
2,444
0
19,780
Yeah, but....

best of both worlds = greatest of all prices

Like S939: I'd love one, but since money doesn't ooze from my ears/doesn't grow on trees/doesn't reproduce itself, I just probably won't.....
 

BeyRevRa

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2004
183
0
18,680
Haha I know, I was being sarcastic. Money does however ooz from my ears apparently :)

AMD 64 3400+
MSI K8N Neo Platinum
1 GB Kingston HyperX PC3200
ATI AIW 9600XT
WD Raptor 74GB
 

endyen

Splendid
Well see, I guess I was wrong. I thought the Amd parts were better than the eqivalent Intel part.
Looking at that chart, I see I was clearly wrong.
I'll take the easy way out though, and decide that chart isn't worth the paper it's on.
 

BirdRobin

Distinguished
Sep 24, 2003
277
0
18,780
Don't remind me man, the difference between the 3200+ and 3400+ are about $100+ sing dollars. =(

AMD A64 3200+ (2.2GHz Newcastle)
MSI K8N Neo Platinum
1GB Corsair DDR400 ValueSelect (CL2.5)
R9600Pro @ 500mhz Core, 340mhz Memory
 

BeyRevRa

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2004
183
0
18,680
Yeah, when I got it it had just dropped in price so I snagged it, it was tax refund money so I went for it.

AMD 64 3400+
MSI K8N Neo Platinum
1 GB Kingston HyperX PC3200
ATI AIW 9600XT
WD Raptor 74GB
 

BirdRobin

Distinguished
Sep 24, 2003
277
0
18,780
Thats was very lucky, man, waiting fir the S754 3700+ to release, then we will kick some a$$.

AMD A64 3200+ (2.2GHz Newcastle)
MSI K8N Neo Platinum
1GB Corsair DDR400 ValueSelect (CL2.5)
R9600Pro @ 500mhz Core, 340mhz Memory
 

Cybercraig

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,058
0
19,780
From that chart it looks like the Intel 3.6E is going to rule the roost. I'm shocked that Kanavit doesn't dive in here!

Abit IS7 - 2.8C @ 3.4ghz - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - Yellowtail Merlot
 

TheRod

Distinguished
Aug 2, 2002
2,031
0
19,780
And more cache is always worse than more clock, that's for sure.
There is still some apps that benefits form the extra cache, but most of the time higher CPU speed is better in the AMD world.

In the Intel world it's another game! A Celeron 2.8 will never outperform a P4 2.4 or 2.6!!! :)

--
A7N8X / <font color=green><b>AMD Sempron 2800+</b></font color=green>
Kingston DDR333 2x256Megs
<font color=red>Radeon 8500 128Megs</font color=red> @ C:275/M:290
 

TheRod

Distinguished
Aug 2, 2002
2,031
0
19,780
This charet summarize the performance of the CPU, by compiling different benchmarks results.

So, in this chart both AMD and Intel looks nearly equal because the strong benchmarks offset the difference. The Intel lead in Audio/Video and the AMD lead in games is not evident from this "GIF".

You should read the complete article (translated or in French if you can read it). You will understand what this normalized chart mean. It's a really good chart to compare AMD vs AMD or Intel vs Intel. But, it's not very good to point out Intel and AMD strengths and weaknesses.



--
A7N8X / <font color=green><b>AMD Sempron 2800+</b></font color=green>
Kingston DDR333 2x256Megs
<font color=red>Radeon 8500 128Megs</font color=red> @ C:275/M:290