San Diego OR ClawHammer

[westyfield2]

Another n00b question from me:

Which is better; <A HREF="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103529" target="_new">AMD Athlon 64 4000+ San Diego</A> <b>OR</b> <A HREF="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103497" target="_new">AMD Athlon 64 4000+ ClawHammer</A>.

Why the $4 difference?

Many Thanks
Ed ( 15 year old computer n00b )

 

[Ned_Flanders]

SanDiego is worth is - It is manufactured on a 90nm process as opposed to the 130nm Clawhammer.

They are basically the same chip, but the SanDiego is a lot smaller and runs on a lower voltage - thus it runs cooler.

Another advantage is that it will overclock better.

</font color=red><b><font color=red>■ ■ <font color=blue>■ ■ <font color=orange>■ ■ <font color=green>■ Dirty Little Sausage ■ </font color=green>■ ■ </font color=orange>■ ■ </font color=blue>■ ■</font color=red>

 

[Ned_Flanders]

A lot of people will buy the 3200 Venice core (half the L2 cache (512Kb)) and overclock it to 2.4 / 2.5 / 2.6 Ghz.

Could save you a bit of money.

</font color=red><b><font color=red>■ ■ <font color=blue>■ ■ <font color=orange>■ ■ <font color=green>■ Dirty Little Sausage ■ </font color=green>■ ■ </font color=orange>■ ■ </font color=blue>■ ■</font color=red>

 

[HardWareBoss]

Is this going to be a gaming puter?

 

[westyfield2]

Yep
Deffinately gaming (not much OCing)

 

[endyen]

The San Diego also supports SSE3. That might be usefull some day. The SD chip also has a better memory controler. Another vote for SD.

 

[Zoron]

I thought Venice was the one that supported SSE3...

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>

 

[HardWareBoss]

What's your price range for your new puter?

 

[mpasternak]

Zoron:

Venic and San Diego are the same Generation 90u Chip. both have the same architectures and featureset, the difference is the Sandiego has 1mb cache while the venice has 512kb.

out of the twocores (clawhammer or SD) i would go with the San Diego, you get the same chips as the FX series, just at a slower clock speed with the locked multiplier

 

[Zoron]

Ahh.. ok, thanks.

So many cores... so little time...

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>

 

[Zoron]

Don't make me angry. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry.

:tongue:

And just for the record... what other threads are you talking about? :tongue:

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>

 

[Zoron]

TRY HARDER, DAMNIT!!



<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>

 

[westyfield2]

I can get the ClawHammer for £50 ($90 according to XE) less than the San Diego.
So; what would you do? Save £50 and get the inferior ClawHammer or not?

It will be used for High-End gaming but I don't plan on overclocking it (much).

 

[endyen]

Is that a premium on the SanDiego? or a discount on the clawhammer? If it's a premium, wait till it goes away, if the clawhammer is discounted that much, grab it.

 

[ChipDeath]

No you wouldn't. You'd save £100 and get the 3200+ Venice like me and OC to beyond 4000+ speeds . Don't lie. :tongue:

---
<pre> (\_/)
|~~~~~|======
|_____| This was bunny. He was tasty.
/\/\/\/\</pre><p>

 

[ChipDeath]

If you're compromising on video card in order to afford the 4000+, then don't. Get the 3200+ and use the ~£100 saving on graphics instead. FAR better for gaming that way.
<pre>plus you can then overclock the 3200+ later anyway</pre><p>
What's the rest of the system you have in mind? Your Gfx card is about the single most important thing for a gaming rig really.

---
<pre> (\_/)
|~~~~~|======
|_____| This was bunny. He was tasty.
/\/\/\/\</pre><p>