3000+ to 3700+ ?????

[ReeceKB]

Hi There

Just wondered if it would be worth going from a Athlon 3000+ Venice to a
3700+ sandiego.

Thanks

 

[Ghuraba]

Depends what speed your running at with your Venice. The 3700+ does have 1MB Level 2 Cache comapred to the 3000+ Venice's 512KB which amounts to about 200mhz extra cpu speed. The 3700+ should clock to FX57 speeds no problem.

Michael

 

[stvmor]

Hi There

Just wondered if it would be worth going from a Athlon 3000+ Venice to a
3700+ sandiego.

Thanks

I think I would go for a 3800 dual core as they are sensibly priced now? Most 3700's seem to get around 2.7 GIG which is probably not much more than your 3000+ Venice!

 

[Minstadave]

Venice 3000 is 1.8ghz 512k cache, the San Diego 3700 is 2.2Ghz with 1Mb cache, so its about 1/3rd faster. The Venice 3000 should clock well though, and is a great chip to play with, so it might be worth pushing a bit before opening up the wallet.

 

[ReeceKB]

Hi

Thanks for the quick repy.

I a ready have it at 2.55Ghz but I dont need duel
core but I so I dont think theres much point getting it but I would consider getting the 3700+ as is sonds as a good chip.

 

[Hamoodii]

Stay with 3000+ Venice dont be silly reece you wont see a huge difference. I
already told you

 

[Gandalf501]

Why dont you go for dual core? Seems a waste of money upgrading from 3000 to 3700. Might as well put a bit more to and get a dual core 3800 as suggested. A more sensible investment than an extra 700 xp points....

 

[Nami]

I just recently made the exact change you are asking about.

I had my Venice @ 2.66Ghz which was a really nice overclock and I was well chuffed. I thought I had a problem with the memory controller so I bought a Sandy 3700 - turns out it was my RAM that was causing problems

Anyway, I've clocked this to 2.97Ghz Prime stable and it still feels like there is more to go! I'm a little reluctant to clock it any higher as 3Ghz is pretty damn fast. With the extra cache as well, this CPU is perfect for me. I also cba with dual core for now as the main use of my PC is to play a game which doesn't benefit from dual core, so even tho they are cheap it was still more cost-effective and the saving of £35 (diff between the 3700+ and a X2 3800+ at the time) was well worthwhile for me.

Personally, I'd buy the Sandy and sell the Venice on a generic online auction website The Venice should pull in £45 there to largely recover your costs

 

[Trilogy]

upgraded to 3500+

hi
i upgraded from a 3000+ to a 3500+ venice on the cheap and i think it was worth it

 

[spacegrass]

I have just made the exact same upgrade although I am yet to install the 3700+

my 3000+ is now clocked at 2.25 ghz which I am quite pleased with, 2.3 seems to be the roof but this is nice and stable.

 

[ReeceKB]

Hi Everone

I have decided to stick with my 3000+ as it's a lovley overclocker and it at 2.55Ghz stable but I and going to sell my Asus A8N-E mother board as a friend said I could get 2.7Ghz out of it with an MSI K8N Neo4 motherboard.

So thanks for all the reply's

Reece

 

[trojan698]

Might not be worth the hassle for 150mhz? I'd go for the 3700 and aim for 3g personally.

 

[taz488]

get it while you can, dual core isnt worth it for the lower models, get a great single core. youll see a difference.

 

[UKTopGun]

Might not be worth the hassle for 150mhz? I'd go for the 3700 and aim for 3g personally.

It is the hassel into getting 150mhz more because it gives you 300 more points on 3dmark converting into 1fps higher in games meaning more bragging rights .