Associate
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 523
I kno both of them runa t 2.2 ghz stock, and the 3700+ has 1 mb cache which is double 3500+, but is that really worth that extra 20 quid?
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
A64 3500+ and 3700+
- Thread starter Runningkid
- Start date
Soldato
If ** saving money tehn get 3500+ its done me fine and games are fast as hell with a 6800.
If u got a spare 20 then i supose yeah, go for the 3700. Doubt ull have better performance tho.
If u got a spare 20 then i supose yeah, go for the 3700. Doubt ull have better performance tho.
Associate
I have both (well just sold the SD) and the 3500 is for sale in members market. The difference I found was small, CODUO loaded about 4 seconds faster possibly due to the extra cache. Windows feels no different.
If the difference in price is only 20, then go for the 3700SD.
If the difference in price is only 20, then go for the 3700SD.
Soldato
booyaka said:
Certainly, got one yesterday, currently at 2.8 on stock volts, air cooled.
Associate
Yeah 3700 are great overclockers i had mine upto 2.97Ghz stable on stock heatsink and fan, but i put it down to 2.87 just to be on the safe side as i tend to leave my pc on a lot. definately worth the extra £20!
Soldato
booyaka said:
Currently 280x10, currently priming, 3 hours in, going for at least 12, usually leave for 24 hours.