 |  |  |  |  |
AMD 3700 San Diego
| |||||||||
|
AMD 3700 San Diego
| | |||||||
 |
 |
| | Thread Tools |
10th June 2005, 04:21
| #1 |
| Member  Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,738
 |  AMD 3700 San Diego When AMD decided to move to the 90nm procces for its "Winchester" core, it seemed that they had a big success on their hands. However, since that release the Winchester has seen a speed bump above the original 3500+ running at 2.2Ghz. AMD have now updated the 90nm process and given us two cores: the Venice, with 512KB L2 cache; and the San Diego with 1MB L2 cache. Both of these have a CPU running at 2.4 GHz. With the release of the FX 90NM range, clock speed will increase to 2.6- 2.8. With this new headroom created by the new core, can we expect an increase in the overclocking potential of the lower end models? Well, today we have the 3700 San Diego under the microscope. How well does it perform? How well does it overclock? Link: http://www.bleedinedge.com/reviews/p...-Diego_01.html 
__________________ lazyman Opteron 165 (2) @2.85 1.42 vcore AMD Stock HSF + Chill Vent II |
|  |
|
10th June 2005, 09:00
| #2 |
|
Posts: n/a
| If my budget does not reach the expected levels, I think this the best value AMD processor and my next buy. |
| |
|
10th June 2005, 09:16
| #3 |
|
Posts: n/a
| I hate them for not making a graphic comparison of the FPS over time. 1MB is SUPPOSED to help with the minimum FPS. |
| |
|
10th June 2005, 10:33
| #4 |
|
Posts: n/a
| That's what I thought. Especially in Doom 3, which is supposed to be a very CPU demanding game. |
| |
|
10th June 2005, 11:19
| #5 |
|
Posts: n/a
| I also consider it weak that they used a stock AMD heatsink to overclock. Only masochists can use that thing. someone make us [H] FPS graphs for 3700+ and 3800+ |
| |
|
10th June 2005, 12:02
| #6 |
|
Posts: n/a
| I tried to make the stock HSF more quiet, but AMD had the brilliant idea of equipping it with a 70mm thin fan! Funny thing it is probably more expensive than a standard 80mm fan. That little damn thing is the noisest component I have. I tried to replace it with a papst 70mm but I couldn't find the specs for the stock fan at AMD's website. (anyone?) So I don't know its rpm nor its CFM. As if that wasn't enough the screw holes on the papst are smaller than on the AMD! And that is probably AMD's fault being unconventional again. |
| |
|
10th June 2005, 12:04
| #7 |
|
Posts: n/a
| Wouldn't an HSF with an 80mm fan have cooled the 3500+ more efficiently and more quietly? Go figure. |
| |
|
10th June 2005, 12:33
| #8 |
|
Posts: n/a
| the bigger the fan the more it's suited for silence it can't be big enough, especially nowadays where it's possible to achieve high end performance with low noise 120mm fans |
| |
|
10th June 2005, 12:45
| #9 |
|
Posts: n/a
| I mean as fas as the stock HSF supplied in the boxed version, is concerned. |
| |
|
10th June 2005, 12:53
| #10 |
|
Posts: n/a
| Easily, the problem is that most companies are cheapskates when they lay down the specs of the stock HS even if the fan size is the cheapest way to get more silence. |
| |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| |
