AMD Performance: Dual Core vs Venice Core

Hi .geek,

Reading the article posted above is rather pointless for the purposes of your comparison! The CPU's that are being compared are Venice vs. San Diego (San Diego being of the FX-55 family I believe, not X2 Dual Core!)

With much pains taking effort, I have prepared an exact match on AMD's website for you. Since I didn't know exactly which models you were considering, I added all 4 to the comparison! There are 2 models of each of these CPU's, they have different stepping and voltages, but the most important characteristics remain the same!

http://www.amdcompare.com/us-en/des...700DKA5CF&opn=ADA3800DAA5CD&opn=ADA3800DAA5BV

In summary, the Venice core has a single 1MB L2 cache, and the X2 having 2 cores has the 2x 512MB cache. All-in-all ... I'd go dual core!

PS: I believe Take 2 probably hasn't updated their price for that Venice core ... it shouldn't be more expensive!

Also, check out the prices of these CPU's on my site:

Sybaritic has the X2 3800+ for 1,439: http://www.bluesting.co.za/item.php?item=404
And the 3700+ for 1,228: http://www.bluesting.co.za/item.php?item=384
 
Hi .geek,

Also, I'm thinking that Take2 has added the specification incorrectly! On AMD's website, if you select 3700+ as a model number, ALL 3700+ models have 1MB L2 cache ... and Take 2 lists it as 512KB L2 cache ... just an observation!
 
Oh crap ... sorry ... forgot to mention the frequencies are also different (too obsessed with caching) ... the X2 has 2000GHz and the other runs at 2200GHz ...
 
it is no necessary to buy high colock single core amd. every lower colock cpu can easy overcolock.

the dual-core cpu is not much than single core at the same colock in games.
 
Why are you bringing up a two year old thread to say "exactly" not cool man :|
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X