Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Athlon 64 3500+ core




  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    13

    Default Athlon 64 3500+ core

    For socket 939, which ones is better Newcastle or Winchester? Why?

    Many thx

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,525

    Default Re: Athlon 64 3500+ core

    Winchester, built on 90nm process instead of 130nm (Newcastle) so it uses power better, runs cooler and overclocks better but even the Winchester is now bettered by the Venice core so look around for that one instead.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    22

    Default Re: Athlon 64 3500+ core

    How good is the clawhammer core?
    <u>Nothin' to it but to do it</u>AMD XP 2000
    512 MB DDR266
    ATI Radeon 9700 Pro
    Asus A7N8x-x Mobo
    Windows XP Professional

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    _
    Posts
    349

    Default Re: Athlon 64 3500+ core

    Quote Originally Posted by dragon
    How good is the clawhammer core?
    The 3500 clawhammer (130nm) has half of the 1mb cache of normal clawhammer cpus (it may be a binned 4000+ didnt make the grade), its possible you could re-enable it, but I dont know the chances of that.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Minnesota, United States
    Posts
    4,543

    Default Re: Athlon 64 3500+ core

    The 3500 Clawhammers are relabeled versions of higher-end processors and tend to overclock just as well as they do.

    But with Venice out, I'd say that's irrelevant now. Those will beat Winchesters and sometimes Clawhammers (certainly heat-wise) in OCing.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •