s754 3700+ Vs. s939 3500+

3700+
-------
-1mb of L2 cache
-CG core
- No dual channel support
- 12x multiplier

3500+
- 512 of L2 cache
- CG core
- Dual channel support
- 11x multiplier

Which is the better overclocker? Which would win hands down in benching at optimum overclocks for each? Keep in mind that both of these chips will be running under sub cooling.

Thanks for any input.

the 939 for sure, way better memory bandwidth in dual channel, plus, 939 is one generation newer than 754,meaning it'll be less time b4 you (for lack of better words) 'have' to upgrade.

Thats hard to belive considering the only processor out-performing the 3700 in the orb is the fx-53.

Any other comments? Anyone?

Socket 754 is a dying platform--the newest thing that will be coming out for it is Sempron 754. If you bought 754 you would be in a dead end platform. That said, 754 processors should be getting really cheap pretty soon.

Buy the 939.

At present the 754 3700+ (2.4GHz at stock) will beat the 939 3500+ (2.2GHz at stock) in most gaming benchmarks when overclocked to the max irrespective of whether it is a dying platform.

The performance difference between equivalent 939 and 754 chips is about 5%, and the 939 costs 300-500 more. The 754's also overclock better. Get a 754 and put some of the saved money into memory/Video.

May be a dying platform, but hmm.... Whats the better deal?

I would rather spend 540.00(3700+) for a processor on a dying platform that can only be surpassed in performance buy a cpu that costs 885.00(FX-53) on a newer socket.

When performance at a similar price differential as the 3700+ comes along, one would rather upgrade to a newest cpu AND mobo combo rather than upgrading to a more powerful cpu only to be put in a motherboard with lesser features that you bought along with a previous processor for its "future compatibility".

Also with extreme cooling which you seem to be likely using the playing field of overclocking is somewhat levelled so it is likely you will achieve similar speeds with both and with the extra cache outweighing the dual channel in applications such as 3D gaming - it makes it a better cpu. Whether the extra cash for the extra cache is worth it is entirely a personal decision however.

A 3700 beats a 3800 and you're asking about the 3500??? Dual channel is highly overrated...and does'nt equal 1 mb lvl 2.

http://hardocp.com/articleprint.html?article_id=626

Course I'd just get the FX if I choose to commit that much cash... might as well go all the way.

Would think the 754 wukk be around for a while yet. Obviously, one would think the Socket A xp chips will go by the wayside first. Personally, I would take the cheaper 754, especially with the larger cache and apply the extra bucks elsewhere in my rig.

nickmckay said:

the 939 for sure, way better memory bandwidth in dual channel, plus, 939 is one generation newer than 754,meaning it'll be less time b4 you (for lack of better words) 'have' to upgrade.

Click to expand...

The 3700+ is defintly faster then the 3500+ even the 3800+, The 3500+ is only a newcastle with 512kb cache running @ 2.2ghz (i think) and the Clawhammer 3700 is running @ 2.4ghz the 3800 is a newcastle running @ 2.4ghz but again it only has 512kb L2 cache. Upgrading in less time ur wrong, with S754 system you wont have to upgrade that until a year or 2, since the S754 is faster then the S939 they both have the same lench of time to upgrade.

Remember now clock for clock the newcastle doesnt compare and since this one is 200mhz slower its definetly not faster. The mem bandwidth you get from duel channle on the 3500+ also doesnt make up for the loss of raw speed the 3700+ has over the 3500

The part that ur right about is the s939 has a better future with the 90nm cpu's comming they will probly scail really high. S754 isnt done for im sure they will continue with the product line but the S754 is no sloutcher.

My cpu @ 2.5ghz is faster then the 3500+ and even tho the 3500 has a like 6k mem benchmark on sandra, while overclocked my cpu gets 4400 so thier really isnt much of a diff, overall since the price diff isnt much between the 3700 and 3500 id get the S939 not beause of the duel channle memory but because of the future upgradability. Since im not a rich guy tho id get the S754 and thats what i did, the 3700 like everyone has said here can only be beatin buy the FX'S which are $200-$300 more in price. With that i could buy a X800pro or a 6800GT for $100 extra and my system would deff smoke the 3500 and 3800.


Until you start seeing S939's getting 2700mhz for an Average overclock the S754 will reign supreme because of the price and how well they overclock. Tell me this would you rather pay $170 for a cpu that will overclock to 2.5-2.6ghz or $500 for a cpu that will overclock to 2.4-2.5ghz but has bonus of duel channle which today doesnt help for games or anything most of us do. ....

I'm still running the Athlon XP and I don't think I will need to up grade my CPU for at least over the next 12 months. The 754 will last at least 2 years. If you see sign of slow down, just overclock it and that will last you even longer. The only factor you need to worry is the cost. for the extra $300 - $500 dollar difference between 754 and 939, I will use that money for the state of the art video card. Video card makes the biggest difference between gaming.

754 is a dying platform? No no no, socket A is a dying platform. We have reached the limit for socket 462/A. 754 is a much better base to start on.

You had better hope it is not a dying platform, because it will soon become (once PCIx becomes more prominant) not only the platform anyone can afford, but even the crazy overclocking/high speed kings will be buying. As of right now, we do not need 939 in desktop applications. 754 with 1mb of cache on the chip will beat out any of the 939 in the same range, not to mention price difference (not only the chip, but motherboards are more expensive for 939)

As of right now. If you do not have 754 or 939 parts yet, then get a 2500 barton, or keep your current setup. Wait for PCIx to be put on amd motherboards mainstream, then buy amd64 or higher. but for the programs/games right now, you do not need the benefits of a 64 bit chip (you can get windows in a 64 bit version, but then you have to use all 64 bit programs)

RangerJoe said:

754 is a dying platform? No no no, socket A is a dying platform. We have reached the limit for socket 462/A. 754 is a much better base to start on.

You had better hope it is not a dying platform, because it will soon become (once PCIx becomes more prominant) not only the platform anyone can afford, but even the crazy overclocking/high speed kings will be buying. As of right now, we do not need 939 in desktop applications. 754 with 1mb of cache on the chip will beat out any of the 939 in the same range, not to mention price difference (not only the chip, but motherboards are more expensive for 939)

As of right now. If you do not have 754 or 939 parts yet, then get a 2500 barton, or keep your current setup. Wait for PCIx to be put on amd motherboards mainstream, then buy amd64 or higher. but for the programs/games right now, you do not need the benefits of a 64 bit chip (you can get windows in a 64 bit version, but then you have to use all 64 bit programs)

Click to expand...

The reason 754 is a dying platform is because AMD is making it the value platform. Case in point: the Winchesters (90nm) A64's will be 939 only. 754 won't go much, if any, higher than 3700+. Also, lower speed rated and more affordable CPUs will be out for the 939 by the end of the year.

always buy the best performing system for you at the time of purchase. other than graphics cards all of us here usually buy a new mobo with a new cpu because in a year or two you'll want new stuff anyway.

pci-e is like agp 4x-8x it offers very little performance boost over current busses.

its not that we don't need the extra mem bandwith on an a64 because of applications currently don't take advantage of it. its that the architectures smaller pipeline doesn't need to access memory as often as say a p4




"(you can get windows in a 64 bit version, but then you have to use all 64 bit programs)"


you do not need all 64bit programs to run a 64 bit opperating system x86-64 just stuffs two 32 bit instructions into one 64bit register allowing you to use both 32 and 64 bit applications simultaneously hence 64bit extended


"you do not need the benefits of a 64 bit chip"


for the average user in the next 2-3 years the benefit of a 64bit chip comes from the 8 extra registers allowing the processor to do more work at a time.

I didnt say 32 bit programming doesnt work on a 64 bit operating system, but to take full use of it, you need to be running the same type of software.

So you are saying that 2.4ghz is slow, and not good enough? Look at the performance AMD can get out of a 1.8 ghz chip. or a 2.0ghz.

The problem with lower speed and cheaper 939 is that to compensate for more costs in building, and keeping the price down, they have to put less cache in the chip (sempron). I would much rather buy a 754 with 1mb of cache, than a 939 with 512k. you will see a VERY big difference in twice the amount of cache, but close to the same clock speed.

In my opinion, there is no sense in buying a 939 platform now. The prices are too high for no performance increase. Save that $300 dollars or so, and put it to real good use when 939 prices go down to what the 754 levels are now. By then, you'll be able to afford some of the 939 cpus and mobos that aren't even out yet and that will make a big difference over a 754 platform. Heck, that $300 dollars might get you a whole 939 system or close by then.

You'll be better off if you buy 754 now for the next year or two. And you'll already have some of your next system paid with what you save.

I understand the "upgradability factor", but the fact of the matter is that in a year or two when it's time to upgrade your cpu to the latest 90nm technology, you'll want a new mobo anyways...

You all realize they are going to be phasing out the 939 chips, and modifying the 940 to do what 939 did. Such as dual channel ram (big selling point i guess)

You should check AMDs roadmaps more often, because 939 is not going to be the next best thing. 940 is.

RangerJoe said:

You all realize they are going to be phasing out the 939 chips, and modifying the 940 to do what 939 did. Such as dual channel ram (big selling point i guess)

You should check AMDs roadmaps more often, because 939 is not going to be the next best thing. 940 is.

Click to expand...

I think you have your facts backwards. Opterons are 940. FX's are going from 940 to 939. 64's are going from 754 to 939. I forget what socket 900 will be though.

Socket 900 is supposedly for DDR2