• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Help me choose, 3700+ San Diego or 3800+ Venice

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
Get a 3000+ and o/c it to about the same speeds as the max o/c for the SD. The extra 512k cache doesn't make that much of a difference. In benchmarks its been shown to offer 1-5% extra performance. If the extra $200 is worth that, then go ahead.

SD: $324
3000+ Venice: $[email protected] (deal might have ended)
 
I guess I will go with the SD. The exta cache is very appealing. It's interesting that that 3800+ cost more tho.

I dont mind spending 3x as much as a 3000+, I want something a bit more high-end.
 
I would be tempted to go with the 3800+ Venice becuase I would bet on a better overclock from the 2.4GHz stock as opposed to the 2.2GHz stock of the 3700+ San Diego.

The only review comparing the two I could find was here.

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=219&num=1

The San Diego is about $50 cheaper on the egg so it's kind of a toss up. I would think the extra cache would make a bigger performance difference but I can't find any evidence to support any more than the 1-5% gain mentioned by pduan87 (thats matched cpu frequencies not the 2.2ghz San Diego vs. 2.4ghz Venice). Go for the Venice if you got the cash. :)
 
geid3811 said:
I would be tempted to go with the 3800+ Venice becuase I would bet on a better overclock from the 2.4GHz stock as opposed to the 2.2GHz stock of the 3700+ San Diego.

The only review comparing the two I could find was here.

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=219&num=1

The San Diego is about $50 cheaper on the egg so it's kind of a toss up. I would think the extra cache would make a bigger performance difference but I can't find any evidence to support any more than the 1-5% gain mentioned by pduan87 (thats matched cpu frequencies not the 2.2ghz San Diego vs. 2.4ghz Venice). Go for the Venice if you got the cash. :)
Click to expand...

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=62176

http://www.thelab.gr/showthread.php?s=&postid=243217#post243217

I believe there is also another one in german...

The extra cache is disappointing to say the least :-/
 
If I had to do it over again, I would get the 3200 and save the extra cash. The results with overclocking the 3700+ are not significantly better than with the 3200.

CJ
 
I would go with the Sandy, they both OC the same and the difference in speed is matched by the difference in cache, so since they oc almost the same, go with the Sandy, youll get to a speed and the extra cache will deffinetively help you out on some tasks
 
dont bother with the 3800. hardly anyone is buying it for the reason that its price is too high for what you get + other cpus overclock to 2.4ghz easy without the need for highend parts.

the 3200 is the best venice to get, but if you want a little more speed. get the 3700 SD and just bumping it up another 200mhz, you got a 4000+ sitting in your computer. and you save a few hundred bucks.

look at me. my 3500 runs at the speed of a Venice 4400 (2.8ghz) if one were to exist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

magellan
Ryzen 9 7900x3d: why not SRAM chiplet on both CCDs?
Replies
12
Views
617
magellan
magellan
Kingfish999
Latitude 7490 upgrades
Replies
12
Views
283
EarthDog
EarthDog
rainless
COD MWII
Replies
16
Views
431
rainless
rainless
Dorito Bandit
Using Keyboard & Mouse With 2 Desktops
Replies
3
Views
334
Dorito Bandit
Dorito Bandit
knoober
What is the best OS for televisions?
Replies
12
Views
530
knoober
knoober
Back