A hypothetical situation

[Sliver]

If I were to get an upgrade right now, which would be the better CPU to buy, a 1.6 Ghz Dothan, or a 3200+ Venice?

 

[Gautam]

If you're hell bent on PI scores and 3DMark scores, and are willing for one hell of a headache, (many) potential crap overclockers, then the Dothan might be a better choice. For a general-purpose rig there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that the Venice is a better option, and it'll still pull the big numbers.

 

[Sliver]

Judging by the list of successful OCs with dothans in the intel thread, both it and the venice hit the same clockspeeds.

 

[dicecca112]

If it were me I'd be comparing a 630 Intel to a Venice.

 

[Gautam]

Judging by the list of successful OCs with dothans in the intel thread, both it and the venice hit the same clockspeeds.

The Dothans are far inferior overclockers, having gone through four of them personally, I can attest to this. They oced something like this:

#1 ~2.65 GHz
#2 ~2.55 GHz
#3 ~2.45 GHz
#4 ~2.7 GHz

Event the best two are notably below typical Venice results. The best one clocks more or less as high as my A64 Clawhammer did. Expect to fall at least 200MHz below a Venice. It's not that big of a deal, since the Dothan is usually a bit faster clock for clock. If you want one to play with, go ahead, but if you're using it for a "real" computer, I still cannot recommend one.

The 630 is far too different from the two of them. It's slow in everything the Dothan and A64 are fast in, and fast where the Dothan and A64 are slow...

 

[johan851]

If it were me I'd be comparing a 630 Intel to a Venice.

Agreed.

What do you plan on using this system for? Each CPU has its strengths and weaknesses.