0.13micron or 90nm

P

poach

Weaksauce
Joined
Aug 31, 2004
Messages
97
This is realating to a 3500+.
What is the benifit of the 90nm core over the 0.13 core, and is the difference worth an extra $70???
Im planing to overclock it to the shit, so I would be prepared to spen the extra, but I dont want to pay more for on difference. :rolleyes:
 
The 90nm CPU's will perform much better when overclocking as they run cooler.
 
It's not a huge difference, think about it the FX series is built on 0.13 and they get nice ocs also.
 
The only real benefit is cooler running temps because it's on a lower voltage and whatnot. The 90nm's easily oc better than the 0.13micron's because of that ;)
 
Don't get the .13 micron CPU. It has little or no benefit over the 90nm version. The 90nm is cooler, oc's better because it's cooler, and it's cheaper. Some reviews even show it's a little bit faster per clock. It's not much, but every little bit helps. ;)
 
eraser_16 said:
The 90nm is cooler, oc's better because it's cooler, and it's cheaper.
Click to expand...

Cooler? yes
OC's better? from what i saw, yes
Cheaper? where the hell have u been? it is cheaper to manufactur but u canot buy it for cheaper then the .13 cpus due to the fact that it is BETTER and the demand is much higher. do u even know how much they cost?
 
gamekid said:
Cooler? yes
OC's better? from what i saw, yes
Cheaper? where the hell have u been? it is cheaper to manufactur but u canot buy it for cheaper then the .13 cpus due to the fact that it is BETTER and the demand is much higher. do u even know how much they cost?
Click to expand...

I think the 90nm are generally selling for what they are suppose to,it's just that nobody wants a 1.30nm so they have to lower the price to get rid of them. My 90nm overclocks very good, 2.65Mhz but i'm sure it would go higher with better memory. It overclocks this much at 1.45 volts which is fantastic,and runs nice and cool with my Gigabyte rocket Pro cooler. I'm also using a Gigabyte K8NSNXP motherboard which probably isn't best one for overclocking,i would try a MSI K8 Neo 2 but i want the Nf4 version instead. :D
 
gamekid said:
Cooler? yes
OC's better? from what i saw, yes
Cheaper? where the hell have u been? it is cheaper to manufactur but u canot buy it for cheaper then the .13 cpus due to the fact that it is BETTER and the demand is much higher. do u even know how much they cost?
Click to expand...

Well, when I said cheaper, I should have specified. The 3000 and 3200 are a steal when you buy them from most retailers. The only CPU that's being over priced right now is the 3500. But I haven't been paying much attention to the price on the 3500, I've been keeping my eye mainly on the 3000. That thing is really a steal on monarchcomputer.com. That's the CPU I'm looking to get. You can buy it cheap, and OC it to perform just as good as a 3500, or better.
 
KoolDrew said:
The FX series do not get that good of oc's..
Click to expand...
oh? 3.2ghz on stock voltage isn't too much for an fx-53 then is it? ;)

my opinion? get the 3200+ winchester. best deal for how much performance you can get out of it.
 
gamekid said:
sorry, but the thread started specified a 3500+
Click to expand...
i am aware, but the 3200+ is a much better deal than the 3500+ at the moment, hence why i said "my opinion?"
the 3500+ isn't worth the extra $70 for the increased oc'ing over the 130nm core
 
Thanks for your replies.
I had not even considered getting a 3200+, but I will look into it ;)
 
Especially if ocing a 3200+ should be a better choice. Anandtech overclocked theirs to 2.6GHz so you should be able to easily hit 2.4GHz
 
the newer weeks (past either 32 or 37) are pretty much a guarranteed 2.5-2.6ghz if you have the right mobo and ram to go with it
 
WINCHESTER ALL THE WAYYY! man i cant wait til my s939 3000+ comes in :p
 
Definitely 3200+ Winnie, .09 micron. For overclocking, I'd grab the 3200+ over the 3000+ just for the 10x multiplier. Too bad we couldn't unlock normal A64 chips to adjust the multiplier up and down.
 
I don't think you people see the point of his question. He wanted to know if it really was worth the $70 for the 90nm CPU. I think everyone already knows its better, but is it $70 better? :confused:
 
Bugalaman said:
I don't think you people see the point of his question. He wanted to know if it really was worth the $70 for the 90nm CPU. I think everyone already knows its better, but is it $70 better? :confused:
Click to expand...

i do not think so but i think we concluded that getting a 3200+ 90nm winchester is the best bang for ur buck and with the money u save u can get a good aftermarket HFS (xp-90/120+any fan) and get much better overclock while still saving u money.
 
"I don't think you people see the point of his question. He wanted to know if it really was worth the $70 for the 90nm CPU. I think everyone already knows its better, but is it $70 better?"

Well, if you want to be totally technical about it, there is no .13 micron 3500+. So the point is moot. So for the $70 you're getting dual channel ram, lower heat, better overclockability (may or may not matter to some) and lower power consumption. I'd say that's worth $70 :)
 
freeloader1969 said:
"I don't think you people see the point of his question. He wanted to know if it really was worth the $70 for the 90nm CPU. I think everyone already knows its better, but is it $70 better?"

Well, if you want to be totally technical about it, there is no .13 micron 3500+. So the point is moot. So for the $70 you're getting dual channel ram, lower heat, better overclockability (may or may not matter to some) and lower power consumption. I'd say that's worth $70 :)
Click to expand...

Don't know where you get $70 but,monarch has:
3500 OEM 1.30nm $272
3500 Retail 1.30nm $270
3500 OEM 90nm $315
3599 Retail 90nm $317
IN STOCK,execellant service, i bought my 3500 90nm from them.
 
Well, if you want to be totally technical about it, there is no .13 micron 3500+. So the point is moot. So for the $70 you're getting dual channel ram, lower heat, better overclockability (may or may not matter to some) and lower power consumption. I'd say that's worth $70 :)[/QUOTE]



No but there is a 1.30nm 3500....................
 
OK...I screwed that one up. :) I always thought the 3500+ was the first S939 chip based on .09 micron technology that AMD built. I stand corrected. Anyhow, I'd still grab the 90nm over the 130nm. For reasons stated above, minus the dual channel ram comment of course.

Thanks for the heads up guys! ;)
 
freeloader1969 said:
OK...I screwed that one up. :) I always thought the 3500+ was the first S939 chip based on .09 micron technology that AMD built. I stand corrected. Anyhow, I'd still grab the 90nm over the 130nm. For reasons stated above, minus the dual channel ram comment of course.

Thanks for the heads up guys! ;)
Click to expand...

i do think the 3500 90nm was the first 90nm sold,then the 3000 and 3200 became available.
 
i'm not sure if that's true.. if it was "released" first, the 3200 and 3000 definitly beat it to retail, because it's only been fairly recently that anyone could reliably get a 90nm 3500+
 
(cf)Eclipse said:
i'm not sure if that's true.. if it was "released" first, the 3200 and 3000 definitly beat it to retail, because it's only been fairly recently that anyone could reliably get a 90nm 3500+
Click to expand...

Well your both sorta correct. The 3500+ definitly were on retail but there just wasnt much of a reason to run out and go get one. Then the 3200 and 3000+ came out like a month afterwards and they were obviously better than their 13nm counterparts and since as the 3000+ was selling like hot cakes even when they were only 13nm parts...well its obvious what would happen next.

I think it was Monarch or whatever its called that had the 3500+ parts in 9nm flavors "reliably" when they first came out.
 
(cf)Eclipse said:
i'm not sure if that's true.. if it was "released" first, the 3200 and 3000 definitly beat it to retail, because it's only been fairly recently that anyone could reliably get a 90nm 3500+
Click to expand...

I bought my 3500 90nm on OCT 2 and i waited till they dropped in price before i got mine. I waited for about 2 or 3 weeks after they were available before i ordered it from MONARCH.
 
I'm so confused, can some one shed some light on this..

-All Socket 939 chips, as of now, are winchesters right?
-Are all winchesters on a 90nm process?
-Or can a winchestor be both on a 90nm and a 130nm process?
 
1: no, there are 3 based on the 90nm process. the rest are newcastle, and 3 sledgehammers (the a64-fx's)
2: yes
3: no, all winchesters are 90nm, as indicated by #2
 
Thank you eclipse! It's been bothering me for so long! I didn't want to go to the store and buy a new Winchestor and find out it's on a 130nm process. Thanks! you're the best!
 
Just to help clarify alittle more for you by adding on to his comment. The 13nm process is for the newcastles and the sledgehammers.

Becareful when you pick out your new A64 its easy to get the wrong one as they are all unique in what they bring to the table (winchester, clawhammer, newcastle, and sempron)
 
Don't know where you get $70 but,monarch has:
3500 OEM 1.30nm $272
3500 Retail 1.30nm $270
3500 OEM 90nm $315
3599 Retail 90nm $317
IN STOCK,execellant service, i bought my 3500 90nm from them.
Click to expand...

My $70 price difference comes from newegg.
3500+ 0.13micron $273 retail
3500+ 90nm $355 OEM
So it's more like a $82 difference.
Also people, dont worry about going a little off topic, I am enjoying reading these post's and thankyou for your input. :D
 
sempron isn't actually a core name though, it's the name of the suck ass low end cpu that amd is replacing duron with :D
and you also mean 130nm.

key thing here-

sledgehammer: dual channel memory + 1mb of cache -> opterons and fx's (mixed 940 and 939)
newcastle: dual channel memory + 512mb of cache -> socket 939
newcastle: single channel memory + 512mb of cache -> socket 754
clawhammer: single channel memory + 1mb of cache -> socket 754
these four are all 130nm

winchester: dual channel + 512mb of cache -> socket 939
as previously stated, winchester is 90nm

hopefully there will be no more confusions about core names after this. ;)
 
poach said:
My $70 price difference comes from newegg.
3500+ 0.13micron $273 retail
3500+ 90nm $355 OEM
So it's more like a $82 difference.
Also people, dont worry about going a little off topic, I am enjoying reading these post's and thankyou for your input. :D
Click to expand...

Is it worse buying one from Canada? I'm pretty sure the US doesn't charge any duties like Canada does or anything. Anyway, the 3500+ s939 costs around $355 Canadian too, but it's retail, which is ...(better?) So that would be like 300 bucks US right?

Edit: NCIX has the 3500+ s939 for $305 US. You can find it here.

Edit # 2:The title has "socket 939" and "newcastle" in it...so ...what?? So maybe you could be wrong (cf)Eclipse...in NCIX's specifications lists, it says that it's on "939-pin organic micro PGA " and "130 nanometer,
SOI (silicon-on-insulator) technology"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top