There are many 3400+'s??? OMG?! Help!

ok, i take that back...get the one with 1mb cache unless you don't want to overclock...get the 1mb cache one and OC it to 2.4GHz, easy enough...but, if you aren't gonna OC, get the 2.4 with 512k cache....
 
There is one more A64 3400+ that you didn't list.

The A64 3400+ Socket 939 2.2GHz, 512K, 800HT Link

:D
 
Alex41290 said:
ok, i take that back...get the one with 1mb cache unless you don't want to overclock...get the 1mb cache one and OC it to 2.4GHz, easy enough...but, if you aren't gonna OC, get the 2.4 with 512k cache....
Click to expand...
I have to agree. I have the clawhammer, and love it. It is a little hard to overclock. You should be able to get 2.4 with good memory and cooling. I haven't ran stock speeds since the day I got it.
 
NCIX.com said:
This product does not include the metal heat spreader that retail Athlon 64 parts normally have.
Click to expand...

voila...not that big of a deal, but i'd rather get the REAL 3400+....:p
 
Alex41290 said:
voila...not that big of a deal, but i'd rather get the REAL 3400+....:p
Click to expand...

what are you talking about?

u were groveling over the mobile the other day!

but, don't mobile's oc a LOT better than the other ones... i know the 2400 can oc like mad...

go check newegg.com :D
 
BakedGoods said:
I thought Mobile CPU's are better overclockers? No?
Click to expand...
only for athlon xp's. the mobile a64's don't really oc much faster... you'd be better off just buying a winchester core at that rate ;)
 
The 2.4Ghz 512k is the best choice. The extra cache does not help performance. Even if you are overclocking it would be better as the clawhammers do not overclock as good.

So go with the 2.4Ghz 512k ;)
 
KoolDrew said:
The 2.4Ghz 512k is the best choice. The extra cache does not help performance. Even if you are overclocking it would be better as the clawhammers do not overclock as good.

So go with the 2.4Ghz 512k ;)
Click to expand...
Cache doesn't help? That's a new one. Why do they even have it, then? Maybe we could get rid of it entirely since it doesn't help. Why, it would make the production costs much lower.

As for ClawHammers being bad overclockers; wrong again: 3700+ can reach upwards of 2.8GHz on about 1.75-1.8vcore.

In fact; the 3400+ is a stupid choice alltogether. They usually aren't much better overclockers than their 3200+ brothers, and are more expensive for those extra 30MHz you can squeeze out of them. Either get a 3200+, or a 3700+ if you're going s754. 3700+ seems to be the new breed of ClawHammers that's similar to the FX53.

Mobiles are only better overclockers in essence that they are all rated at 100°C maximum temperature; making them very resistant to overheat death... then again, they are merely rated. Sure, they are better than desktops, but you can easily damage the core otherwise. Crush it. You can't even get a proper shim for it.

And I agree with Eclipse; s939 Winchesters are the way to go... once DFI releases their nF3U board. Hehe :)
 
Is this for a new rig or an upgrade or something? Just wondering because I would get a socket 939 setup.
 
definatally get the 939 (if possible)

better features on mobo and (i think) they perform better
 
KoolDrew said:
Is this for a new rig or an upgrade or something? Just wondering because I would get a socket 939 setup.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

Mobos are a little immature, but you shold find the DFI one sometime soon, if you don't plan on buying right away. Even if you do buy it today, you can always replace the board later; if you happen to become unhappy with the former.
 
that said, a socketA mobo could have better stuff than a 939, its just the board that you get...you can have the same features on a mobo from one socket to another, its how well they work and the performance of the mobo....as for better performance, 939 hands down beats the living sh*t out of 754 because of the on-die memory controller and dual channel.

so yes, i just added to yours TJ, if you have a choice, get s939...its practically the same price, if not maybe a few dollars more/less...just do it ;)
 
yah...

basically what i said...

and i guess i was right about the 939 performing better :D
also, the reason i said "939's have better mobo options" is because i know the socket 940's require ECC ram and Registered Ram... which is a BIG price increase... but u probably don't need to worry about that with the other types of Processors
 
Socket 940 is also meant for servers and with that ECC registered RAM it would be slower. Socket 939 is the way to go especially with the additions of the 3000+ and 3200+. Now it is affordable.
 
spin02 said:
I have to agree. I have the clawhammer, and love it. It is a little hard to overclock. You should be able to get 2.4 with good memory and cooling. I haven't ran stock speeds since the day I got it.
Click to expand...
yeha i totally asgree with both of those statements.
 
Alex41290 said:
as for better performance, 939 hands down beats the living sh*t out of 754 because of the on-die memory controller and dual channel.
Click to expand...

A correction... the 754 also has the on-die memory controller. The 939 does not "beat the shit out of the 754". It has been shown that the dual channel only has maybe a 5-10% difference. Dont believe me? look at the FX series comparison with the A64's. As far as I know, the A64's still only have single channel memory, and the dual channel is reserved for the FX series. Please correct me if I am wrong. Anyway, dont recommend the 939 for pure performance. Yes, they are good, but recommend it because the 754 socket is dead. The reason why they have the one socket is because its probably more cost effective to have one socket as opposed to two different sockets. Lets try not to confuse things, eh?
 
covertclocker said:
A correction... the 754 also has the on-die memory controller. The 939 does not "beat the shit out of the 754". It has been shown that the dual channel only has maybe a 5-10% difference. Dont believe me? look at the FX series comparison with the A64's. As far as I know, the A64's still only have single channel memory, and the dual channel is reserved for the FX series. Please correct me if I am wrong. Anyway, dont recommend the 939 for pure performance. Yes, they are good, but recommend it because the 754 socket is dead. The reason why they have the one socket is because its probably more cost effective to have one socket as opposed to two different sockets. Lets try not to confuse things, eh?
Click to expand...

Nope, all s939 A64s use a dual channel memory controller. To compensate for this (as it used to be one of the FX's edge) they just added more L2 cache to the s939 FXs.
 
Impulse said:
Nope, all s939 A64s use a dual channel memory controller. To compensate for this (as it used to be one of the FX's edge) they just added more L2 cache to the s939 FXs.
Click to expand...

and left the multiplier unlocked...which makes up for the uber $6xx-8xx price tag :eek:
 
Alex41290 said:
and left the multiplier unlocked...which makes up for the uber $6xx-8xx price tag :eek:
Click to expand...

the FX's are a BIT pricey, but they're uber fast

i have the FX-55 :D
 
Alex41290 said:
well they work and the performance of the mobo....as for better performance, 939 hands down beats the living sh*t out of 754 because of the on-die memory controller and dual channel.
Click to expand...
Do you even know what the hell you're talking about? Because you've listed the features for s939 processors. The boards; however suck. Would you have Neo2, the troublesome, or A8V, which is arguably, even worse? I'd wait for them to mature up a little bit. These are first generation s939 boards, after all. I've waited till 3d generation to upgrade to s754 (from a Celery2!) And I'm still going to use get a 4th generation board sometime later this week.

Besides, ALL AMD64 architecture processors have an on-die memory controllers. That includes Opteron, Athlon64, AthlonFX and some of the Sempr0ns. We've already seen how much almost doubling the memory bandwidth provides in terms of real performance. AMD gives it 200 PR points; while the performance gain is under 10%.
 
DeathMan said:
the FX's are a BIT pricey, but they're uber fast

i have the FX-55 :D
Click to expand...

i told you that you stalk me...well, you know, i guess people do worship "Gawds" :p
 
so wut edge does the fx's ahve over a regular athlon64.....? (socket 939's only)

is it clockspeed or wut? cause i am confused..
 
aZn_plyR said:
so wut edge does the fx's ahve over a regular athlon64.....? (socket 939's only)

is it clockspeed or wut? cause i am confused..
Click to expand...

Did you read the replies above? :rolleyes: Bigger L2 cache (512k total) and a fully unlocked multiplier (the rest of the A64s are unlocked downwards only, higher multipliers than stock aren't available).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top