A64 3400 - Newcastle or Clawhammer?

B

Baredor

Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2004
Messages
667
This will be for a pure gaming rig; if it makes any difference, I currently have no OC intentions. :p

I see the Newcastle at 2.4 with the 512 cache, and the Clawhammer at 2.2 with 1 meg cache. Which leaves me wondering which is 'better' (for lack of a better word). Thanks for the feedback.
 
The jury is still out over this issue; most people argue that the extra 200MHz will come in handy in any application while the 1MB of cache isn't useful to every program out there.

Personally, I would go for the Newcastle. I also noticed that it's cheaper. :p
 
hmm..

I admittedly don't have the best understanding of L2 cache, but let me ask this:

would the larger cache help with framerate in highly memory intensive gaming situations? (think Everquest in the bazaar, Stormwind in WoW, or any MMORPG with lots of PCs in the area)
 
Thanks, that did help, but I'm really not sure either if the added cache would be a benefit to the situation. It would seem that it would depend on whether the game data that is actually causing the "lag" (framerate) is 'frequently used' and thus stored in the cache. (or not, I'm likely totally wrong.) As a non-programmer, I don't know the answer.

more opinions are welcomed. :D
 
So wait can I or cant I check out Lord of the Rings? :rolleyes:

Anyway, I think you should first check to make sure your MoBo will support the M processor (I'm having a problem with that link, it sends me to Microsoft.com?, so I'm guessing its a mobile processor). I have heard that people are having problems with that. But I say get the faster Mhz processor, just my opinion.
 
Link fixed. :)

I'm planning on using the MSI K8N Neo Plat, until someone changes my mind at least. :p
 
I dunno, some people have been having problems OC'ing the MSI, but then again many probably have no problems.

As a personal preference, I would recommend the Epox 8KDA3J and the Chaintech VNF3-250. Both can be had for under $100.
 
I just bit the bullet here myself. I went with an Athlon 64 3400+ Clawhammer retail for $299. You may not be buying this and overclocking but ask yourself this. Why not get the clawhammer and just clock it up the extra 200MHz to match the newcastle? This would be an almost garunteed overclock on almost anymotherboard without any trouble, its not like you are trying for a huge OC here. That will give you the best of both worlds, you can OC the clock speed but you cant increase the cache size.

BTW hey guys. Long time [H] reader, first time poster. Don't know why I never made it to post here I guess I was always too busy just finding time to read the frontpage...

For those wondering I went with the Abit KV8 Pro motherboard. I keep hearing an uncomfortable amount of concern over MSI's boards so I went with Abit since I've not had a problem with them before. I am also going with 1GB of Corsair XMS DDR 400.

Not sure about getting a new videocard yet. I currently have a Gf4 Ti4400 which has (and continues) to serve me fairly well although I want a Gf 6800GT really bad until I see that I'm gonna pay $390 for it....
 
Ultima99 said:
I just bit the bullet here myself. I went with an Athlon 64 3400+ Clawhammer retail for $299. You may not be buying this and overclocking but ask yourself this. Why not get the clawhammer and just clock it up the extra 200MHz to match the newcastle?
Click to expand...
Why not just overclock the Newcastle? :D That is what I'm hoping to do:

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=785248

Congratulations on your first post!
 
Going to to say Newcastle. Sometimes you just dont have the chance/opportunity to overclock.

I'm building my new A64 setup in a tiny ATX case so I doubt I will be
 
My view is that everyone seems to be claiming 2.6Ghz max on any 754pin cores on air so if you could have an A64 at 2.6Ghz the question is do you want 1MB cache or just 512k?

This of course does assume you get a newer revision clawhammer.
 
you can overclock a cpu but you cant add more cache.

i have the 3400+clawhammer and im glad i got it instead of the newcaslte.
 
When you buy a CPU, the amount of OC that's possible on your chip is going to be random. It's best to get the chip that performs "best" for your initial stock settings.

With a Clawhammer, you get the advantage of 1Mb L2 cache but DISadvantage of being 200mhz behind.

With Newcastle, you get the advantage of 200mhz ahead but 512kb L2 cache behind.

Overclocking is a random unpredictable beast. Who's to guarantee that a Clawhammer can OC 200mhz to make up for its disadvantage?

The only solution we can find is if someone buys these two chips and test them against one another. Then we'll know which is best, not speculating on how much you can OC.
 
DOH I just posted that in your other thread before I realized same person. FYI, I got that link from the main page of [H] a few days ago.
 
Everyone keeping up with the issue will probably say clawhammer. You cant OC the cache back on and its really worth at least 200MHz in a lot of apps. When maxing the cpus, 200MHz is quite a big difference on a high IPC cpu like A64. You do the math... get 2.4 or 2.5G on that claw and it will take what on a newcastle? Figures that are quite a stretch beyond current yields.Yes, OC is gamble but it is faster at stock equivalent PR ratings also. Newcastles are to save AMD money on die space. Claws are better. The only wrinkle is if you'd give up the cache and opt for dual channel on 939 cpu instead. On 754, might as well have that 1MB feature which often compensates, and sometimes even surpass there 939 brothers.

Like I said, AMD wants to sell Newcastles. Why is there no 3700+ newcastle? Because stretching the current process in MHz this far won't work. AMD themselves cant seem to get out something that will perform like a 3.7GHz cpu from a Newcastle. Newcastles often can clock a bit higher, but not enough to make it equal performers very often. OC'in IS a gamble, but understanding the chip biz, limitations of current processes, gathering data from benchmarks, hell even taking a look at the orb...... helps a great deal in deciding where to place your chips. Clawhammer... favorite... 2 to 1 odds.
 
Do they both utilize the CG stepping though? Better/more tolerant memory controller onthe CG from what I've heard.
 
You can get CG's in most of the higher models, maybe all since its not like AMD pumps out older steppings. Becasue the stepping improved the MHz possibilities, cpu's like the 3700+ are always CG. The memory thing relates to the CG defaulting to a command rate of 2T instead of 1T (really helps 1GB play nice but 1T is the shiznit). Like always, the newer and better steppings take awhile to reach cpu's like the 2800+ etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top