Let's talk Venice

C

cyberslag5k

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 29, 2004
Messages
277
So I'm looking into 64-bit processors and I have a few questions. First, is 939 still the "best" chipset? By that I mean is it the best performing chipset? And if so, what is the best value chipset? 754? Second, I'm looking at the Venice family on newegg and for whatever reason no one has reviewed the chip yet. Are they super new or unavailable for whatever reason? And finally, the only difference between the Winchester and the Venice chips is that the Venice chip advertises a 1GHz FSB while the Winchester says "Integrated into Chip". Can someone explain what that means?

Thanks guys!
 
Hmm...looks like the newcastle performs just as well and in some cases better than the venice. I think I'll save the extra $10 per proc then.

Thanks for your response!
 
939 is NOT a chipset!
It's a socket.

socket 939 = 128bit memory + dual core compatibility
socket754 = 64bit memory + semprons as upgrades

All the chipsets, nforce3/4, via K8T800/k8T890 and the old AMD jobs are compatiable with both socket 754 and 939.

There are two differences between venice and whinchester.

1) SSE3 on venice - not really a big deal
2) Venice uses different silicon than whinchester and as a result runs much cooler and uses less power. This in turn leads to better o/c's



So if you're [H] and are going to o/c your system, venice is the clear choice (or if you want it to be nice and cool so you can use nearly silent cooling).


And your right at stock speed perfomance between clawhammer, newcastle, whinchester and venice are all nearly identical assuming same cache, clockspeed and socket. Any one of them can be faster than the others.
 
not yet i don't, maybe when i graduate ;)

but i do indeed have a newark. i managed to snag one from a very helpful guy over at XS :p:D
 
obiwansotti said:
socket 939 = 128bit memory + dual core compatibility
socket754 = 64bit memory + semprons as upgrades.
Click to expand...
sorry if this is hijacking, but 939 is going to support dual-core
 
mpcamer1220 said:
cf has one.. unless.... he works for amd... :eek:
Click to expand...

Like he said, he knew somebody that knew somebody. Not in stores yet.

Locutus....huh?
 
ashmedai said:
Like he said, he knew somebody that knew somebody. Not in stores yet.

Locutus....huh?
Click to expand...

I know the somebody that he knows. I can get a Newark RIGHT NOW but it frankly wouldn't be that big of an upgrade over what I have.
 
Last I saw he just had the higher-model version too, which I think kind of defeats the purpose of going with a cheaper platform...plus I wasn't sure he'd appreciate having people constantly refered to him that couldn't find him on their own.
 
ashmedai said:
Last I saw he just had the higher-model version too, which I think kind of defeats the purpose of going with a cheaper platform...plus I wasn't sure he'd appreciate having people constantly refered to him that couldn't find him on their own.
Click to expand...

This guy is a vendor. I'm pretty sure he would want business. But yeah, only Newark 3700+ until all the mobile clawhammers are gone.
 
robberbaron said:
I know the somebody that he knows. I can get a Newark RIGHT NOW but it frankly wouldn't be that big of an upgrade over what I have.
Click to expand...

Well, Can I be introduced to that somebody :D ???
 
Newark? Is that a good OC proc for s754 or something? Sorry, I've actually never heard of it...I have trouble getting 200 mhz out of my AMD 64 3000+ Clawhammer s754 even when I set the ram back to DDR 333 at 2-2-2-5 timings...so that is kind of moot. I'd like to know more if you have a link or info...
 
Siciliano said:
Newark? Is that a good OC proc for s754 or something? Sorry, I've actually never heard of it...I have trouble getting 200 mhz out of my AMD 64 3000+ Clawhammer s754 even when I set the ram back to DDR 333 at 2-2-2-5 timings...so that is kind of moot. I'd like to know more if you have a link or info...
Click to expand...

Newark is similar to San Diego, but it's a mobile chip and has no heatspreader. (cf)Eclipse got his Newark 3700+ from 2.4ghz stock speed to 2.8 or 2.9ghz stable. His max clock was 3.1ghz on AIR COOLING.
 
O_O

ME WANT NOW! I got some basic watercooling (Aquarius II) and although temps are in the 50's they never ever go past 55 no matter what, so I guess that is water at work. I definitely need to get me a better processor, then again, I have no PCI/AGP lock on my mobo, so I personally think I coulda hit 3400+(or more) speeds if it wasn't for this damned Soyo CK8 Dragon Plus. Show's I need to do research before building my next system (Wish I came to this board back in July 04')
 
Siciliano said:
O_O

ME WANT NOW! I got some basic watercooling (Aquarius II) and although temps are in the 50's they never ever go past 55 no matter what, so I guess that is water at work. I definitely need to get me a better processor, then again, I have no PCI/AGP lock on my mobo, so I personally think I coulda hit 3400+(or more) speeds if it wasn't for this damned Soyo CK8 Dragon Plus. Show's I need to do research before building my next system (Wish I came to this board back in July 04')
Click to expand...


If I were you'd I'd get a DFI 939 setup. I'm extremely biased towards 754 as opposed to 939, but your 754 setup is a lost cause :(
 
Definitely! When I hit 400 mhz even on my ram at 2.4 ghz, it literally just won't boot! It'll post fine, but then "Check your CPU" messages just crushed my hopes of getting anywhere with it. I'm definitely thinking, part out and sell and then salvage the water cooling setup, ram and the case/HD. Seems to be the only viable option to get into enthusiast OCing.
 
Siciliano said:
Definitely! When I hit 400 mhz even on my ram at 2.4 ghz, it literally just won't boot! It'll post fine, but then "Check your CPU" messages just crushed my hopes of getting anywhere with it. I'm definitely thinking, part out and sell and then salvage the water cooling setup, ram and the case/HD. Seems to be the only viable option to get into enthusiast OCing.
Click to expand...

That would be a good idea. The WC parts will carry over to 939, and most likely even M2! :eek:
 
I have heard that the Venice chips all have pretty much the same top end when OCing. Is that true?
 
p_little said:
I have heard that the Venice chips all have pretty much the same top end when OCing. Is that true?
Click to expand...

Until the architecture is revamped, ALL A64's have roughly the same ceiling...
 
ScHpAnKy said:
Until the architecture is revamped, ALL A64's have roughly the same ceiling...
Click to expand...

It seems more like an artificial limit in order to keep the FX series from being messed with.
 
Rev. E can all hit about 2.7GHz, most of 'em max out a bit higher. Mine for example made about 2.85GHz but took sharply increased voltage so I just backed down to 2.7 flat to run at normally since 300x9 made it come out nice and round.

WC seems to help a bit but not worth the expense and additional effort. Sometimes stables as high as 3GHz with it though instead of 2.8GHz. Also phase change can get more out of it, sometimes a lot more...then again it costs a lot more, so one would only hope.

Unlocked multis on the FX help a lot with uber-high phase change overclocks.
 
robberbaron said:
It seems more like an artificial limit in order to keep the FX series from being messed with.
Click to expand...

I don't get what you're saying...
the FX only gets higher because it's AMD's cream of the crop... probably taken from the center of the wafer and such, but that's not what I was hinting at.

The AMD64 @ 2.7Ghz limit can't be artificial, if that was the case there would be a much more definate limit, but it's far from that. At 2.7 they've reached the end of the architecture, God knows they have been using it for long enough. (Hell, if you really think about it, the newest Athlon 64 is only a Barton AXP with a memory controller! And a die shrink, but it's the same architecture)
 
ashmedai said:
Rev. E can all hit about 2.7GHz, most of 'em max out a bit higher. Mine for example made about 2.85GHz but took sharply increased voltage so I just backed down to 2.7 flat to run at normally since 300x9 made it come out nice and round.

WC seems to help a bit but not worth the expense and additional effort. Sometimes stables as high as 3GHz with it though instead of 2.8GHz. Also phase change can get more out of it, sometimes a lot more...then again it costs a lot more, so one would only hope.

Unlocked multis on the FX help a lot with uber-high phase change overclocks.
Click to expand...

Venice isn't subject to the deep-freeze bug as the winchester was?
 
why would the limit be more defined? if AMD is simply selectively placing "slow" transistors (think turion here) in certain places, there will still be variations in the core, and it'll only take a new stepping to get much higher speeds by replacing the "slow" transistors with "fast" transistors. this would create a pretty effective limit. does it not seem odd to you that almost all cpu's are ending up within 100mhz of each other in similar conditions? :p

and the revE chips still have the cold bug :(
 
(cf)Eclipse said:
why would the limit be more defined? if AMD is simply selectively placing "slow" transistors (think turion here) in certain places, there will still be variations in the core, and it'll only take a new stepping to get much higher speeds by replacing the "slow" transistors with "fast" transistors. this would create a pretty effective limit. does it not seem odd to you that almost all cpu's are ending up within 100mhz of each other in similar conditions? :p

and the revE chips still have the cold bug :(
Click to expand...

I'm not following you, do you mean slow transistors in the sense that they are not able to switch fast enough over a set clock speed? I feel that would be hard to implement in chips individually


Bummer about the chill problem on the RevE's, but it's not like I didn't see it coming >_<
 
ashmedai said:
Rev. E can all hit about 2.7GHz, most of 'em max out a bit higher. Mine for example made about 2.85GHz but took sharply increased voltage so I just backed down to 2.7 flat to run at normally since 300x9 made it come out nice and round.

WC seems to help a bit but not worth the expense and additional effort. Sometimes stables as high as 3GHz with it though instead of 2.8GHz. Also phase change can get more out of it, sometimes a lot more...then again it costs a lot more, so one would only hope.

Unlocked multis on the FX help a lot with uber-high phase change overclocks.
Click to expand...


What voltage are you running at with 2.7ghz? What type of cooling?
 
Chris Lakies said:
What voltage are you running at with 2.7ghz? What type of cooling?
Click to expand...

Typically no more than 1.55V and on air (including stock).

Check the sticky at the top of this forum.
 
ScHpAnKy said:
I'm not following you, do you mean slow transistors in the sense that they are not able to switch fast enough over a set clock speed? I feel that would be hard to implement in chips individually
Click to expand...

If I understand the technical issues involved they'd just have to make a few thicker gates here and there. Not that I buy in to the "slow transistors" conspiracy. I'm just pointing out that it COULD be implimented if they wanted to badly enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top