Name: pheonix991 Date: June 4, 2005 at 13:45:07 Pacific Subject: San Diego vs. Venice OS: Windows 2000 pro and Suse CPU/Ram: p4 3330mhz
Comment:
what is the difference in the San Diego athlon 64 vs. the Venice athlon 64? i know that the San Diego has a larger cache, but is there anything else? i've started to wonder on this cuz people have been prazing the Venice cores.
p4 3.0ghz @ 222X15=3330mhz 512mb pc3200 dual channel @222mhz 80gb wd hdd/40gb maxtor when on linux 8x agp geforce 6200 @ 549/585can't unlock extra pipes. plz help if you can Audigy 2 ZS<b
the san diego core comes with 1mb of cache while other venice cores come with only 512kb. That's basically the only difference. THe venice cores are also cheaper as the san diego is only avilable on the fx-55, 4000+, and 3700+ for socket 939.
ASPIRE ATXB4KLW-AL Antec 400W ASUS A8N-SLI Deluxe AMD 3700+ San Diego Corsair 1GB 2x512 eVGA 6600GT 250GB Hard Drive Sound Blaster Audigy Windows XP HOME W/SP2
i found a 3500+ San Diego. does the San Diego run hotter than the Venice?
p4 3.0ghz @ 222X15=3330mhz 512mb pc3200 dual channel @222mhz 80gb wd hdd/40gb maxtor when on linux 8x agp geforce 6200 @ 549/585can't unlock extra pipes. plz help if you can Audigy 2 ZS<b
The san diego won't necessarily run that much hotter than a venice, as they've only modified the venice core with 1mb l2 cache, with proper cooling, you won't notice much of a difference in the temps perhaps only a fraction of a degree.
ASPIRE ATXB4KLW-AL Antec 400W ASUS A8N-SLI Deluxe AMD 3700+ San Diego Corsair 1GB 2x512 eVGA 6600GT 250GB Hard Drive Sound Blaster Audigy Windows XP HOME W/SP2
thanx, now i can laugh at my friend for getting a winchester, and have the info to back it up with.
p4 3.0ghz @ 222X15=3330mhz 512mb pc3200 dual channel @222mhz 80gb wd hdd/40gb maxtor when on linux 8x agp geforce 6200 @ 549/585can't unlock extra pipes. plz help if you can Audigy 2 ZS<b
good question. a rumer i also heard that the San Diego core was a defective Venice, but that is only a rumer i heard.
Rob, right now the joke is on me mostly b/c i never got the 64bit cpu and my friend did. but once i feel like upgrading, im gunna get a dual core and laugh at him for getting a winchester. but i must still say, the winchester is a good chip.
p4 3.0ghz @ 222X15=3330mhz 512mb pc3200 dual channel @222mhz 80gb wd hdd/40gb maxtor when on linux 8x agp geforce 6200 @ 549/585can't unlock extra pipes. plz help if you can Audigy 2 ZS<b
Yea, I had read that about the Venice core as well. It wouldn't be the 1st time AMD did that...the Thorton core XP is supposedly a Barton with 1/2 the L2 cache disabled.
Asus A7N8X-X 1800+ @ 8.5 x 200MHz 768MB PC3200 Asus A9550 128MB/128-bit Gamer Edition WinME/WinXP Pro
If that's right then wouldn't the venice be the defective san diego with half the cache. As the san diego has the 1mb l2 cache and the venice has only half that.
ASPIRE ATXB4KLW-AL Antec 400W ASUS A8N-SLI Deluxe AMD 3700+ San Diego Corsair 1GB 2x512 eVGA 6600GT 250GB Hard Drive Sound Blaster Audigy Windows XP HOME W/SP2
p4 3.0ghz @ 222X15=3330mhz 512mb pc3200 dual channel @222mhz 80gb wd hdd/40gb maxtor when on linux 8x agp geforce 6200 @ 549/585can't unlock extra pipes. plz help if you can Audigy 2 ZS<b
p4 3.0ghz @ 222X15=3330mhz 512mb pc3200 dual channel @222mhz 80gb wd hdd/40gb maxtor when on linux 8x agp geforce 6200 @ 549/585can't unlock extra pipes. plz help if you can Audigy 2 ZS<b
i just read a review of the venice vs. san diego issue. it appears that the san diego is the chip whose L2 cache worked more completely. the venice had some of its cache not work, so they disabled half of it. furthermore, the san diego is the same core that is used in the athlon 64-FX-55 and 57. however, on the non FX chips, its core multiplier cannot be increased.
The review also covered overclocking results between the two cores. at 2.6 Ghz for both venice and san diego, gaming FPS rates were approximately the same (doom 3 run at 1280x1024). However, the venice vcore voltage had to be increased by approximately +.2V and the San diego core was able to overclock from 2Ghz to 2.6Ghz without increasing the core voltage. In my opinion this says that the San diego is a hell of a lot more overclockable. the Venice was probably topping out around its 260Mhz system freq. i think the San diego could be pushed to 360Mhz (with the right mobo (asus) and cooling setup).
this difference in the end would be 2.6~2.8Ghz (Venice) and 3.6Ghz (san diego) for a fixed core multiplier between the two at 10x. and in overclocking, i would rather not have to increase the processor voltage. for non-overclocking use, the processors perform approximately the same.
The information on Computing.Net is the opinions of its users. Such
opinions may not be accurate and they are to be used at your own risk.
Computing.Net cannot verify the validity of the statements made on this site. Computing.Net and Computing.Net, LLC hereby disclaim all responsibility and liability for the content of Computing.Net and its accuracy.
PLEASE READ THE FULL DISCLAIMER AND LEGAL TERMS BY CLICKING HERE
