Athlon 64 3000 or 3500?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ivronovich
  • Start date Start date
I

Ivronovich

I was thinking about getting the 3500 socket 939, but then read an article
(URL below) saying that the 3000 could reach 2.6 ghz when over-clocked, the
same as the 3500. That being the case, what would be the advantage to buying
the 3500+? Would over-clocking the 3000 shorten the life of the chip?

thank you for all inputs
 
Ivronovich said:
I was thinking about getting the 3500 socket 939, but then read an article
(URL below) saying that the 3000 could reach 2.6 ghz when over-clocked, the
same as the 3500. That being the case, what would be the advantage to
buying the 3500+? Would over-clocking the 3000 shorten the life of the
chip?

thank you for all inputs
Click to expand...

Yes, and void your warrenty. Unless you like overclocking and tweaking your
system I would recommend you buy the 3500+ rather than over clocking the
3000+.

Carlo
 
I was thinking about getting the 3500 socket 939, but then read an article
(URL below) saying that the 3000 could reach 2.6 ghz when over-clocked, the
same as the 3500. That being the case, what would be the advantage to buying
the 3500+? Would over-clocking the 3000 shorten the life of the chip?

thank you for all inputs
Click to expand...

One thing to keep in mind is overclocking is luck of the draw, even with
the same parts you may not see the same results.

I say buy what you can afford because if the slower CPU doesn't
overclock much you'll end up with a slower system then you wanted in the
first place.

Ed
 
I was thinking about getting the 3500 socket 939, but then read an article
(URL below) saying that the 3000 could reach 2.6 ghz when over-clocked, the
same as the 3500. That being the case, what would be the advantage to buying
the 3500+?
Click to expand...

Nothing except a garauntee that it will run as a 3500+. This assumes the
3000+ you buy is the same (or newer) core.
Would over-clocking the 3000 shorten the life of the chip?
Click to expand...
As long as you don't go overboard, not by enough to matter. Now if you max
out vcore and clockspeed then it may fail within a year (and it nay not).
At this point how cool you keep the core will have a great impact. But the
same would apply to the 3500+ also. Running the 3000+ as a 3500+ with the
same vcore should last as long as a real 3500+, again assuming they are
the same core.
 
It is not just that article but large numbers of people, like me, who have
bought the A64 3000+ S939 and overclocked it. So far, on cheapish RAM and
using the AMD cooler, I am running at 2.4GHz - that is a 3800+. In pushing
the cpu using Clockgen, I had it running stable at 2520 with no extra juice
to it. I think I could have gone higher. Don't be put off - the chances of
frying it are small: oc properly and you'll be fine. In a year or so, there
will be faster cpus for much less. Buying say an MSI K8N Neo2 or one of the
newer NF4 boards will give you a good upgrade path for faster cpus.
 
Thanks for all the responses, and sorry for the delayed response on my part.
Although I don't really have a problem with overclocking on chips that prove
to be stable at higher speeds (as, by all accounts seems to be the case with
these two chips), and after much consideration (including this thread), I
will most likely go with the higher rated CPU simply because I will be using
the hardware in testing scenarios and overclocked chips will invalidate the
tests.

Thanks again for all inputs,
Ivron
 
Back
Top