|
|||||||
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
03-02-2006, 07:36 AM
|
#1 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: FL, the low end.
Posts: 524
|
What's the difference between these processors?
Two of them apperantly are the same Athalon 64 Venice while the other is slightly more but is a Clawhammer.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...ubCategory=343 what exactly is the Process type and is it something that would affect performance ahead of the venice? |
|
|
|
03-02-2006, 09:48 AM
|
#2 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Owosso, MI, USA
Posts: 1,283
|
The first two Venice cores are essentially the same. The first is an earlier revision, but there is essentially no difference. The Clawhammer is an older core, it runs on the 130nm process, which isn't quite as cool or efficient of a design as the Venice cores. The Venice (either one) is superior to the Clawhammer from a overall performance perspective.
I STILL don't know why AMD and their vendors do that, but they discourage you from using the older processes by pricing them higher. You would think they would discount them to clear them out of inventory..........
__________________
DFI Infinity 975X/G, Intel C2D E6600 (@3.4Ghz), 2 Gb DDR2 800 GSkill HZ, Powercolor X1900XT, 74 Gb Raptor SATA, 250 Gb Seagate SATA, Audigy 2 ZS, FSP Epsilon 600 watt PSU, NEC 3540 DVD-RW, ASUS DVD ROM, Thermalright SI-128, Thermalright HR-05, Lian Li PC65 case, Samsung 940B 19" LCD |
|
|
|
|
03-02-2006, 01:55 PM
|
#3 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: FL, the low end.
Posts: 524
|
cool.
|
|
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Linear Mode
