it has to be a 939, I currently have a venice 3000+

choices are $225 and less

I've narrowed it to a 3700+ sandiego (2ghz 1mb L2 cache) and a 3800+ x2, 2.2ghz*2 cores 512kb l2 cache per core. the 3800+ is cheaper, I'm just wondering if I'd see more of a gain with 1mb of l2 versus 2 cores and relying on software to utilize both cores efficiently

7/24/2006 7:55:17 PM

The AMDs have integrated memory controllers, which means that the effect of adding more cache is somewhat lessened vs. a processor with a slower bus.

512k is kinda low though, but the dual cores are really great for multitasking. After having used a dual proc. computer, it would be hard for me to go back, so i would go with the dual core. Plus, it would make things like encoding DVDs or 3D rendering (stuff I would do as a hobby) effectively 2x faster than the single core, more cache or not. Games would be about the same, I would think, on either processor.

7/24/2006 8:13:55 PM

second for dual-core

7/24/2006 8:29:34 PM

Apple Macintosh

-ZiP!-

7/26/2006 7:41:09 AM

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/7792.html

AMD just slashed the heck out of their 939 chips to compete with the new Core 2 Duo.

Quote :

"AMD announced Monday its dual-core Athlon 64 X2 5000+ (socket AM2 only) will now be available at $301 against the earlier price of $696. The company also cut down the price of Athlon 64 X2 4600+ (socket AM2 and 939) by 57 per cent to $240 from $558."

If the 4600+ is now $240, then I know you can get the 4400+ for $225 or less. Go with that one (the 4400+) b/c it has the 1mb L2 cache. Excellent chip.

[Edited on July 26, 2006 at 7:46 AM. Reason : .]

7/26/2006 7:46:11 AM

I ordered a 4600+ in socket 939 Monday for $220. I'm hoping it will be a nice upgrade from my 3500+.

7/26/2006 10:07:47 AM

No, to dual core, am2 comes out in a few months, save up for one of those, these dual core processors for athlon m.bs are basic prototypes for that processor model.

Buy a 3700, they're worth the $$$.

7/26/2006 1:25:02 PM

...am2 has been out for months

7/26/2006 1:38:07 PM

And it has to be 939 because this is the mobo he has. I am in the same boat and will probably be going with some flavor of the X2 myself.

Where are you finding the chips at the already reduced prices? As of this weekend, newegg still had the old prices up (trying to clear inventory I guess).

7/26/2006 1:56:08 PM

ZipZoomFly has the 4600+ for $260
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80727-R

7/26/2006 2:00:53 PM

unfortunately it's not the toledo 4600, that's what I'm trying to find in stock somewhere

7/26/2006 2:29:40 PM

http://www.royalbusiness.com/default.php/cPath/5800_5822?osCsid=b35cb7a14d1b38ba553cc22fc2085e34

I would go with the 4400+...the 4600 is 200mhz quicker but only has 512 cache. The 1 meg cache of the 4400 will get you more then the 200mhz of the 4600.

7/26/2006 2:43:08 PM

there is in fact a 1mb cache*2 revision of the 4600+, it's just a bitch to find right now

7/26/2006 3:03:03 PM

^ Isn't that the 4800+ then?

I thought it broke down like this...

4200 - 2.2/512
4400 - 2.2/1MB
4600 - 2.4/512
4800 - 2.4/1MB

7/26/2006 3:08:14 PM

i vote for 4400+. You could always OC it to 2.4 if you really wanted.

7/26/2006 5:07:49 PM