Two AMD 64 3500+ models, difference?

keat320 · 05-December-04, 01:35 PM

Well I took a look at socket 939 proc's on Newegg for my plans for a new system, and I came across two different AMD 64 3500+'s. Here are the links:
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduc...103-463&depa=1
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduc...103-498&depa=1

The only difference that I can tell is that one has a "Newcastle" core and is 0.13Micron; and the other has a "Winchester" core and is 90nm. What the heck does this mean? What is the real difference in these two chips; which is better for performance?

Also, what is the big difference between the AMD 64's and the 64 FX's? Thanks for your help.

teh_spazz · 05-December-04, 01:42 PM

The difference is the way the core was created. From what I know, 90nm is the lithography technology that Intel, and now I guess AMD, are starting to use to make their processors. What this allows is a finer and more accurate construction of the core. .13 micron I guess is the old way that cores were made, 90nm is new technolog.

just my 2cents, please correct me if I'm wrong.

keat320 · 05-December-04, 02:00 PM

I just read an in-depth review of the new 90nm proc. and it appears that you are right on the dot. 0.13micron is apparently 130nm, and the 90nm ones perferm slightly better and are newer. Thanks for your help.

teh_spazz · 05-December-04, 02:16 PM

I guess working at Intel helped. Glad to hear you figured it out.

Maxession · 10-December-04, 07:48 AM

Well, the 90nm is the newer version, it is quite a lot beter cause it creates less heat (around the 5-10Ã‚Â°C / 41-50F), performes slightly beter and is a beter overclocker.

Here is a review that compares the 3500+ 130nm and 90nm: http://www.legitreviews.com/article.php?aid=118&pid=1

Arkangyl · 10-December-04, 09:36 AM

Go for the 90nm Winchester core

Winnys are OC'ing about the same as the later generations of the 130nm Newcastle cores AND they are acting faster clock for clock because AMD included some A64 improvements in the Winchester cores (SSE3 amongst them)

keat320 · 10-December-04, 10:44 AM

Now I am thinking of getting the 90nm 3500 to put in an Nforce4 SLi board when they come out... will this be alright? Is there really anything special about the FX-55 with the Nforce4 features wise or is it just speed wise? Thanks for your help.

micronx · 10-December-04, 10:45 PM

FX55 is jus plain FREAKIN FAST and on a new chipset like the nf4..sli....then it is INSANLY FAST....but the 3500 is a awsome chip also...90nm is newer technology so get it now..

screwcitypunk · 10-December-04, 11:16 PM

The base A64's are multipier locked. The FX series is not, so you have more options when OCing. The FX series also has a 1mb L2 cache.

micronx · 11-December-04, 11:25 AM

i donno why they removed the 1mb cache from the 64 cores now only high end 64's have em and fx series

keat320 · 11-December-04, 11:36 AM

Well I am not really gonna OC this thing at all... I have never OC'ed anything but a FX5200 (yeah.... that was worth it, lol) and I am not gonna risk it with hardware this expensive. So I am really not sure what I'm gonna get, I guess it all just depends on how much money I have in my pocket when I decide to buy. Also, is NVidia gonna release more 6800-series PCIe cards? Oh, and between the 64 models, does the 0.2ghz make a noticeable difference in performance? Thanks.

micronx · 11-December-04, 04:18 PM

the k8 core takes advantage better than intel cores so yeah 200mhz will make a diffrence...but for the price...well i donno go with the 90nm core..about the 6800 cards i donno...nvidia is always suprising...with ati it is always the same....SE NP Pro Xt.....with nvidia it is Ultra GT NP Pro SE and whatever they feel like is a markiting product...if u wanna new card wait till the new 6900(may or may not) come out....hope this helps

keat320 · 11-December-04, 04:28 PM

Nah, I think ill just go with the 3500 90nm and then OC if I ever feel like it.

Maxession · 11-December-04, 04:51 PM

The prices of the 90nm and 130nm are the same, most shops don't even know that there are 2 different ones, AMD just started to ship them since september without really telling about, so you might one ask the shop first.

About the 6800 GPU's, they will each come in PCI-express version. I've only seen the 6800Ultra version in benchmarks, but it will come to.

MSI's 6800GT PCI-express: http://www.msi.com.tw/program/produc...il.php?UID=623
ASUS 6800 PCI-express: http://www.asus.com/products/vga/en6800/overview.htm

keat320 · 11-December-04, 05:06 PM

Actually Max, Newegg (where I am buying it from) has both of them, and clearly states that one is the 130nm Newcastle and that the other is the 90nm Winchester.

Yeah.. when I asked if Nvidia was releasing more 6800-series cards I meant the Ultra as the others have been out for a little while now.

cpjlam · 17-December-04, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keat320


	Actually Max, Newegg (where I am buying it from) has both of them, and clearly states that one is the 130nm Newcastle and that the other is the 90nm Winchester. Yeah.. when I asked if Nvidia was releasing more 6800-series cards I meant the Ultra as the others have been out for a little while now.

Aside from the feature differences between the two, the other difference is that the .090 core should guzzle less power than the .130 core simply due to its physical characteristics. Whether or not you'd notice any difference would have to be seen. Technically the .090 core should have minutely shorter latencies simply due to the physical distances between transistors and switching times being shorter. Who knows; ultimately my pockebook would have the final say if I were looking to purchase either.

Teranfirbt · 17-December-04, 11:24 PM

I find it funny that AMD can beat Intel with at least a 1 ghz disadvantage and half the transisters...

Andrevas · 18-December-04, 02:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkangyl


	Go for the 90nm Winchester core Winnys are OC'ing about the same as the later generations of the 130nm Newcastle cores AND they are acting faster clock for clock because AMD included some A64 improvements in the Winchester cores (SSE3 amongst them)

AMD did not include SSE3 with the Winchester core. The minor core tweaks are almost unnoticeable and performance gains are around 1-2%. This was more or so simply a die shrink.

Also some mis information about the A64 compared to the A64 FX. The A64 is multiplier locked above the default multi. Anything below is available. It is not completely locked.

I would go for the 90nm Winchester as well. Less power consumption, less thermal output, newer, improved ever so slightly, and should you decide to OC after all you should have better results.

cpjlam · 18-December-04, 04:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrevas


	AMD did not include SSE3 with the Winchester core. The minor core tweaks are almost unnoticeable and performance gains are around 1-2%. This was more or so simply a die shrink. Also some mis information about the A64 compared to the A64 FX. The A64 is multiplier locked above the default multi. Anything below is available. It is not completely locked. I would go for the 90nm Winchester as well. Less power consumption, less thermal output, newer, improved ever so slightly, and should you decide to OC after all you should have better results.

That just about sums up everything there is to be said about the difference IMHO. Well said.

keat320 · 18-December-04, 02:54 PM

Yeah I will definentaly go w/ the Winchester core because of those reasons and the small difference in price.

05-December-04, 01:35 PM		#1 (permalink)
keat320 Apex Master Tech Apprentice	Two AMD 64 3500+ models, difference? Well I took a look at socket 939 proc's on Newegg for my plans for a new system, and I came across two different AMD 64 3500+'s. Here are the links: http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduc...103-463&depa=1 http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduc...103-498&depa=1 The only difference that I can tell is that one has a "Newcastle" core and is 0.13Micron; and the other has a "Winchester" core and is 90nm. What the heck does this mean? What is the real difference in these two chips; which is better for performance? Also, what is the big difference between the AMD 64's and the 64 FX's? Thanks for your help.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
All Athlon 64 Models	ranger1033	PC Apex Member Posted News	0	22-January-07 08:14 AM
3d models of cases	Nerdz	Anything Goes	9	14-November-05 10:02 AM
Corsair 3500 vs. XtremeDDR 3500	GlitterKill	PC Apex Site News	0	16-April-03 02:37 PM
APC Recalls Two Models	Grimm	PC Apex Site News	0	25-February-03 01:09 PM

05-December-04, 01:42 PM		#2 (permalink)
teh_spazz Apex Master Tech	The difference is the way the core was created. From what I know, 90nm is the lithography technology that Intel, and now I guess AMD, are starting to use to make their processors. What this allows is a finer and more accurate construction of the core. .13 micron I guess is the old way that cores were made, 90nm is new technolog. just my 2cents, please correct me if I'm wrong.

05-December-04, 02:00 PM		#3 (permalink)
keat320 Apex Master Tech Apprentice	I just read an in-depth review of the new 90nm proc. and it appears that you are right on the dot. 0.13micron is apparently 130nm, and the 90nm ones perferm slightly better and are newer. Thanks for your help.

05-December-04, 02:16 PM		#4 (permalink)
teh_spazz Apex Master Tech	I guess working at Intel helped. Glad to hear you figured it out.

10-December-04, 07:48 AM		#5 (permalink)
Maxession Apex Techie I	Well, the 90nm is the newer version, it is quite a lot beter cause it creates less heat (around the 5-10Ã‚Â°C / 41-50F), performes slightly beter and is a beter overclocker. Here is a review that compares the 3500+ 130nm and 90nm: http://www.legitreviews.com/article.php?aid=118&pid=1

10-December-04, 09:36 AM		#6 (permalink)
Arkangyl Hoe-lier than Thou	Go for the 90nm Winchester core Winnys are OC'ing about the same as the later generations of the 130nm Newcastle cores AND they are acting faster clock for clock because AMD included some A64 improvements in the Winchester cores (SSE3 amongst them)

10-December-04, 10:44 AM		#7 (permalink)
keat320 Apex Master Tech Apprentice	Now I am thinking of getting the 90nm 3500 to put in an Nforce4 SLi board when they come out... will this be alright? Is there really anything special about the FX-55 with the Nforce4 features wise or is it just speed wise? Thanks for your help.

10-December-04, 10:45 PM		#8 (permalink)
micronx Apex Techie II	FX55 is jus plain FREAKIN FAST and on a new chipset like the nf4..sli....then it is INSANLY FAST....but the 3500 is a awsome chip also...90nm is newer technology so get it now..

10-December-04, 11:16 PM		#9 (permalink)
screwcitypunk Apex Master Tech	The base A64's are multipier locked. The FX series is not, so you have more options when OCing. The FX series also has a 1mb L2 cache.

11-December-04, 11:25 AM		#10 (permalink)
micronx Apex Techie II	i donno why they removed the 1mb cache from the 64 cores now only high end 64's have em and fx series

11-December-04, 11:36 AM		#11 (permalink)
keat320 Apex Master Tech Apprentice	Well I am not really gonna OC this thing at all... I have never OC'ed anything but a FX5200 (yeah.... that was worth it, lol) and I am not gonna risk it with hardware this expensive. So I am really not sure what I'm gonna get, I guess it all just depends on how much money I have in my pocket when I decide to buy. Also, is NVidia gonna release more 6800-series PCIe cards? Oh, and between the 64 models, does the 0.2ghz make a noticeable difference in performance? Thanks.

11-December-04, 04:18 PM		#12 (permalink)
micronx Apex Techie II	the k8 core takes advantage better than intel cores so yeah 200mhz will make a diffrence...but for the price...well i donno go with the 90nm core..about the 6800 cards i donno...nvidia is always suprising...with ati it is always the same....SE NP Pro Xt.....with nvidia it is Ultra GT NP Pro SE and whatever they feel like is a markiting product...if u wanna new card wait till the new 6900(may or may not) come out....hope this helps

11-December-04, 04:28 PM		#13 (permalink)
keat320 Apex Master Tech Apprentice	Nah, I think ill just go with the 3500 90nm and then OC if I ever feel like it.

11-December-04, 04:51 PM		#14 (permalink)
Maxession Apex Techie I	The prices of the 90nm and 130nm are the same, most shops don't even know that there are 2 different ones, AMD just started to ship them since september without really telling about, so you might one ask the shop first. About the 6800 GPU's, they will each come in PCI-express version. I've only seen the 6800Ultra version in benchmarks, but it will come to. MSI's 6800GT PCI-express: http://www.msi.com.tw/program/produc...il.php?UID=623 ASUS 6800 PCI-express: http://www.asus.com/products/vga/en6800/overview.htm

11-December-04, 05:06 PM		#15 (permalink)
keat320 Apex Master Tech Apprentice	Actually Max, Newegg (where I am buying it from) has both of them, and clearly states that one is the 130nm Newcastle and that the other is the 90nm Winchester. Yeah.. when I asked if Nvidia was releasing more 6800-series cards I meant the Ultra as the others have been out for a little while now.

17-December-04, 11:24 PM		#17 (permalink)
Teranfirbt Apex Master Tech Apprentice	I find it funny that AMD can beat Intel with at least a 1 ghz disadvantage and half the transisters...

18-December-04, 02:54 PM		#20 (permalink)
keat320 Apex Master Tech Apprentice	Yeah I will definentaly go w/ the Winchester core because of those reasons and the small difference in price.