Legit Reviews

What on earth is a San Diego core? I've never heard of such. the 3700+ is a couple bucks more than the 3500+, plus it has 1MB of L2 vs. the 3500's 512KB.

So, is the core any good? It probably won't be overclocked.

San Diego has an improved memory controller on-chip....and if I'm not mistaken (though this may be a rumor), the San Diego 3700+ is actually a FX chip in disguise, so if you know much about them, then you know they overclock very well. otherwise, I don't know much more about the core, the process and power usage is the same on both chips.

Well, good advice. My friend is trying to build a new system, so I'm just trying to help him find good parts to last another 4-5 years like his current computer. He's running a Thunderbird I think...

I think the $20 to upgrade from a 3500+ is going to be worth it then.

oh yeah, but you do know the prices on the X2 3800 are dropping pretty damn good, personally I would either go with that chip now or if he can spare the time, wait until its price goes down even further. while there's really nothing that can tax the processor right now, aside from running two instances of a high-yield application, it is still worth the money, I plan on going with this chip myself. I think it's like $328 on Newegg, so yeah, though it's only 512K*2 cache, it can kill a lot of other AMD products out now. Just another thing to consider.

The San Diego is the Rev. E 90nm chip with 1mb L2 cache. It's basically the successor to Clawhammer. Just like Venice is the successor to Newcastle (after winchester that is). San Diego is infact the same core they are using in the FX's, but the major difference is that the multiplier in the non-FX chips are half locked (you can only use multi's from the the stock multiplier downward) but the FX chips are completely unlocked so you can use any multiplier your motherboard provides.

It is a great core, especially if you plan on gaming, and light multitasking. If you really want a powerful chip though, look at dual cores. As killswitch mentioned, the X2 3800 with the Manchester core (well, some are actually a castrated Toledo, but that's a whole 'nother story...). The X2 3800 is dropping in price pretty quickly and isn't too much more than the 3700 San Diego now! Dual Core is the future, so I say if you can afford one, you might as well get one. You won't see a performance improvement in gaming over the San Diego, but it will multitask like nobody's business. It also compresses files and rips audio/video qucker as well

EDIT: DAMN PAUL!!!! You broke the 1000 post barrier!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lol

gvblake22 wrote: EDIT: DAMN PAUL!!!! You broke the 1000 post barrier!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lol

damn right boooooooyyyy, rofl; who's your digital master .....all your base are belong to me, lmao...ohhhh, I need to wake up and go to school

killswitch83 wrote:I need to wake up and go to school

LOL, you and me both!!!!

Well the only thing that I know he's going to wait on is the video card. I told him to start buying parts a bit before the video card of his choice comes out. He has his eye on the x1600 which he mentioned comes out early December. So, maybe the X2 3800+ will drop to his preferred price level by then?

He wants to build this system to play some games and to do graphics work on as he's going to school for art.

The X2 would definately do him good, but even a San Diego will still be a great processor. But if it were me, I would try and shoot for the X2 3800.
As far as the video card, the X1600 should be a good card, as long as you can get it for under $200. I wouldn't pay more than $200 for it. It only very stilghtly outperforms the 6600GT, and usually they are about equal.
Just my $0.02 worth anyway...

gvblake22 wrote:The X2 would definately do him good, but even a San Diego will still be a great processor. But if it were me, I would try and shoot for the X2 3800.
As far as the video card, the X1600 should be a good card, as long as you can get it for under $200. I wouldn't pay more than $200 for it. It only very stilghtly outperforms the 6600GT, and usually they are about equal.
Just my $0.02 worth anyway...

So are you recommending him to get a 6800GT instead? That is what his other option was. I think waiting for newer architecture would be better. Heck, even the 7x00 Series cards may do him well. I didn't look at any prices or see how good/bad the middle/low end cards in that series perform, but I would assume a little better than a 6800GT? Could be wrong.

No, not necessarily. The 6600GT and the X1600pro are both great cards. I personally own the 6600GT and I think it is a great "bang for your buck" product. But what I'm trying to say is that the X1600 cards will be overpriced upon thier release for the performance they can provide. I just think that for how they perform, I (personally) would not pay more than $200 for one, I'm not saying I wouldn't buy one though. Just the opposite, I would love to have one of those babies purring away next to me in my rig!

But to be honest, if you want it to last another 4-5 years of playing the most recent game titles as they are released, you might want to step up to something with a little more power. Probably at least a 6800GT, maybe a 7800GT if you can scrape together the cash. But if you are buying components that you want to be high end for another 4-5 years, you're gonna have to pay through the nose to get the best of the best now so in 4-5 years, they are still "OK" instead of "crap-o-la". Catch my drift?

You should consider your options though, it may almost be cheaper to get a midrange card now (6600GT or X1600) and let it last for two or 2.5 years, and then get another mid-range card then to last you the next 2-2.5 years. Basically you either spend ~$400 now on an awesome card that will be mid range in 4-5 years, or you spend ~$200 on a card that is mid range now and then spend another ~$200 on another mid range card that will last you through the end of your 4-5 year timeframe. Either way, you end up spending $400 at the end of the 4-5 years, but your video card performance at the end will be current generation hardware rather than 4-5 year old technology. Newer hardware has a better resale value to...

Well, I guess I'll have to help him compare the results and prices for the 6800GT and 7800GT. He was running a GeForce 256 for the longest time until it failed. I borrowed him my Radeon 9000 Pro and that lasted him for a few months.... then he gave it back for some reason? So I don't think buying a nice card now will be a problem as he is WAAY too cheap to buy new things if he doesn't have to. My brother tried to sell him a machine with a 6600GT, Athlon XP 3000+, 280GB HDD, Plextor DVD-RW, 1GB of RAM, and some other goodies for $450-500 and he said that was too expensive... This was all around the time that the 6x00 series cards came out too... This just kinda shows you that he won't buy something that's a few months old if he knows he can get something newer, but for a bit more.

Personally, since my comp is a POS, lol, I would have been all over that 3000+ system, even if it is only an XP, hell it had a 6600GT and a fairly large HDD, woulda been good to get around with for awhile, but I guess considering it was an XP it is a smidge high.

Well, you gotta remember, the 6600GT was like brand new, so there is ~$200 right there. I thought it was a great price as he priced out all new parts and it would have been $700-800 for the system new. Again, having practically new parts in it already, $200-300 off is a steal! But whatever, he isn't too concerned I guess.

If you got it, go for it, right? I know I would if I had some decent dough, alas I'm a college student, and yes the stereotype applies: I'm broke as a joke and trying to make it by on my mortgage with a $9/hr full-time job. Not complaining at all though, hell I have a house, lol