Athlon 64 3000+ Whinchester vs Venice 939 CPU

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am building a new system lower end budget and was wondering what the real difference is between the Athlon 64 3000+ Whinchester vs Venice 939 CPU.

I have looked over various sites, but cannot find any real performance numbers. The price difference between the two is $1 ($153.00 vs. $153.99) at Newegg. Can someone explain the difference?

Thanks.
 
Definitely get the venice, it's newer and better. Venice supports 4 memory sticks at ddr400(pc3200) speed, whereas winchester has to run 4 memory dimms at ddr333(pc2700) speed, which is a performance hit. Even if you only use 2 dimms now, in the future you probably will get more ram. Venice also overclocks very well, from what I've read, better than winchester.
 
vnf4ultra said:
winchester has to run 4 memory dimms at ddr333(pc2700) speed
That is ONLY the case if you use 4 double-ranked sticks or 1 double-ranked stick each in slots 1 & 3
2 double-ranked plus 2 single-ranked sticks also run at DDR400(PC3200).

But yes, the Venice is the latest and greatest(?).
 
realblackstuff said:
That is ONLY the case if you use 4 double-ranked sticks or 1 double-ranked stick each in slots 1 & 3
2 double-ranked plus 2 single-ranked sticks also run at DDR400(PC3200).

But yes, the Venice is the latest and greatest(?).

But most all 512mb dimms and larger are double sided, and that's what many performance users use, 2x512, and then get another 2x512 down the road, which runs at ddr333. I guess it works at ddr400 if you have 4x256, because many 256 stick are single sided.
 
Most Crucial Ram is single-sided, I know mine is (512mb PC3200 DIMMs). Even the Ballistix series is single-sided.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back