jermaink Posted June 16, 2005 Posted June 16, 2005 I've seen it alluded to in many posts that the San Diego core is not as good as Venice at overclocking, probably due to less BIOS support. Does anyone know of this is right (prefer 1st hand or reliable 2nd had accounts). Seeing as though there is a price difference of $50-60 between the 3500+ and 3700+, and the performance difference is not that big (is this right? from what I've heard, about 3%), then the Venice core seems to be better value, and OC performance as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGone Posted June 16, 2005 Posted June 16, 2005 Relavent and specific signature made here will help a lot as some users might "recognize" your setup and problem... Make a signature. Make a "projected" signature. Don't believe all the BS you read. I would not have 2 Venices over a good 3700+ San Diego. Now that is my opinion of course just like all the other BS you are reading. You really look around and most of the Venices are running in the 2700mhz class as does my 3800+ Venice but my 3700+ San Diego is a 2800mhz class cpu on air. In short I don't want no Venice. The 3500+ Clawhammer has been one fast cpu. But then if you are going to run basically stock> h*ll get anything. RGone... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now