Navigate:

Advice
Beginners
BIOS Guide
CPUs
Links
Mainboards
Memory
Network
Storage
Video/Sound Cards

Contact
Forum
SiteMap
Sponsors
WebNews
Home
. .

Prices:

Mainboards

ABIT
ASUS
Chaintech
Shuttle
Soyo
Tyan

CPU
Intel
P4 2.4C-800
P4 2.6C-800
P4 2.8C-800
P4 3.0-800
P4 3.2-800

AMD
AthlonXP
XP 1700+
XP 2000+
XP 2400+
XP 2500+
XP 2700+
XP 3000+
XP 3200+

Athlon64
Athlon64 3200+
Athlon64 FX-51

Opteron
Opteron 240
Opteron 242
Opteron 244
Opteron 246

Memory

Corsair
Crucial
Kingston
Mushkin
OCZ

Search Prices:


























































































































LOSTCIRCUITS

SHORTCUTS:
The Mancunian Candidate
Numbers and Test Configurations
Benchmarks at one Glance
SiSoft Sandra
Cachemem
WorldBench5
3dsmax Lightwave [8],
Cinebench 2003
Power Consumption
Caligari and Watt per Rendering Pass
3DMark'05
DOOM3, FarCry
Final Thoughts

Discuss this review here:

 AMD Athlon64-X2-3800+
The Mancunian Candidate
(Review by MS September 20, 2005)
AMD Athlon 64 3800+ (Venice)

Final Thoughts

We took the X2-3800+, ran it through the paces, and suffice it to say that this “little” CPU took all the beatings we subjected it to without the slightest hiccup. Power consumption and thermal properties are exceptionally good, especially compared to the actual processing power the X2-3800+ delivers.


There are a few highlights of our findings that may be worth repeating, particularly the fact that running the memory at higher clock speed than the core results in quite a performance hit. Originally, it appeared to be the opposite, meaning that the performance increased with the memory bus speed. However, when we scrutinized our own findings, it turned out that, at least in the system we used as test bench, an increase in memory bus frequency automatically upped the processor core speed at the same rate. It was not until we had run an entire spectrum of benchmarks that we caught this glitch, but it is there and it is reproducible, even though it is system dependent.

In the end, what it comes down to, is that we see the same impact of asynchronously running of the memory bus that already plagued the VIA KT series and the nForce2 chipset. Bottomline is that once and again, the best way of running memory appears to be in synchronous mode, our latency and bandwidth benchmarks speak for themselves and were reflected in basically every system benchmark that involved memory data traffic.

The next highlight is the extreme power efficiency of the X2-3800. While the Venice core may - depending on the core speed - run at lower electrical power, the Manchester-based X2 3800+ will deliver better system performance at approximately the same overall power consumption. The same goes for the thermal dissipation that is plain and simply in a league of its own.

Arguably, there are faster gaming processors out there than the X2-3800+. On the other hand, the dual core smoothness that is so hard to put into numbers offsets any setback of the lower core speed in single threaded, single minded, single, er, first person shooter games.

In terms of overall performance, power efficiency, thermal waste, and overall smoothness, the X2-3800 is probably the best microprocessor currently available.

Athlon64 X2-3800+
(dual core)

next page: => More =>

All advice and educational articles on LostCircuits are free, but if you feel you can, please make a small donation to us!
Thank you!

General disclaimer: This page only reflects the author's personal opinion and assumes no responsibility whatsoever regarding any of the contents or any damages that may occur explicitly or implicitly from reading the contents of this site. All names and trademarks mentioned in this review are the exclusive property of the respective parent companies.
All contents of this site are protected by international copyright laws. Reproduction of the contents even in parts is not allowed except after written permission by the author and referral to this site.
Copyright 2002 - 2008 LostCircuits