AM2 3500+ Review

ikjadoon

Distinguished
Feb 25, 2006
1,983
44
19,810
AM2 3500+ Review!

That doesn't sound so good, but it just a memory upgrade. I personally think that DDR2 needs to mature some more, like either tighter latencies or even higher speeds, to show its true potential in AMD-based systems. Though, this was done with a beta CPU, a beta motherboard, and a beta BIOS. Cuz if we need to double our memory speeds, i.e. 400MHz to 800MHz, to even get CLOSE to what we were getting with current 939-pin CPUs, than AM2 has lost a large advantage. I know AM2 is just not ONLY a memory upgrade, but it was still a major part of the upgrade.

~Ibrahim~
 

bront

Distinguished
Oct 16, 2001
2,122
0
19,780
Untill it's a final sample, I won't believe it (same approach I take with Conroe).

That said, I don't expect much with AM2 initialy. The idea is that they'll have the room to ramp up the chip speed once they drop to the .65 process. It's a basic future proofing.
 

hacky_maximus

Distinguished
May 11, 2006
94
0
18,630
DDR2 needs to grow up a little bit. There was an article on THG about "Tight Timings vs High Clock Frequencies" and in my opinion, for DDR2, some tight timings are the best.
 

PigeonMessenger

Distinguished
May 11, 2006
20
0
18,510
Some of those results are pretty odd.

Take DVDShrink:

It takes 12:30 @ DDR2-667, yet using faster DDR2-800 on the same benchmark it takes 4seconds longer?

I'm not sure whether to trust the test methodoligy - Either way, AM2 isn't going to be breaking any performance records.
 
I personally recommend that anyone planning on an AM2 "upgrade" could instead get the equivalent performance by swapping out their current socket 939 cpu for one clocked about 200 Mhz slower...

Same performance as a new AM2/DDR2 rig, and far cheaper overall!
 

TRENDING THREADS