Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Athlon 64 3400+ 939?

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Compatibility
  • Socket
Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 12, 2005 5:48:20 PM

I just bought an athlon 64 3400+ that is socket 939, it runs at 2.4 Ghz. Anybody know of any compatibility issues with these cpus. I will be plugging it into an Abit AN8 Motherboard.

More about : athlon 3400 939

a b à CPUs
April 12, 2005 5:56:18 PM

I'd just like to know where you got it. Got a clicky?
I thought the s939 chips went from 3200+ and then the next step up is 3500+. I thought the 3400+ were all s754 - unless this is a chip made for large OEMs and you somehow got your hands on one...

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red>
Related resources
April 12, 2005 6:01:41 PM

Rugger is right its 3200+ and 3500+ for 939 pin. Only socket 754 comes in 3400+
April 12, 2005 7:04:23 PM

Well, it says the part number is: ADA3400DEP4AZ
A is for A64
D is for desktop
A is for regular wattage
3400 is its rating
D is for Socket 939
E is for 1.5V (130nm)
P is for a 70C max die temperature
4 is for 512KB cache
AZ is for the stepping

So if the model number is anything to go by, it really is a 939 3400. So if it's a hoax it's a well done one. **ROFL**

<pre> :eek:  <font color=purple>I express to you a hex value 84 with my ten binary 'digits'. :eek:  </font color=purple></pre><p>@ 185K -> 200,000 miles or bust!
April 12, 2005 7:06:13 PM

That is weird.. assuming this thing is real, the only explanation I see for the low PR rating (given the clock) is that only one memory controller is activated/functional. Maybe AMD had a bunch of semi flawed S939 chips with only one working MC, and turned them into something usefull for oems ?

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
April 12, 2005 7:11:18 PM

I wouldn't be so sure. On AMDs lists, AFAIK, you will also not find the 2.33 GHz Athlon XP 3200+ (166 FSB) they made exclusively for HP. This looks like a similar "special op" chip to me.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
April 12, 2005 7:12:03 PM

<font color=green><A HREF="http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/...
" target="_new">AMD clicky.</A></font color=green>

Not nearly as informative as <font color=purple><A HREF="http://www.overclockers.com/articles1116/" target="_new">this</A></font color=purple> and <font color=purple><A HREF="http://www.overclockers.com/articles1116/index02.asp" target="_new">page2</A></font color=purple> however.

<pre> :eek:  <font color=purple>I express to you a hex value 84 with my ten binary 'digits'. :eek:  </font color=purple></pre><p>@ 185K -> 200,000 miles or bust!
April 12, 2005 7:17:14 PM

you got me there, but I figured since it was form AMD's website that it was guaranteed acurate
April 12, 2005 7:38:49 PM

Ach. AMD is the worst source of information on their own products. :o  They either like to hide a lot, or they're just lazy about being thorough. In this regard Intel kicks their arse. Intel is sickeningly thorough. Maybe that's what happens when you're the 'underdog': you don't have the money to document well.

<pre> :eek:  <font color=purple>I express to you a hex value 84 with my ten binary 'digits'. :eek:  </font color=purple></pre><p>@ 185K -> 200,000 miles or bust!
April 12, 2005 8:01:05 PM

So assuming this works without a hitch, ive read its htt frequency is 800/1600(not really sure what that means, I know more about pentiums) So assuming this is dual channel enabled, will it run at about the same speed as the other 939 2.4's or i guess it might run like a 3500. any ideas?
April 12, 2005 11:25:58 PM

This really needs a sticky or something because of the confusion. The 939 3400+ is simply a 3500+ with a 800HTT rather than a 1000. Simple as that. They were mainly for oems.

The know-most-of-it-all formally known as BOBSHACK
April 12, 2005 11:39:17 PM

That chip has been around a while. It caused problems for a lot of people. It is not recognized in bios. Many boards have trouble dealing with that. The only suggestion I have, is to set the perameters manually, if your board supports it. Good luck.
April 13, 2005 4:50:14 PM

Here is my question...

Why pay 217$US for a 2.4GHz chip when you can buy a BOXED 1.8GHz chip for much less that can EASILY match the performance with easy overclocking of the chip you just bought.

I hope you will not have trouble make it work on your MoBo!

-
GA-K8NF-9 / <b><font color=green>Athlon 64 3200+</font color=green> @ 3800+</b>
Infineon DDR400 (CL2.5) 2x512Megs
<font color=green>GeForce 6600GT 128Megs</font color=green>
<A HREF="http://www.getfirefox.com" target="_new">Firefox</A>
April 13, 2005 5:01:58 PM

1. Because overclocks are not guarenteed.

2. He may not want to overclock

3 . He may have a crap psu that cannot handle the Vcore increase you would have to give the 1.8 to get to 2.4 (if that is possible - #1)

...the list is endless...

______________
Welcome to my Shed of Pleasure
April 13, 2005 5:15:36 PM

Good reasons!

But the PSU, even if it's not top-notch should not be an issue. Most A64 don't need a lot more vCore to run at 2.4GHz. Mine only need 0.1 Volt, and I'm sure I could drop it to default vcore, but I don't have the time to run long-term stability test right now.

Fur sure, you will have an "exclusive" CPU! :smile:

-
GA-K8NF-9 / <b><font color=green>Athlon 64 3200+</font color=green> @ 3800+</b>
Infineon DDR400 (CL2.5) 2x512Megs
<font color=green>GeForce 6600GT 128Megs</font color=green>
<A HREF="http://www.getfirefox.com" target="_new">Firefox</A>
!