AMD core codenames?

[n00b4now]

So basically I'm building my first computer.
I've been a lurker on the forums for awhile so I've got a decent knowledge base. What I want to know is this:

What is the difference between the San Diego, Venice, Winchester, Manchester, and Toledo cores?

I understand that they have different architecture geared toward a different target group, but what the different cores geared toward?

appreciate it.

[Azoxy]

Well there might be more of a difference then this little blurb, but I am not sure how detailed you really want to get...

http://hardwaresecrets.com/article/239

[public_eyesore]

most go for the venice, cause it seems to overcolock really well

[n00b4now]

Thankx.

It seems that only the FX-57 is based on the San Diego core, which is $1K that I don't have.

Isn't the older FX-53 still produced, but not labled the 53, but some ordinary #, like the 3000, or 3200 or something like that. I've heard of some really good overclocking coming from those processers, and they are both around 150 bones on newegg.

[Bluewolf]

My 3700+ is a San Diego core.

[DickNervous]

This is a good question, except the answer isn't easy, especially since I am an Intel guy, but here is what I know.

"Toldeo" is the dual core chips. 90nm design. Some have 1mb L2 cache per core (4800 and 4400) and some 512kb L2 per core (4600 and 4200).

"San Diego" is the single core version of "Toledo" and what you will find in the FX-57 and other chips. Both of these also support SSE3.

"Palermo" will be the new Sempron core. Also 90nm.

This page has a useful chart as well, though a little old.

And finally, this page has a more up-to-date roadmap of the Cores.

Hope this helps.

[n00b4now]

Thanks everybody, thats all the info I need for cores.

Looks like its a Athalon 64, 3200 @ 2 GHz venice core for me.
Overclocks to around 2.5 to 2.7 for most.

On another note, I'm thinking of getting a budget mobo. Both MSI and Chaintech offer some Nforce4 mobos with 1000MHz FSB for round $80. The reviews seem mostly good, but does anyone here think there will be a problem with a board like that?

[Azoxy]

Well I just recently put together my new system with a MSI K8N Neo4-F and it is working great for me. (After I fixed the slight problem of cutting a couple of traces while removing the back plate for the CPU cooler...) I have a AMD64 3700+ in it and have yet to start overclocking... I saw a similar priced Chaintech but the more reviews I read the more it sounded like it was not OC'ing friendly. Just my two cents.

[Dark-hobo]

If you plan on overclocking I would say go with DFI. They are more pricey but they are worth it.

[n00b4now]

I was going to do some mild overclocking.

This is my first home built computer, and the computer I have now doesn't have the BIOS options to overclock.

Primarily, I want a better computer to get my game on. Right now I've got a 1GHz pentium III in a HP. For under $250, I can upgrade my mobo, CPU, and PSU for a far superior gameing maching. I also want to get a bit of experience overclocking as well.

In the future, I plan to do at put together a medium-upper overclocked machine, but I have to get the money for the proper cooling n sh*t first. When that time comes, I'll probably drop the cash for a superior mobo, but for now, I just want to tweek it a little bit to get some experience. These mobos have overclocking friendly BIOS, but I doubt the mobos themselves (at under $80) would be stable during some hard core overclocking.