Venice vs. Toledo Core

elg2001 · Post by **elg2001** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 5:09 pm

Hi,
I'm a pretty long-time reader of SPCR but i havent gotten around to signing up for the forums until now. Great to be here

Anyways, I searched all through the forum and couldnt find the answer to my question: if you were to power down one of the cores in a dual-core Athlon64 X2 CPU (Toledo core), is the toledo core just as power efficient as the venice core (assuming identical MHz)?

I remember reading somewhere that the Toledo is much less efficient than Venice, but I'd rather have an answer from people I can trust like the members of this forum.

elg2001 · Post by **elg2001** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 7:18 pm

i did some searching and came up with this: http://www.lostcircuits.com/cpu/amd_x2/11.shtml

is it true: does the toledo core in the X2 really suck that bad efficiency-wise? i know its 2 cores instead of one but damn its more than twice the power requirement.

~El~Jefe~ · Post by **~El~Jefe~** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 8:06 am

it sux if it was one computer, but it's two!!!

for 2 chips squished next to each other, its insanely good. I wouldnt worry about things here. Plus it is the fastest computing wise of the group right? so power to heat to performance it is really really good. much better than a winchester which stays cool, but try to do video editing/whatever and its like back in the stone ages compared to most any 250+ dollar intel chip.

also, the less spacing you have for chips, the more they heat up, and the more that causes electricity to be used, which then heats up more a bit. For what it is, x2 dual core is great. Also, unless you are goign to spend 1050 bux on the chip, NOT, you could look at a realistic 4400 which runs cooler ya know?

jojo4u · Post by **jojo4u** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 9:46 am

The only figure I can add is:

http://www.hardtecs4u.com/?id=1121551363,48342,ht4u.php

It's real power draw of the CPU during non-Cool'n'Quiet idle and full load.
Full load for single is BurnMax and for dual 2x BurnMax and 3dMark2003.
It shows 31-39W for the Venice and 65W for the X2.

~El~Jefe~ · Post by **~El~Jefe~** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:15 am

is it just me?

or does any webpage illustrating an amd64 without cool n quiet enabled severely irritate you?

wtf is the point!!!!

not a bad test though.

WHOA, see the 3800+ in mention? thats cool for spcr people. i mean, still i would go for the 4400 to more future proof for gaming. but, it's still a nice deal and i bet it goes very fast.