AMD Athlon XP?

Kiroku6 · Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:32 am Post subject: AMD Athlon XP?

I am building my first pc. I am wondering if i should get an AMD Athlon XP, and if so, which version should i get? Is it worth it to go for the Barton 3200 or should i get the 3000. If its not worth it to get a Barton what about the 2700+?
Thanks,
Kikiyo

paulisdead · Guru Joined: 10 Apr 2002 Posts: 510 Location: Seattle, WA

Barton cores are nice, I found compile times went down a fair amount when I went from an 1800+ palamino core, to a 2500 Barton core, probably because of the more level 2 cache or higher front side bus. You won't see a huge performance difference between a 3200 and 3000 with clock speed, so just get what you feel comfortable paying for.

I love my Abit nf7-s 2.0, so I'd recommend an nforce2 mobo to go with that.

If you're willing to shell out the cash, you might even look at an athlon64, but if you go that route, you may want to wait a month or so when socket 939 for the athlon64 comes out with dual channel memory support, and nforce3 250s to go with it. That's what I'm waiting for, for my next upgrade.
_________________
"we should make it a law that all geeks have dates" - Linus

Malakin · Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2004 8:51 am Post subject:

If you go with an Athlon XP I wouldn't bother going any higher then an XP2500, the performance difference is very small compared the increased cost and the XP2500 stays fairly cool. If you want something that's significantly faster then this I'd go with an Athlon 64 3000+ or 3200+.
Some performance figures:
http://www20.tomshardware.com/cpu/20040106/athlon64_3400-12.html

Currently all XP2500/2600/2800/3000/3200 are Bartons (in non-mobile chips).

If you're into overclocking a bit you could buy an XP2400 mobile chip, they're a barton and they're unlocked so you can run them at whatever you want, they all oc fairly high.

Edit: It should be mentioned that the non mobile xp chips are all locked these days and the mobile's are better overclockers. Mobile chips don't cost that much more either.

altorus · Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2004 12:44 pm Post subject:

I definitely second the 2500 vote - they are fantastic, and dirt cheap.

Hell mine stably does 197 x 11 (2167Mhz) with barely a rise in cpu temps - normally at well under 40 degrees (C) with the stock cooler (in an Australian summer too). That is barely below 3200 speeds, for a 115 dollar cpu. And this isn't even an overclocker's motherboard. Its an Albatron nforce2 home theatre board.

Its got my vote. I love my 2500

And yes, i too went up from an 1800 palomino, and the extra cache really speeds things up.