Best bang for buck amd processor.

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

Hi,

I was totally confused looking at the AMD model line for 32 bit the
other day. Different front side buses and different cpu cache sizes.
Of course the famous amd rating system is confusing to me at least.

Does anyone know a site that has ratings for the best bang for the
buck amd 32 bit processor? Best price/performance ratio.

Does a 512k cache really make a difference? Does a 333 FSB bus really
that slower than a 400 FSB? I'm looking at the athlon 32 bit lineup.

Thanks,

Alan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 00:27:20 -0500, Post Replies Here Please
<spamme@edge.net> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I was totally confused looking at the AMD model line for 32 bit the
>other day. Different front side buses and different cpu cache sizes.
>Of course the famous amd rating system is confusing to me at least.
>
>Does anyone know a site that has ratings for the best bang for the
>buck amd 32 bit processor? Best price/performance ratio.
>
>Does a 512k cache really make a difference? Does a 333 FSB bus really
>that slower than a 400 FSB? I'm looking at the athlon 32 bit lineup.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Alan


On the 32-bit scale, the Barton 2500 model is popular. It's cheap and
can often be overclocked to match the fastest 32-bit Athlons. 512k
cache doesn't make too much difference but it's nice to have. A fast
FSB makes a considerable difference. (but even the "333" CPUs like the
2500, can often be run at a "400" FSB). Good luck.

Also, I strongly suggest you consider the Athlon 64 3000+ model. It's
not nearly as cheap as the older 32 bit models but it has a lot more
performance.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 00:27:20 -0500, Post Replies Here Please
<spamme@edge.net> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I was totally confused looking at the AMD model line for 32 bit the
>other day. Different front side buses and different cpu cache sizes.
>Of course the famous amd rating system is confusing to me at least.
>

Get the mobile athlon2600. ~$100. It's CPU multiplier is unlocked.
Put it in an Abit NF7-S rev2 motherboard and set the FSB to 200/400.

Best bang for the buck.

http://www.anandtech.com/guides/showdoc.html?i=2021&p=2

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

>>>>> "alonzo" == alonzo <alonzo@nospam.com> writes:

alonzo> On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 00:27:20 -0500, Post Replies Here Please
alonzo> <spamme@edge.net> wrote:

>> Hi,
>>
>> I was totally confused looking at the AMD model line for 32 bit
>> the other day. Different front side buses and different cpu cache
>> sizes. Of course the famous amd rating system is confusing to me
>> at least.
>>

alonzo> Get the mobile athlon2600. ~$100. It's CPU multiplier is
alonzo> unlocked. Put it in an Abit NF7-S rev2 motherboard and set
alonzo> the FSB to 200/400.

alonzo> Best bang for the buck.

alonzo> http://www.anandtech.com/guides/showdoc.html?i=2021&p=2

That was interesting where in the world do you purchase a mobile
athlon from?

Thanks all for the information.

Later

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

Post Replies Here Please wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was totally confused looking at the AMD model line for 32 bit the
> other day. Different front side buses and different cpu cache sizes.
> Of course the famous amd rating system is confusing to me at least.

OK. The bigger the number in the AMD rating, the faster the processor. Not
that tricky, is it?

> Does anyone know a site that has ratings for the best bang for the
> buck amd 32 bit processor? Best price/performance ratio.

Divide the rating by the price and your biggest number is the one to get.

> Does a 512k cache really make a difference?

It can do, depending on your application.

> Does a 333 FSB bus really that slower than a 400 FSB?

Yes. But again, thats application dependant.

If you wish to overclock, then the Barton 2500 is likely the best bang for
buck (as it's the cheapest). Or maybe the cheapest Tbred B core.

Ben
--
A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

 

[rms]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

> where in the world do you purchase a mobile
> athlon from?


http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?catalog=343&DEPA=0&submit=property&mfrcode=0&propertycode=&propertycodevalue=4181

Really the smart move for the average overclocker is the mobile 2400+.
It will still run fine as a 3200+ or higher, and saves $25 over the 2600+.

rms

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

Faster in what category? A 2400 TBird/A 2500 Barton
"Ben Pope" <spam@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:c5u172$5jb1k$1@ID-191149.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Post Replies Here Please wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was totally confused looking at the AMD model line for 32 bit the
> > other day. Different front side buses and different cpu cache sizes.
> > Of course the famous amd rating system is confusing to me at least.
>
> OK. The bigger the number in the AMD rating, the faster the processor. Not
> that tricky, is it?
>
> > Does anyone know a site that has ratings for the best bang for the
> > buck amd 32 bit processor? Best price/performance ratio.
>
> Divide the rating by the price and your biggest number is the one to get.
>
> > Does a 512k cache really make a difference?
>
> It can do, depending on your application.
>
> > Does a 333 FSB bus really that slower than a 400 FSB?
>
> Yes. But again, thats application dependant.
>
> If you wish to overclock, then the Barton 2500 is likely the best bang for
> buck (as it's the cheapest). Or maybe the cheapest Tbred B core.
>
> Ben
> --
> A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
> Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
> I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

<alonzo@nospam.com> wrote in message
newsj0580tjec2t3a314rpalo6680omugic73@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 00:27:20 -0500, Post Replies Here Please
> <spamme@edge.net> wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >I was totally confused looking at the AMD model line for 32 bit the
> >other day. Different front side buses and different cpu cache sizes.
> >Of course the famous amd rating system is confusing to me at least.
> >
>
> Get the mobile athlon2600. ~$100. It's CPU multiplier is unlocked.
> Put it in an Abit NF7-S rev2 motherboard and set the FSB to 200/400.


Or a mobile 2.4 Barton - and clock it up to 10 x 256 FSB on a DFI mobo.


>
> Best bang for the buck.
>
> http://www.anandtech.com/guides/showdoc.html?i=2021&p=2
>
>

 

[chip]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

"Scumball" <scumball@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:c609un$e3d$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
>
> <alonzo@nospam.com> wrote in message
> newsj0580tjec2t3a314rpalo6680omugic73@4ax.com...
> > On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 00:27:20 -0500, Post Replies Here Please
> > <spamme@edge.net> wrote:
> >
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >I was totally confused looking at the AMD model line for 32 bit the
> > >other day. Different front side buses and different cpu cache sizes.
> > >Of course the famous amd rating system is confusing to me at least.
> > >
> >
> > Get the mobile athlon2600. ~$100. It's CPU multiplier is unlocked.
> > Put it in an Abit NF7-S rev2 motherboard and set the FSB to 200/400.
>
>
> Or a mobile 2.4 Barton - and clock it up to 10 x 256 FSB on a DFI mobo.
>
>

Nah. Get a 300MHz Celeron and clock it to 4.2GHz. Why not.

Chip

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

lazya wrote:
> Faster in what category? A 2400 TBird/A 2500 Barton

Can you at least leave a gap of one carriage return between my post and
yours, that way I'll find it easier.

Well that would depend, wouldn't it, but overall the 2500 would be a lttle
quicker.

The TBred is likely clocked faster so will number crunch quicker, the Barton
will be better at memory throughput.

Ben
--
A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

"Ben Pope" <spam@hotmail.com> wrote
> The TBred is likely clocked faster so will number crunch quicker, the
Barton
> will be better at memory throughput.

Wow! I, too, finally know!

I wonder which I should get for Trainz train simulator. When people put lots
of trees and buildings in it, it slows down magically.


--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at
uce@ftc.gov
Thanks, robots.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

Ed Light wrote:
> "Ben Pope" <spam@hotmail.com> wrote
>> The TBred is likely clocked faster so will number crunch quicker, the
>> Barton will be better at memory throughput.
>
> Wow! I, too, finally know!
>
> I wonder which I should get for Trainz train simulator. When people put
> lots of trees and buildings in it, it slows down magically.

Personally I'd get the Barton (I have a Barton 2500+). Since we're in an
overclocking group I have to assume that you may want to give it a go
sometime - I would suspect both chips to reach a similar speed, but the
Barton will likely be able to have a higher FSB (as the multiplier is
lower), which, in addition to the extra cache, will give you greater memory
bandwidth with the same number crunching ability.

Ben
--
A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...