When did AMD stop making 177+ Palominos?

[Franklin]

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

Today I bought a new 1700+ Athlon chip. I expected it to be a
Thoroughbred-B (AXDA1700DLTBC) but instead it is a Palomino with
a code of AX1700MT3C.

The other markings are: AG0IA 0224SPDW, 98781970230. The chip is dark
green and has 27111 in the corner.

When did AMD stop making these 1700+ Palominos?

 

[geoff]

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

Franklin wrote:
> Today I bought a new 1700+ Athlon chip. I expected it to be a
> Thoroughbred-B (AXDA1700DLTBC) but instead it is a Palomino with
> a code of AX1700MT3C.
>
> The other markings are: AG0IA 0224SPDW, 98781970230. The chip is dark
> green and has 27111 in the corner.
>
> When did AMD stop making these 1700+ Palominos?

prob old stock
they prob stopped making them ages ago

 

[Guest]

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

Franklin wrote:
> Today I bought a new 1700+ Athlon chip. I expected it to be a
> Thoroughbred-B (AXDA1700DLTBC) but instead it is a Palomino with
> a code of AX1700MT3C.
>
> The other markings are: AG0IA 0224SPDW, 98781970230. The chip is dark
> green and has 27111 in the corner.
>
> When did AMD stop making these 1700+ Palominos?
The manufacture date on your Palomino is the 24th week of 2002. If you
bought it at a retail store I'd take it back and ask for a refund or
credit toward a T'bred B.

--
FRH

 

[Guest]

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

"Frank_v7.0" wrote
> The manufacture date on your Palomino is the 24th week of 2002. If you
> bought it at a retail store I'd take it back and ask for a refund or
> credit toward a T'bred B.



Hi,

yeah that's a fair point, but actually the PALOMINO is a decent chip, just
that it uses 1.75vCore which is higher than the Thoroughbred Core
(1.5-1.65vCore) which of course means it's harder to overclock!

Are you intending to overclock?

Wayne ][

 

[Guest]

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

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 00:12:14 +0000, Franklin wrote:

> Today I bought a new 1700+ Athlon chip. I expected it to be a
> Thoroughbred-B (AXDA1700DLTBC) but instead it is a Palomino with
> a code of AX1700MT3C.
>
> The other markings are: AG0IA 0224SPDW, 98781970230. The chip is dark
> green and has 27111 in the corner.
>
> When did AMD stop making these 1700+ Palominos?

Couldn't tell you the exact date tehye stopped, but yours was made the
24th week of 2002, thus the date code 0224. Now if what you bought was
advertised as an AXDA1700DLT3C and they sent you this old palomino core,
I'd raise all kinds of hell with them. That's fraud.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
Verizon server http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm

 

[Guest]

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

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 03:19:33 +0000, Wayne Youngman wrote:

> "Frank_v7.0" wrote
>> The manufacture date on your Palomino is the 24th week of 2002. If you
>> bought it at a retail store I'd take it back and ask for a refund or
>> credit toward a T'bred B.
>
> yeah that's a fair point, but actually the PALOMINO is a decent chip, just
> that it uses 1.75vCore which is higher than the Thoroughbred Core
> (1.5-1.65vCore) which of course means it's harder to overclock!
>
The Palomino core is 2 generations back. It's about as good as the Tbred A
core but way short of the B core which is the basis for all K7 cores
produced even today. The Barton, Applebred, Sempron, and all the other
wierd name cores are bascially just a Tbred B core with different amounts
of cache. Even my Duron 1600 is a tbred b core cpuid 681 with some of the
cache ram disabled. So to me it would make a big difference even if I
weren't planning on overclocking it. the b core will run much cooler too.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
Verizon server http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm

 

[Guest]

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

"Wes Newell" wrote
> The Palomino core is 2 generations back. It's about as good as the Tbred A
> core but way short of the B core which is the basis for all K7 cores
> produced even today. The Barton, Applebred, Sempron, and all the other
> wierd name cores are bascially just a Tbred B core with different amounts
> of cache. Even my Duron 1600 is a tbred b core cpuid 681 with some of the
> cache ram disabled. So to me it would make a big difference even if I
> weren't planning on overclocking it. the b core will run much cooler too.


Hi Wes,

My first Athlon was a 2500+ Barton, but I since worked backwards, and now
also have two T-Breds and two Palominos.

I was under the impression that a T-BredA was *exactly* the same as a
Palomino except for the die-shrink? and as for the difference between
T-BredA and T-BredB. . um. . .I thought it was just voltage? and some are
set to run on a 166MHz-FSB.

I haven't tried overclocking the Palominos, just got them running in some
old microATX nForce mobos, but still I think there pretty fast chips still.

Not sure of the specifics of the O.P's deal, but if he just walked into an
average computer store and asked for an AthlonXP 1700+ then that's what he
got, but he says "I expected it to be a Thoroughbred-B (AXDA1700DLTBC)"

Not sure what *expected* means!

Wayne ][

 

[Guest]

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

Thus spake Wayne Youngman:

>I was under the impression that a T-BredA was *exactly* the same as a
>Palomino except for the die-shrink? and as for the difference between
>T-BredA and T-BredB. . um. . .I thought it was just voltage? and some are
>set to run on a 166MHz-FSB.

The transistor layout is slightly different between Tbred-B and -A.
and quite a bit different between Tbred and Palomino. Plus, Palomino's
are made with seven layers of interconnects, Tbred-A's with eight, and
Tbred-B's with nine.
--
sls

 

[Guest]

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

On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 04:08:32 +0000, Wayne Youngman wrote:

> I was under the impression that a T-BredA was *exactly* the same as a
> Palomino except for the die-shrink? and as for the difference between
> T-BredA and T-BredB. . um. . .I thought it was just voltage? and some are
> set to run on a 166MHz-FSB.
>
The Tbred A was more than just a die shrink I think, but maybe not. It
really doesn't matter much. It was a disaster for AMD when it wouldn't run
much faster than the Palomino core. The Tbred B core is a complete new
design with 2 extra layers. If it hadn't been for it, AMD would probably
have lost almost all of what market share they had.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
Verizon server http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm

 

[Dave]

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

I started out with a 1700+ Palomino. It wouldn't go above 2000+ performance.
I then replaced it was a T'bred B 1700+ which has been running at 2600+ for
2 years

> I haven't tried overclocking the Palominos, just got them running in some
> old microATX nForce mobos, but still I think there pretty fast chips
> still.

 

[Guest]

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

"Wes Newell" <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net> wrote in message
newsan.2005.03.05.07.00.05.303570@TAKEOUTverizon.net...
> The Tbred A was more than just a die shrink I think, but maybe not. It
> really doesn't matter much. It was a disaster for AMD when it wouldn't run
> much faster than the Palomino core. The Tbred B core is a complete new
> design with 2 extra layers. If it hadn't been for it, AMD would probably
> have lost almost all of what market share they had.


It was not a completely new design. The thoroughbred B had new cooling
layers that allowed the core to run faster.

--
LTP

When the llama speaks you listen. Unfortunately the llama hasn't spoken
yet.

 

[Guest]

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

On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 13:55:38 -0700, Luc The Perverse wrote:

> "Wes Newell" <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net> wrote in message
> newsan.2005.03.05.07.00.05.303570@TAKEOUTverizon.net...
>> The Tbred A was more than just a die shrink I think, but maybe not. It
>> really doesn't matter much. It was a disaster for AMD when it wouldn't run
>> much faster than the Palomino core. The Tbred B core is a complete new
>> design with 2 extra layers. If it hadn't been for it, AMD would probably
>> have lost almost all of what market share they had.
>
>
> It was not a completely new design. The thoroughbred B had new cooling
> layers that allowed the core to run faster.

How fricking picky can you get. No it wasn't technically a completely new
design. It also still had 462 pins. How bored are you.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
Verizon server http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm