Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Why is AMD being so slow with the 400FSB Bartons??

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 24, 2003 1:48:59 AM

Just out of curiosity, but does anybody know AMD is being slow with the release of a 400mhz FSB version of the Bartons. With the release of Canterwood, AMD is going to lose alot of customers with no good new product release. Does it have anything to do with waiting for the nForce 2 refresh?

One mans throw-away is another mans god-box. Help friends in need, I always do!!
Then again, having extra parts are great for making dedicated servers for LAN parties!!!!<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Wurrmm on 04/23/03 09:49 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
April 24, 2003 1:51:37 AM

Who knows why AMD does anything nowadays? I agree with you though. With P4-800 FSB hitting shelves now, I am about to go back to Intel. However, I would really like to see the price/performance of a 400 FSB Barton before I make my final decision. Unfortunately, I may not be able to wait much longer.


<font color=green>The Netherlands is where you go when you're too good for heaven.</font color=green> :tongue:
April 24, 2003 1:58:12 AM

I really think it has something to do with the chipsets, since it seems to always be the chipsets holding back the fsb of athlons, not the processors themselves
Related resources
April 24, 2003 3:16:10 AM

They would have made sooo much money if they would just get them out. Intel is really sticking to them now.

One mans throw-away is another mans god-box. Help friends in need, I always do!!
Then again, having extra parts are great for making dedicated servers for LAN parties!!!!
April 24, 2003 3:22:04 AM

I'm with you on not staying with AMD. They take way to long with releasing their products on time. Barton 333 FSB or 400 FSB. This has been going on for the past two months.
April 24, 2003 3:29:51 AM

The barton should have just purely been a 400FSB. Who cares if the mobos don't "offically" support it yet. Alot of people can get it to that or close and some can get better. Not having it out a month ago was a big mistake.

One mans throw-away is another mans god-box. Help friends in need, I always do!!
Then again, having extra parts are great for making dedicated servers for LAN parties!!!!
April 25, 2003 1:35:06 AM

Why does it take Mobo makers so long to support 400 fsb Bartons. Didn't take them that long to get Intel 800 Fsb boards up an running.
April 25, 2003 3:08:24 AM

Because Intel has like 90 percent of the market (or is it less?) and less money is to be made expaditing the technology of the AMD systems. Why spend as much money designing chipsets for something that wont make you as much money?

I prefer AMD, mainly because of the way they run things as opposed to Intel, and their history. I have an AMD, the next computer I will build will be AMD, but I will say for right now, Intel has the upper hand.


BTW, if anybody has a SUPER7 motherboard they don't want, I need one to fill in the spot for my K6-2. ATX or AT style will work (as I have many cases around).

Water cooling is for the weak. Get liquid nitrogen.
May 4, 2003 4:59:02 PM

AMD is lagging behind a bit in the consumer CPU market right now, though they have a lead with their new Opteron over Intels Xeon CPU.

My system: AMD Athlon XP 3000+ CPU / TwinMOS 1Gb DDR400 / Soltek 75FRN-RL /
Sapphire Radeon 9800 Pro / Antec True Power 550W / Maxtor 80Gb ATA-133 / Hercules GTXP SC /
Samsung DVD / Lite-On CDRW
May 4, 2003 7:59:58 PM

Intel slashes price and increase the performances.
Maybe I will choice Intel too. I liked very much AMD, but I am a customer and I have to look my convenience.
Why AMD is so late ? The answer comes from the numbers. Intel is much much bigger than AMD and it was able to make promptly a change in the direction on how to design processors. When AMD realised the design of AMD Athlon they were thinking to a desktop processor able to work very very fast in all conditions. And it is true, who, out of there, can say that his XP 3000+ is too slow for the job he has to perform ? Unless you need to build a multiprocessor server, the AMD Athlon XP can answer to all the request a user can do. The only way to observe performances increase is to run benchmarks. Is it important if a WORD window open in 100 milliseconds or in 120 milliseconds ? Intel understand promptly the importance of benchmark has in the choice of a CPU, while AMD had no time and no resources, between the Athlon XP and the Opteron to put an other processor on the market, and probably the new opteron is not yet as fast as users are expecting at least for 32 bit application.
The new 400 MHz FSB is only the best result attainable with the old architecture, but it costs a lot because the need to realize chip using an extremely high quality silicon, extremely pure and very expensive. Consider that all 333 MHz FSB cpu are already able to operate with a FSB of 360÷370 MHz.
The Pentium 4 core has huge capacity to rise in frequency and it seems that the story between the Athlon and the Pentium 3 is repeating. At that time the Athlon CPU was like a horse against the turtle Pentium 3. Now the story is reversed and AMD invent a code rating similar to frequency to mask the difficulty to rise in frequency. Now the difference is too big and the prices are comparable and the old phrase which accompained the AMD success "You can better perfomnces at lower price" is no more true.
AMD knows that the big obstacle are the memory management and to increase the clock speed. Why the same memory DIMM perform better in a INTEL platform ? Why AMD do not increase the clock even in higher rated CPU (XP 3200+) and tread the expensive road to increase the cache memory ? Probably they reached the top for this architecture and have nothing in the shelf.
However I never had problems from users which had a computer with an AMD CPU inside and I have also a XP 2700+ running absolutely stable at 2.4 GHz (177 x 13.5). The system allows me to perform any kind of job (simulation and modelling as well as office application and some games are my main applications)and I do not have any needs of higher speed. I am in the situation that the computer waits for input and I do not wait for the computer output.
Maybe Microsoft will realize a new OS which will oblige me to buy a 10 GHz Intel processor to boot the system.


...Ahhhh? , ok, ok ...I am turning off the computer.
May 5, 2003 12:08:51 AM

Unlike others.It only ram relate.

[-peep-] french
May 5, 2003 12:16:26 AM

In ragards to the 400MHZ FSB - I guess it woulda been nice to have something new non-serverwise from AMD, I recently got a 2500+ oced to like 3200+ speeds so Im happy. But I may have defected back to Intel IF Windows XP woudlnt make me format. I stuck with AMD mostly out of convenience.

Price/Performance wise I dont think you can beat the 2500+ oced to 3200 right now (Then again this is for games). Im pretty happy with my system right now and I didnt have to spend all that much on it

Athlon XP 2500+ @ 2.2GHz (12.5x177), Volcano 7 w/Smart Fan2, A7N8X, Kingston HyperX PC3000 512MB @177MHz, Radeon 9700Pro, SB Live 5.1
May 5, 2003 12:32:39 AM

I think AMD is trying to push its 64bit cpus out right now, they released the opteron and the desktop version is due out soon, the barton core still has plenty of room left in it tho so they could make loads by releasing a 400mhz version of the barton, these things can easily reach 2.4ghz with a little bit more loving care and the fsb would allow them to raise that rating system a bit more.

Treat your body like a $600 car. God didn't intend it to last so use it. Run it into the ground!
May 6, 2003 6:32:22 PM

the 2500+ is a great cpu, retail for 130 bucks with free second day shipping is one heck of a deal for a cpu that can compute at a tad over 2ghz :) . I just wish the 400mhz had come out before so i didn't have to buy two cpus right after each other. I bought 3200 ram to accomidate the 400fsb, but even now, its nice to have the extra wiggle room when i clock up the fsb anyway.

"sixth sick sheik's sixth sheep's sick"
*grabs a stick and places it into the flames; mmmm, smores*
%Think before you act would be a good motto%
May 7, 2003 3:33:01 PM

Just thought id let you guys know, the 3200 barton has been available here in the uk since this monday, thats only a week or 2 behind the p4 release at 800mhz, not so much of a gap really. But why cant i find any reviews? :( 
May 8, 2003 3:01:23 PM

indeed, the 3200+ with 400 FSB is out to buy now! I just saw it and was a little shocked, as THG and Anand heven't mentioned it yet.
May 8, 2003 3:50:57 PM

Quote:
they released the opteron and the desktop version is due out soon

Isn´t the desktop version of x86-64, the Athlon 64, still several months away at this point?
May 9, 2003 7:39:37 AM

I'm surprised you found the 3200, AMD does not publicize it at all in their WEB site. It seems AMD never produced such processor.

______________________
<font color=red>you don't need a faster computer, you need faster fingers for your hand</font color=red><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by unoc on 05/09/03 03:54 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
May 9, 2003 2:18:26 PM

Humm...

I'm not sure, I would like to see bench or review of this CPU??? Anyone have link to some of them???

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?
May 9, 2003 2:51:15 PM

Like I said... there si no OFFICIAL 3200+, It's a 3000+ Overclocked... Do Overclockers OK sells "legit" CPU???

I will wait to see the 3200+ on the AMD web site before thinking of buying one.

FROM X-BIT LABS :

"As a result, we managed to investigate the performance of the upcoming Athlon XP processors with 400MHz bus, namely, Athlon XP 3200+ working at 2.2GHz and Athlon XP 3000+ working at 2.1GHz."

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?
May 9, 2003 4:10:10 PM

I've bought many things from ocUK and they <i>Never</i> mis-label stuff like that. what I have seen is stuff like:
"Athlon XP1700+ guaranteed to hit 2Ghz" or similar, but they never actually claim that it's something it isn't, just that it's possible to get a certain amount of performance gain thru ocing it.... They know that the default Multiplier on the chip would give it away... They're not stupid you know - they would lose a reasonably good reputation if they did things like this.

[Edit]
I'm not blindly supporting the site - I'm just saying I trust them based on my dealings with them in the past.
If I did find they had done something so dishonest, I'd never buy anything off them again.
[/Edit]

---
:smile: :tongue: :smile: <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by ChipDeath on 05/09/03 05:15 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
!