Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > Barton core any better?
Ask the community Add a reply
Word :    Username :           
 
frozentax   06-07-2003 at 12:48:36 AM

The 2600XP/333fsb and Barton 2500XP/333fsb are about the same price now. Which one is the better performer?

Add a reply
Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
VelocityPimp   06-07-2003 at 02:31:12 AM
- 0 +

well, the barton core has 512k cache, the t-bred b uses 256k

Reply to VelocityPimp
endyen   06-07-2003 at 03:50:48 AM
- 0 +

According to extensive testing by AMD the 2600 is 4% better in general. I think the 2500 is better in most games, where the extra cache comes in very handy. Still, you would have trouble telling them apart. However if you want to oc the extra area on the 2500 allows it to cool better so it can oc more, at least in theory.

Reply to endyen
Spitfire_x86   06-07-2003 at 04:02:03 AM
- 0 +

(If not overclocking)

2600+ (333 MHz FSB) is 250 Mhz faster than Barton AXP 2500+. In games, AXP 2600+ is faster than 2500+, though the difference is very little. But in apps. that doesn't require much L2 cache, AXP 2600+ 333 MHz FSB should be much faster than Barton AXP 2500+.

(For overclockers)

Barton AXP 2500+ easily overclocks to 2200 MHz (400 MHz FSB). Then it's equal to AXP 3200+ and performs like P4 3.06 GHz or P4 2.8 GHz (800 MHz FSB).

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new"> My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new"> My Rig</A></b>

Reply to Spitfire_x86
smitbret   06-07-2003 at 06:54:41 AM
- 0 +

My 2500+ Barton runs at just over 2GHz with a 1 degree increase in temps. The 2600 is a bit faster by the nature of what it is, but the overclockability of the Barton makes it hard to say no. Go with the Barton and OC it.
-Brett

Reply to smitbret
TKH   06-07-2003 at 02:15:14 PM
- 0 +

Even you oc the result will be the same. Barton 2500+ is Thoroughbred-B 2600+ with extra 256k cache, and clocked slower. So, despite the fact that 512k cache makes little difference, 2600+ is better than 2500+ in almost everything. But if the price is the same I'll get 2500+. Why? It isn't gonna hurt with extra 256k cache.

It is morally wrong to allow suckers to keep their money
<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=22996" target="_new">My System Rig</A>

Reply to TKH
pitsi   06-07-2003 at 03:16:28 PM
- 0 +

I suggest going with Barton 2500+. You can easily overclock it to 3000+ with very little knowledge about overclocking, and you can even reach 3200+ speeds if you pump up the vcore voltage a bit.

Reply to pitsi
frozentax   06-07-2003 at 03:36:08 PM
- 0 +

How much of an overclock would be possible with the stock fan/heatsink?

Reply to frozentax
smitbret   06-07-2003 at 04:35:06 PM
- 0 +

At or near the 3200+ speeds.
-Brett

Reply to smitbret
recruit370   06-07-2003 at 06:36:16 PM
- 0 +

don't push it if u want to oc get a good heatsink and fan

ALWAYS AIM LOW SO YOU CAN'T BE DISSAPOINTED

Reply to recruit370
Ask the community Add a reply
Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > Barton core any better?
Go to:

There are 1182 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Forum map
Bestofmedia Forum ©
2000-2009 Bestofmedia Group
Page generated in 0.459 seconds
Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
Related Topics
See all relatives topics
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them
How do I win badges?