Slashdot Mirror
New AMD Athlon 2600 Processor Released
Ertai writes "Looks like the latest AMD processor is out today, and is taking it right to Intel! Running at 2.13 GHz, the Athlon XP 2600+ is reviewed at Amdmb.com. The benchmarks show that the new Athlon on a 'revision B' Thoroughbred core with the frequency increase is able to beat out the Pentium 4 2.53 GHz processor on almost every test. Not only that, but it is a good overclocker as well! Check it out." AMD's press release on the topic also notes a Athlon 2400 was released as well.
Anandtech has some alternative review links over here including the more in-depth (and perhaps more objective?) review, at Tom's.
If you read the review of the new processor by Anandtech you will find that the processor hasn't hit mass production yet. This is more of a paper launch much like what Intel did with the 1ghz P3 back when the 1ghz Athlon was released. It still won't be another month or two until we see mass production and then commericial avalibility. But the numbers sure do look nice :) Good to see AMD can still get some higher speeds out of the .13 process!
Unstable Apps: Our Android Apps Don't Suck
Well for one thing the Xeon and the Pentium 4 are different chips, just like the XP and MP chips are different for AMD. A better comparison would be a Xeon vs. MP. Both of them can run in SMP.
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
I cannot comment on Xeon versus Pentium 4, but the Athlon XP and MP are decidedly not different chips. Athlon XP processors can usually run in SMP without problems, although newer ones may be locked to prevent this. The MP designation simply means that AMD has validated the processor for SMP use.
I don't see out 55 degree Celsius Athlon XP 1800+ having temperature problems. Not sure what kind of overclocking you've done to it (obviously you have - "liquid cooling isn't the answer" :), but if it's not overclocked it's cool enough for any work unless something really weird is going on.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
>I had an Orb on the Athlon
Well, there's your problem. At the time of the processor you speak of, the Thermaltake Orb series of CPU fans were notorious for being a POS all around.
A regular, AMD approved, low cost fan would have done better.
Whoever came up with bonding copper to aluminum to improve the heat flow needs to take a basic physics lesson.
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
...has Athlon come up with a way to deal with heat issues yet?
Apparently so, because the 2600+ runs much cooler than earlier XP's, and are much more overclockable.
www.hardocp.com mentions some temperature numbers.
'I will answer you from the mouth of my canon' - Le Marquis de Montecalm to General James Wolfe
I'm sorry, but the quote is from Frontenac to William Phips in 1690: "Je n'ai point de réponse à faire à votre général que par la bouche de mes canons et à coups de fusil".
Opus: the Swiss army knife of audio codec
Myth/rumor: The Athlon XP is a furnace of unimaginable heat! I'm getting a Pentium IV! Even though they are slower and more expensive, at least they won't dim the lights then melt them!
The fastest Athlon XP chips dissipate less than 5% more heat than the fastest Pentium IV chips. They can, however, handle more heat before cooking.
Myth/rumor: Tom's Hardware guide is "more objectvice" or even "Tom's Hardware guide is reliable"
I can't believe I read this, even in a Slashdot comment.
Tom's Hardware Guide is infamous among forums such as those at StorageReview.com and among people that actually know what they are talking about for being little more than a hardware review tabloid. Read the reviews! They come to illogical conclusions and sensationalize most of their reviews.
Read the Athlon review in question:
This is AMD's admission that the previous performance scale was set too high, especially when it came to the higher clock speeds.
Umm... Could it be that because the CPU is advancing where the other components such as memory and FSB are not, that it is possible that AMD added another 66MHz to make sure the rating system was still accurate? It isn't like system performance scales linearly with CPU speed when everything else sits still. Whoever thinks that Tom's Hardware is a good place to get hardware reviews doesn't have a clue about hardware!
Read Tom's glorious review of the KT266a vs the Nforce where despite there being less than a 5% difference between the chipsets and despite the Nforce outperforming every one of the many KT266a that outnumber it greatly in some tests, their "conclusion" was Conclusion: KT266A Trounces nForce 420D - Soltek is Front-runner
Tom's has had some good reviews, and most of the reviews BY TOM HIMSELF are pretty good, but most of the reviews are from his editors, and the proof is in the reviews--they are making Tom's Hardware more of a tabloid than a legit hardware review site, riding on the reputation that Tom made for the site years ago. I know, I was once an avid Tom's reader and am disgusted how the once clear and thoughtful reviews have turned into manic drivel.
If you want reviews that are actually well thought out, intelligent, and have sane conclusions based on mere facts, try Ace's Hardware, Ars Technica, and Anandtech.
Ace's Hardware reviews are clearly the best and most researched, but they are few and far between. Want an excellent review of current and future memory technologies written with the help of actual engineers? Read Ace's Hardware.
Ars rarely has hardware reviews, but when they do the reviews are good.
Anandtech is a good all-around major review site that as far as I can tell has never been biased, but is a little bit too PC for me. (that's Politically Correct, not the other one)
Is Tom's biased? Read the reviews! They aren't biased in a classic sense as far as I can tell, that is, they don't "always favor Intel" or "Always favor AMD"; rather they are often biased against one or the other. They will post stories that are clearly opinionated bullshit from ignorant tech writers that tend to have a bias against one or ther other. This is a mystery to me as they surely piss off both AMD and Intel all the time, and don't make any friends in the process. Overall, I wouldn't say that bias is a big problem at Tom's Hardware as much as stupid technical writers that don't know what they are talking about is a problem.
Want more examples? Point me to a review at Tom's and I'll tell you what's wrong with it (if there is anything wrong with that particular one)
At Tom's--read the reviews by Tom, but everyone else is not trustworthy.
Myth/rumor:
When you hold a seashell up to your ear, you can hear the sea.
Fact: You can hear the same sound reflections by holding a drinking cup up to your ear. It has nothing to do with the ocean. The question is, if you hold a Unix shell up to your ear, can you hear the C?
Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes. --E. W. Dijkstra
AMD processor temps have long been thrown around as proof that Intel processors are a "safer" buy. What one fails to realize, however, is that the P4 can and DOES generate MORE heat than an Athlon XP!
Go to Intel's whitepaper area and note the max heat dissipation in watts, then go get the same info on the Athlon. You'll find that Intel's flagship will dissipate ~70W-75W, and AMD's flagship will run about ~68W-70W.
The crucial difference between the two is Intel's thermal management techniques. Both AMD and Intel processors can make use of a HALT instruction provided by the chipset. This basically stops the CPU when nothing is going on, allowing it to dramatically cool down. The problem is, AMD chipsets (VIA, SiS, even AMD's own 760 series) don't properly implement the HALT instruction, whereas Intel REQUIRES it of their chipsets and board makers.
The results of this are pretty obvious. Intel chips cool down quicker and generally run cooler UNDER PARTIAL LOAD. But when both chips are stressed to the maximum, the P4 WILL get hotter than an Athlon.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
The reviews I saw indicated that they definitely delivered subpar cooling performance as well. The only thing they really had going for them was appearance, and unless you're one of those idiots who adds windows (this kind, not this kind...though some would say the same for the latter) and neon lights to a computer, you're never going to see it when the computer is closed up and shoved under your desk anyway.
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
they do, and a 2.8
0 20 819015933.htm
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2002Aug/bch20