Slashdot Mirror
Athlon Xp 3200+ 400FSB is Coming
SoDaLaS writes "Athlon 3200+ Coming:
According to CNET The Athlon 3200+ with a 400MHz FSB is on the way in the next two weeks. It'll be interesting to see how well the processor overclocks at that high of a bus speed...it didn't seem to hamper the new 800MHz FSB Pentium 4, which many people were worried about too."
Lets make sure we're comparing apples to apples. The 400 MHz bus on the Athlon is a DDR doublepumped bus, so its really 200 MHz. The 800 MHz FSB on the P4 is a quadpumped bus, so its really 200 MHz.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Unless they shrunk the Athlon core, I don't see a lot fo room for overclocking. The 3000+ isn't an overclocking dream, so simply moving to a faster bus ain't gonna make the 3200+ any better.
Beer Die is the game of champions Learning To walk my own path.
From HardOCP [H]ardNews 6th Edition posted on Wednesday April 30th, 2003:
Athlon 3200+ Coming:
The Athlon 3200+ with a 400MHz FSB is on the way in the next two weeks, according to C|Net. It'll be interesting to see how well the processor overclocks at that high of a bus speed...it didn't seem to hamper the new 800MHz FSB Pentium 4, which many people were worried about too.
---
Hello, Slashdot user. My name is Dr. Sbaitso. I am here to help you.
The athlon is rated to be safely running at 85 C. Mine always runs at 60 because of low noise components (GOOD heatsink but still) and I couldn't care less for it.
When I read the article text submitted by SoDaLaS, I realized I had read it before. Look for [H]ardOCP's news about the Athlon XP 3200+ posted yesterday at 11:50am.
So my advice is for not buying a computer with Atlhon XP 3200, as your upgrade roadmap will be locked. It is better to buy a computer with a slower (and cheaper) Athlon, and wait untill the price drop to buy an Atlon XP 3200. Or wait for the release of Athlon 64 - it will be an excelent computer for video edition, 3D rendering and games like Unreal Tournament 2003 or Doom III.
10 Years ago you could do internet/email/word processing/spread sheets with just a 33MHz Intel 386 with 16 MB RAM. Today you need for the very same things a Pentium IV with 2 GHZ and 128 MB RAM.
.mod playing on my 386 without skipping.
I still use my p133 for many tasks, irc, email and personal server.
Web browsing on a 386/33, never did it, I had a 386/40. It was VGA (640x480 w16 colours), It was slow, the pages were simple. It was the only thing I could do at the time.
Now I browse with many windows, 24bit colour at higher resolutions (rarely anything as pathetic as 1024x768).
I can play mp3's without skipping a beat, along with movies. I was glad to get a
We've come a long way, we do have overkill for many applications, but it isn't all waste. I think too many people who complain aobut how excessive it is today forget how relatively wimpy it was before it became mainstream.
Does anyone else remember how cool it was to have a 486 that would dir a directory listing faster then you could read it?
AMD CPUs outperform Intel CPUs at similar frequencies. That's why AMD stopped marketing their processors based on their frequency. In some benchmarks, an Itanium running at 900 MHz outperforms 3 GHz Pentium IVs. Once upon a time, before clock multiplying, MHz meant more than it does now. But even in the 8-bit days, a 6502 running at 1 MHz would perform similarly to an 8086 running at 4.3 MHz.
Fun with Anagarams! LADS HOST, SHALT DOS. HAS DOLTS. AD SLOTHS, HATS SOLD. ASS HO, LTD.
I wouldn't blame the chipsets right away... Most problems as you've described are caused by the motherboard itself. It's a well known fact in the IT world that ECS motherboards are crap, and are oftentimes expected to crash.. i.e. it's an anomoly to have one run stable for more than 3 days. Same deal with Abit, Tiger, and to an extent Asus. The latter manufacturers put more of an emphasis on performance than stability. For the past 3 years I've worked as a system builder and technician for a small company, and have worked with virtualy every motherboard manufacturer on the planet. I've seen a number of very stable motherboards, mainly from MSI, Biostar, DFI, and a few others, with VIA chipsets, and not one of them had any sort of hardware problems, once all drivers are properly installed. I have seen and heard of many issues with SiS chipsets, but VIA is rock solid when integrated properly by a manufacturer.
Example: ~$320 will get you an AMD Athlon XP 3000, the most similarly priced Intel P4 is their 2.8GHz for ~$300, you're only getting a slight price advantage with AMD. However for ~$90 you can get a 1.6GHz Intel P4 or an AMD Athlon XP 2400.
I haven't looked at the entire review, but I smell the wiff of bullshit comming from Tom. First I checked out the game benchmarks...where he only ran Quake 3!!! If you didn't know, Quake 3 has always run faster on P4's than on Athalons. To be fair, he should have also benched something like Serious Sam 2 which has a similar advantage on AMD chips. I would be similarily suspicious of his other benchmarks, like mp3 and mpeg encoding. If he knowingly uses a game that's better optimized for one processor in a benchmark, whats to stop him from doing the same in others?
Remember that Tom plays favorites with Intel and AMD, depending on who's giving him more free stuff these days. A year or two ago he was loudly claiming there was no way Intel would be able to compete with AMD and that they'd end up exiting the consumer processor business.
So basically, to paraphrase: "there are lies, there are damn lies, and then there's benchmarks"
The AthlonMP line was never effective?
Perhaps from a marketting perspective, but certainly not from a technological perspective. We took a $13,000 quad P3-Xeon machine, replaced it with a $3,000 dual AthlonMP, and guess what - the loads dropped in *half*.
They were (and are) very good performers. Their only limitation was a memory bandwidth limit. AMD went to all of the trouble to give each AthlonMP it's own independent bus, but they never took the time to mate that with a dual-channel memory controller, so that each processer could actually *utilize* the entirety of it's bus. Even so, they were (and still are) very capable machines.
steve
Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
OS Name: Microsoft Windows XP Professional
OS Version: 5.1.2600 Service Pack 1 Build 2600
System Up Time: 11 Days, 2 Hours, 7 Minutes, 35 Seconds
System Manufacturer: ECS
System Model: K7S5A
My mom never taught me to sign.
Allow me to speculate.
Barton (Model 10) comes in three flavors: 3000+ (2.167 GHz), 2800+ (2.083 GHz) and 2500+ (1.83 GHz). All other things equal, the 3200+ should run at 2.25 GHz, same as the 2800+ Thoroughbred (Model 8).
However, if AMD were to increase the FSB speed, you can expect the CPU frequency to be slightly lower. I would guess between 2.083 and 2.167 Ghz.
AMD keeps a definitive list up to date.