Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AMD 2500+ Socket A CPUs Compared

Posted by timothy on from the other-semiconductor-company dept.

SuperPuppy writes "Hardcoreware.net has rounded up three 2500+ Socket A processors from AMD. An AthlonXP, based on the Barton core (this particular one predates the locked multipliers we've been seeing lately), a Mobile Athlon, based on the Barton SOI, and the new Sempron, which is based on the Tbred core. Each processor differs in clock frequency and cache size, but most importantly, the Mobile Athlon takes up a LOT less juice than either of the other two, and is therefore a remarkable performer in terms of overclocking. The Sempron was quite disappointing on all fronts but price."

10 of 227 comments (clear)

  1. CPU Market by sofakingon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In general, The need for new CPU's has stagnated in the last year or so. What can't you do with a 2.4Ghz HT Intel CPU? The "bleeding edge" isn't as far ahead as it used to be. What do you guys think will be the next revolution in the CPU (or GPU, for that matter) market?

    1. Re:CPU Market by oxygene2k2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      multicore - a bunch of real cpu cores (not that HT hack) on a single chip. of course, you need a scalable SMP/NUMA capable OS for that (scalable in terms of, say 8 cores/chip*4 chips = 32cpus)

    2. Re:CPU Market by Khali · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Silence.

      I'm quite fed up with these noisy computers. I have 4 of them at home, and except for the laptop, they all generate much noise, because they heat so much that every little piece, CPU first, needs a fan. I hardly can hear me think anymore. One of these systems acts as a server that I keep up at night. I did my best to make it go silent but I can still hear it behind the door.

      In some way it means the same as another post right before mine: low power dissipation. This value has dramatically increased in the past few years, in the name of the top speed race, but at the price of our tranquility.

      It also joins the view of anther poster that most users don't need the extra power offered by the latest CPUs. I certainly don't, so I'd rather use a quiet 1GHz machine than a noisy 3GHz one.

      This is why I'm quite sad to see that you cannot easily buy Transmeta-based systems. This is exactly the kind of CPU I would enjoy, if only my online computer parts store had that available. What I am really looking for is a completely fanless system.

    3. Re:CPU Market by noselasd · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And that was one of my points. CPUs have caches and advanced pipelining/branch prediction/TLBs etc. Why ? Cause ram access is
      amazingly slow relativly speaking. Make it faster and you don't need
      all these things. (Well, ram is located further away, and there will be delays for other reasons, still, things would be much,much better..)

    4. Re:CPU Market by JPelorat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Wonder how many more decades it'll be till we're talking about how many cores a chip has, in the same manner that we talk about transistors now. That'll be freaky. And cool.

      --
      Hokey statistics and ancient misconceptions are no match for a good thought in your head, kid!
    5. Re:CPU Market by twbecker · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What can't you do with a 2.4Ghz HT Intel CPU?

      Why does it have to be an Intel chip? I like to think I'm pretty unbiased when it comes to CPUs, but the fact of the matter is that the A64 architecture is clearly superior to that space heater Intel calls Prescott. Intel still holds a slim advantage in some encoding tests, but that's about it. I'm not trying to troll, I'm just curious why you chose to mention a 2.4Ghz HT Intel chip when TFA is about AMD. . .

      --
      "The problem with internet quotations is that many are not genuine" -Abraham Lincoln
    6. Re:CPU Market by shokk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Redundant hardware. A chip that big is going to have a lot of flaws and we won't be able to just throw out chips that have the flaws. The chips will have to fail self-test and repair before they can be considered unusable.

      --
      "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
  2. 2500+ by Eeknay · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Barton 2500+ is probably the best chip that AMD have ever released. It was cheap, it performed well, and it was an overclocker's dream. It's not at all uncommon to find many people who have a 2500+ and have overclocked it to 3200+ speeds with nothing more than a stock cooler, without crashing.

    The Semprons, however, are rather lacklustre, and I'm nto sure why they released them for the Socket A platform... the XP's are the same price and perform better. The only Sempron anyone would be remotely interested in is the Socket 754 Sempron 3000+, which gves the same performance as an Athlon 64 2800+, but without the 64bit compatability (i.e. no Windows XP 64 edition).

  3. Thinking about an upgrade by Echnin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    On my Windows PC I still have an Athlon XP 1600+ I bought in late 2001. I don't have a big budget, but I'd like to make some upgrades; go from 512 MB of RAM to 1 GB, add a 200 GB HDD, DVD burner, little by little. Of course, I have a Socket A motherboard (ASUS AV266-E) and I'm interested in upgrading the CPU without replacing the mobo. Is the upgrade from a 1600+ to a 2500+ worth the extra money, or should I wait and get a new motherboard with an Athlon 64 when I have the money? I'm sure I'm not the only one with an early Socket A CPU wanting to upgrade.

    --
    Lalala
  4. fanless? by davegaramond · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is there a desktop processor (at least 1700+ or better, AMD preferrably, x86 or amd64) that can run without a fan? I am quite annoyed with CPU fans nowadays. They tend to make more annoying noise compared to power supply fans. I am considering a Thermaltek liquid-cooling solution (around $150-$200) but really what I'd love is to have something that can run without a fan. I don't mind underclocking or buying a slightly more expensive processor. Remember the good old 486/Pentium days?