Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 102

Thread: 333 FBS Athlons 2700+ & 2800+




  1. #71
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    Posted by The__tweaker
    [b]I have not had the time to dig this up until now, sorry for that. .........

    My source was Tomshardware.com
    Yes the memory benches can't be beaten, yet. Another Tom's article (oh check the pic below out). :p

    Posted by Ehhe Yebeb
    [b]0? Who from :confused:
    The vendor outside Kmart at Nth.Rocks was the lucky one 2 Sunday's back. ;)

  2. #72
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    1,514

    Default

    Onle 13,000 3d marks with a 2200+/Radeon 9700? That's pretty low. I would think that the Radeon could do more than that...
    New Sig soon, old one was way outdated.

    :thumb:

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    493

    Default

    ohhhhh yeah. I cannot wait until the 2800+'s come out. They are going to be soooo sweet. Although I will have to wait for them to drop in price, but it will be a nice upgrade to look forward to. :thumb:

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    Well if ya unlock ya 2200+ and change it to a 166MHz FSB you'll get very close to the score of the P4 2.4B. ;)
    More maybe if ya darkside really takes over. :devil:
    <center>:cheers:</center>

  5. #75
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Here we go friends... :)
    First someone wrote that the xp 2200+ outperforms Intels
    2.26 ghz processor, as you can se on the pics Wiggo just posted
    Intel scored 13.926 3dpoints and the 2200+ 12.884 points.
    So the xp2200+ processor did infact as i said lose that battle.

    When it comes to mpeg2 encoding then yes, amd performs better. You'll have to use the 2.53 processor to win that race.
    Whitch in fact is the one and only test i ever seen that place this amd processor higher than Intels 2.26 model, when used with high speed 533 mhz mem that is.

    So therefor i hope that the people who wrote all the stuff about that the xp2200+ could beat the 2.26 or even the 2.53 anyday is willing to read some facts like me and Wiggo before they post their "knowledge" next time...

    :)

    Btw, it seems like the xp2200+ with a radeon 9700 performs very similar to Intels 2.26 with the gf4 TI4600. (My old setup).
    I performed about 13.000 with that stuff myself.

    Intresting 10 month to come:
    It looks like amd has a chance to take the crone from Intel when the new 2800+ is released next year. (if the 3.33 ghz or 3.6 ghz processor from Intel does'nt keep it of course.) I read that the 3.06 version is beeing released in November this year,
    and the 3.33 & 3.6 before June 2003. So how will this new ultrafast Intel 3.6 ghz cpu perform? Well the improvement on the P4/2800 is somewhere between 7% and 29%, depending on the application used. So damn this is going to be some very exiting month of wait! :) *peace*



    /tweaker
    : peace2:

  6. #76
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    1,514

    Default

    Alrighty then. But the Barton and Clawhammer proc's are going to whoop on Intel.
    New Sig soon, old one was way outdated.

    :thumb:

  7. #77
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    366

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggo
    Yes the memory benches can't be beaten, yet. Another Tom's article (oh check the pic below out). :p

    The vendor outside Kmart at Nth.Rocks was the lucky one 2 Sunday's back. ;)
    Ohh OK, that would be westgate computers? i got most of my stuff from them too

  8. #78
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    366

    Default

    The__tweaker, a few things to say.

    Toms hardware is hardly a reputable source of information.
    Those memory benchmarks translate to very little practical performance gain, yet PC1066 RDRam costs a fortune.
    Intel doesnt plan on continuing with using RDRam for the P4 platform, yes they are going to use DDR memory, because RDRam is ridiculously expensive, doesnt offer much better performance, and rambus currently has a lawsuit to deal with, which pretty much means the end of rambus (RDRam).
    3DMarks is not the only factor in deciding how powerful a CPU is. The Athlon XP 2200+ is rated to be EVEN with the P4 2.26, yet it goes one up in most of the benchmarks.

    Also, saying that the 9700 & and XP2200+ performs the same as a Ti4600 & a P4 2.26, couldnt be further from the truth, maybe if you turn on all the eye candy for the 9700 such as 8x FSAA and all that stuff, it will perform the same as the P4 & the Ti4600 with all the extras OFF.

    Anyhow, how can the XP2800+ be coming out a week ago? the XP 2400+ & 2600+ still havent reached and have been delayed for AGES

  9. #79
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,489

    Default

    If its just all about numbers here... whats even better is that intels FSB is higher than the 2200+...to me thats a winner...something that is at a lower clock (1.8), and has a lower fsb keeping up with intel's "2.26"...thats just funny.
    - Damien

  10. #80
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Actually the mem i use, (kingston pc-1066) is not mutch more expensive than the high quality ddr mem many of you use.
    I pay around 330 us$ here in Sweden for 2x256 mb.
    My memory and Asus P4T533-C will keep me well uppdated for at least a year ahead using the new 3.6 ghz or faster at that time.

    Ehhe Yebeb you are the first person that i have heard mention that tomshardware is'nt a reputable source of information.
    What exaktly do you mean by that? That the benchmark tests they run ain'nt done proper or what? I seriosely doubt that...

    The thing i said about that my 2.26 ghz comp with gf4 performed as good as the 2200+ with radeon card is infact true, at least in the simple 3dmark 2001se. Otherwise tomshardware are lying. Come on man you can't mean that. That site is very well known by most computer people and well trusted to. Why would you not trust them i wonder...


    "Barton and Clawhammer proc's are going to whoop on Intel."
    Well "pga1234" you might just be right, that is just what amd needs and let's hope everything works out fine for them.

    :)

Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •