Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 43

Thread: athlon 3000+




  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    173

    Default

    double cache HMMM !!! classic pic
    Athlon XP 1800 + @ 1600
    Gigabyte Ga-7va KT-400
    ASus Gf4 Ti 4200 128
    Seagate Barracuda III
    512mb Kingmax DDR 333

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    419

    Default

    all I got to say is Groovy baby yeah!good bye intel
    I shall stir the gates of hell once more and stare into the jaws of death and laugh, for I will know fear no more.

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

    Default

    Well unfortunately AMD doesn't seem to be there just yet:

    Toms hardware conclusion:

    http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030210/barton-23.html

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    X-bit labs conclusion:

    Well, the conclusions, which we tend to make, are quite ambiguous. It is true, AMD Company managed to improve its Athlon XP processors architecture by adding another 256KB of L2 cache memory. However, the manufacturing technology for these processors remained the same. As a result, the clock frequencies of Athlon XP based on the new Barton core cannot be increased over the clock frequencies of the Athlon XP processors with 256KB L2 cache. This way, we cannot state that the new core will be faster in all applications. Despite the fact that AMD assigned its new CPUs higher processor ratings.

    Unfortunately, Athlon XP 3000+ on Barton core doesn't support higher clock frequency than Athlon XP 2700+ on Thoroughbred core. As a result, Athlon XP 3000+ very often appears just a little faster than Athlon XP 2700+. Moreover, in quite a bit of tests Athlon XP 2700+ performs better than Athlon XP 2800+ on Barton core. We suppose that this reshuffle may discredit the rating system used by AMD to mark its processors.

    As for the rivalry between the top Athlon XP and top Pentium 4 models, the situation is not that favorable for AMD here as well. Bigger L2 cache doesn't allow Athlon XP to improve its performance significantly. This leads to even fewer applications where Athlon XP manages to defeat Intel Pentium 4 processors. At present Athlon XP can boast its superiority only in 3D games, CAD and scientific tasks. Hyper-Threading technology implemented in Pentium 4 processors proved highly efficient and improved the performance of Pentium 4 CPUs quite a lot. The announcement of the new Barton core can hardly be called an adequate response to Hyper-Threading.

    However, the harder times for AMD are still ahead. In the end of April Intel Company will announce Pentium 4 3.2GHz with 800MHz processor bus and Hyper-Threading technology. The only thing AMD can actually respond with will be the launching of their new Athlon XP 3200+ based on Barton core. But, we really doubt that it will manage to withstand the new powerful rival.

    So, we have to admit that it looks as if the situation in the high-end desktop processor market promises to be not in AMD's favor until their so long-awaited Athlon 64 is out."

    :cry:

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    419

    Default

    Another misled Intel fan Ohhhhhh the humanity! Blast you, you mind warping Itel corporation!:flames:
    I shall stir the gates of hell once more and stare into the jaws of death and laugh, for I will know fear no more.

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

    Default

    hehe there's nothing wrong with amd, hell i have thought about getting one for da missus..

    I just want what can give me the highest fps..
    Just pointed out what i found.

    :cheers:

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    419

    Default

    Well considering I have never owned an amd processor in my life One could speculate that I am talking out the top of my head, but I just don't like intel. One reason being that I was really disappointed that my pentium1-s processor had more cache on it than my p4 1.5. My p1 had 256k cahce where as my p4 only had 128kb of cache. plus ever since I became a fan of amd, all of the tests that were done on the amd vs intel showdown were always unfair and that really pissed me off. It was always 2 different systems with unfair specs like the amd rig would have 128 mb of sdram and the intel rig would have 128 of rdram. In additon to that, one had an asus mother board and the other had a generic p.o.s., dissimmiliar hard drives and other things that would give the intel an unfair advantage. So ever since then I really diden't like the intel people or the people who tested the amd processors. Even the people who have written emails to the magazines testing the two processors have not really given a crediable response except one who said that the manufactures woulde'nt let them test the intels with sdram. heh, if I had it my way they would be tested with the same specs on two identicle machines by an ubiased person.

    With all that said Grab your bawls and run like hell intel: party ha ::cheers:

    Can't wait till they start testing the athlon64 claw hammers and sledge hammers:cool:
    I shall stir the gates of hell once more and stare into the jaws of death and laugh, for I will know fear no more.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    P4's ain't bad but they just don't have that feelin' of..... grunt that a good Athlon system does. ;)

    Sorry ppl but remember I have both now. :p
    <center>:cheers:</center>

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    419

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggo
    P4's ain't bad but they just don't have that feelin' of..... grunt that a good Athlon system does. ;)

    Sorry ppl but remember I have both now. :p
    <center>:cheers:</center>

    actualy what you should have said is you've lost that lovin feeling ooohhh that lovin feeling
    I shall stir the gates of hell once more and stare into the jaws of death and laugh, for I will know fear no more.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    "It was always 2 different systems with unfair specs like the amd rig would have 128 mb of sdram and the intel rig would have 128 of rdram."

    lol were do you find those tests as this haven't been done in quite some time now..?

    Well of course the test are run with 100% of fsb use!
    Pretty damn stupid to slow down a processor and claim that would be a fare test..

    Todays test are ALWAYS ALWAYS done with 100% bus usage on the amd side, (ddr 266 mhz or ddr 333 mhz)

    On the Intel side they use either 62% or 100% of the total bus bandwith, get it? (ddr 333 mhz=62% or dualddr/rdram=100%)

    I dunno bout you but in my opinion it is pretty damn stupid and not very logical to slow down a cpu to let a competitor keep up just to get what you call a "fair fight"..

    These tests are made to show us customers what we get and what we can expect from these processors, do i as a Intel customer want their processors to be shown and tested under some misleading and not very real circumstance??

    WELL OF COURSE NOT!

    And more imortant, would YOU as a Amd customer want your possible future cpu's to be shown and tested under some misleading and not very real circumstance so that they can perform equaly..? Would that make your choise for amd easier?

    WELL OF COURSE NOT!

    You have to understand that people WANT the products to be tested at their max capacity so that they by the result could decide what to by.

    Damn man, it's like i would say that it's unfair to test P4/Athlon against eatch other because P4's only carry out 6 instructions per cycle while an Athlon can do 9. Not very logical now is it..??

    Hey wait, maybe we can find a way to disable the Athlons 3 extra instructions per cyckle so that we have a fair fight...

    When it comes to your cpu's cache memory please don't judge todays modern P4 cpu's as they use 512 kb of full speed L2 cache, wich is up until lately double the amount that Amd's high end cpu's got..

    Get yourself a decent cpu before talking about this as the 1,5 ghz P4 is one of intels absolute worst performers..
    At least that i know of... Even the P3 cpu's probably outperforms them..

    Oh, Claw hammer? You said it there man, "wait" is the word..:cry:

    Wiggo: I know what you mean, i get the same feelin'
    whenever i sit my ass down in front of a amd system, it's just ain't the same as a fast P4.

    Many of my friends rigs up to XP2400+ is suposed to beat mine, but have failed yet.. At least it gives me something to tease them with when they'r on to me about me ugly car.. lol

    And yes, it is a fact that i will build a amd system someday..

    :cheers:

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    94

    Default

    at school our comps run p4 2.8's with rdram and 1060, and i feel that my xp2100 plus even with pc2100 ram, keeps up with it!, granted the video card difference if you do any graphical things, 3d animation is the class, they have 9700pro's while i'm stuck with the good ol' gf4 mx 440

Page 1 of 5 123 ... 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
  •