Applebred Durons

[Axle Gear]

So I see the Duron1.6. 192 KB cache. Not that horrid.
1.6 GHz. Not bad.
266 MHz bus. 66 higher than before.

Price: $50. THAT caught my eye.


So what do y'all think? Which is faster?


A 1.6 GHz Duron with 266 MHz FSB, 64/64 (128) KB L1, 64 KB L2

or

950 MHz Tbird (clocked to 1333 MHz), 133 MHz FSB, 64/64 (128) KB L1, 256 KB L2

[Svenn]

Eh? What's an applebred Duron and $50 for a 1.6Ghz Duron seems too high...

[Svenn]

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?catalog=343&DEPA=1&submit=property&mfrcode=0&propertycode=&propertycodevalue=4167,4424
$43, is that the same thing?

[Axle Gear]

...Your a bit behind on the tech, eh?

Applebred is the newest Duron by AMD. 1.6 GHz is the fastest (and only) current model. It's got more cache than most older Durons, and a higher BUS. While it's the most expensive Duron right now, it's only $10 higher than the next best, a 1.3 GHz duron.


And yes, that's the same thing. I was quoting the average retail price, not the OEM or 'bargain' prices.

[taco]

why not spend 35 dollars more and get a 2500+ barton, or for 50 dollars you can get a 1700+ tbred b.. the cache factor is whats really hurting it.

but id say the duron will probley be better then the tbird because it will probley overclock to 2ghz+ easily.

[Svenn]

Originally posted by Axle Gear
...Your a bit behind on the tech, eh?

Applebred is the newest Duron by AMD. 1.6 GHz is the fastest (and only) current model. It's got more cache than most older Durons, and a higher BUS. While it's the most expensive Duron right now, it's only $10 higher than the next best, a 1.3 GHz duron.


And yes, that's the same thing. I was quoting the average retail price, not the OEM or 'bargain' prices.

Heh, I don't want to sound rude or anything, but I usually just don't pay attention to the lower end of things... I'm always just reading up on the latest and greatest.... Honestly though, I'm with taco, at that price, you might as well get a tbred b, or even spend a little bit more for the barton... Heck, I've got a 2400+ tbred b that I'm selling soon, I'll sell it for $50, heh.

[Axle Gear]

Now see if I was a billionaire, I would.

But see, i'm not. Duh.


Not to be rude, but i'm going for price efficiency, not wastefulness.

Why spend twice as much for 20% more performance, when I don't NEED 20% more performance?

I mean, if I just wanted ALL OUT ULTIMATE POWER!!!!!111111111111
then i'd just get a 2-way A64-FX-51 and be done with it.

But I don't HAVE $5000 to spend on an upgrade.

I've got a student's wages, and i'm looking at only the following:


Stick with what I got
Get a Duron1.6


So, as I asked initially...

Which is better. What I got, or a Duron1.6?


Besides, the Duron1.6 is more overclockable. Lots of people have gotten 2.2 GHz and 400 MHz FSB after unlocking it. Benchmarks show it, once overclocked, on par with the 2800-333.


In a price, analysis, here's what a buck buys you:

In a Duron:
32 MHz, 5.32 MHz FSB, 3.84 KB Cache

In an XP2800-333:
11.57 MHz, 1.85 MHz FSB, 3.5 KB Cache

In a 2.4 GHz 800 MHz FSB P4:
13.71 MHz, 4.57 MHz FSB, 2.26 KB Cache

(Based on retail street prices of $50 for Duron and $180 for 2800-333, and $175 for the P4)

Even with an XP2800-333's 640 KB of cache, you get less cache for the dollar.

[Svenn]

I'd say the Duron, but not a large increase.

[Axle Gear]

I might be interested in your used CPU, though.

According to price analysis..

A buck buys:
38.6 MHz, 5.32 MHz FSB, 7.68 KB Cache




What condition is the chip in? What's it's history? How old is it?

Also, if you know, what's the family and stepping?

[felix88]

if money is an issue, stick with what you've got. otherwise, you can pick up a XP1800 Tbred from newegg for $50. depending on your luck and cooling, you could potentially hit 2.4GHz or better with it.

what exactly do you use your computer for?

[Svenn]

AIUGB0244WPAW
AXDA2400DKV3C

Chip is great, had it since december-january range... It runs up to 2.7Ghz stable with my Prometeia. It's actually been L12 modded to a 333Mhz cpu though you can choose to remove that fairly easy (wipe off the conductive ink, heh). I'll also be selling this nf7-s (slightly modded, northbridge block epoxied to southbridge, pencil mod done for vdd up to 2.1V).

[IFMU]

Watch it here folks. Coming close to breaching the rules of deals outside the classifieds.

Sorry, I cant give any help on what you're wanting.

[dropadrop]

There has been rumours and conformations that you can enable the disabled cache on most of the durons. It won't work on all of them, but mostly seems to do the trick.

[saaya]

get the applebread, faster than the tbird at default and will oc a LOT higher, 2.3ghz+ ....

and you might be able to unlock the extra L2 cache! 12x200+ extra L2 cache=3000+ :D

[buff]

haha, buy an XP1700 are 1800 at newegg for 50 bucks. mine runs at 2400 on air, and mines a bad one. it want 1.93v

[Jeff]

Originally posted by Axle Gear
1.6 GHz is the fastest (and only) current model.

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?description=19-104-158

Looks like there is a 1.4GHz model as well.

I may get one just to play with. It's always neat to see how far the "low" end chips can go. ;)

[MudWhistle]

Spend the extra 9 dollars on a xp1800, you will be much happier in the end when you realize you can hit 2300mhz on air with a §§§§ty heatsink and poor cooling. Best bang for the buck unless your getting an ecs motherboard or something get the xp1800.

[Axle Gear]

K. I'll repeat. Again.


What I got.
Duron1.6.


I have my reasons.

[IFMU]

Come on guys, he has stated that he wants the 1.6 Duron, youve made the statement that you feel is the better approach, he is not wanting to go that route.
Wish I could give you an idea as to what your looking for, but Ive been a little outta the loop recently.
Luck to yeas on this.

[[Bonbon]]

since we know ; applebred duron = athlon xp with less cache,
u must use de ratings of an xp cpu to compare an old athlon with a new duron applebred
-> 1600 mhz = 1900+
-> the duron is a lot faster , almost as fast as a 'real' 1900+

[Axle Gear]

Bon, no offense, but although your probably correct in saying the Duron is faster, your approach to rating CPUs is less than accurate. If clock rate alone were the soul indication of something's speed, then Matrox would be a faster card than GeForce, RDRAM would be slower than DDR, and a Wildcat VP990 would be the slowest video card on earth.

But we all know these to be false.


From my A+ Core Book (Book1 of 3):

CPU speed in 32-bit processors is commonly rated in the following, in order of most effective to least:

System Bus Frequency (or Front Side Bus Frequency)

Cache

Core Frequency

System Bus is the frequency at which the CPU communicates with the rest of the computer. Most main computer functions pass through the Front Side Bus, such as Memory, Video, and the Southbridge.
The effect of Core Frequency is dependant on the processor's cache. A CPU with more cache and a lower core frequency will outperform even a system with a higher core frequency with less cache.
Cache can be used as a speed multiplier, as it stores temporary data for the CPU to process. By storing it nearer to the CPU, it can load the data faster, and process it much quicker.


And according to book 2:

To give a rough estimate of speed, we will use an arbiter numeral to scale processors.
For each MHz in Bus Frequency, assign 100 points.
For each MHz in Core Frequency, assign 1 point.
For each 10 KB of cache, increase resulting score by 1%.

So, according to the book, 33,614.4 is the speed of the Duron
While my CPU is 20,252.072
And an XP 2800(barton) is 58,028.12
And an XP 1900 is 39,028.8

Which makes a Duron faster than my CPU, but not as fast as an XP 1900.


Leave it to an A+ corebook after I ask overclockers. Figures. ^.^



I wonder what the other CPUs get on this scoring chart...

[[Bonbon]]

as you can see here : ( dutch)
http://www.tweakers.be/nieuws/28485

a duron 1600 vs athlon xp 1900+

3dMark03

Duron 1,6GHz 4723

Duron 1,6@2,3GHz 5022

Athlon XP 1900+ 4763


Quake 3 Arena

Duron 1,6GHz 231,4

Duron 1,6@2,3GHz 324,2

Athlon XP 1900+ 247,4


not much difference duron 1600 mhz <-> 1900+ huh

[Axle Gear]

The XP 1900 is just marginally better. I doubt it would be noticeable in real-world.


I'll get a Duron, unless that guy's gonna sell his modded chip.

[saaya]

how does that formula work?

system bus in mhz or in mhz DDR?
total cpu cache or only L2 cache?

[Axle Gear]

Didn't specify on the cache. I assume it means all cache, since L1, L3, and L4 counts as cache, too.
I counted all cache when I did my calculations.
It's only fair. Else AMDs would be seriously handicapped, since they have more L1 cache than most other CPUs. Especially Intel CPUs.

The Bus, tho, is strictly the system BUS.

[felix88]

interesting formula, but i don't think you could use it to compare Intel and AMD chips.

[Axle Gear]

It says it can be used for all CPUs. But I have noticed a rather heavy sway towards Intel processors: They always score about double what the comparable AMD score.

[chile]

just to revive this dying thread:

http://www.amdforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=259675

[saaya]

thats formula is bull§§§§, sorry but its not the amount of cache, it also depends on the cache latency, the way the cache vcan be accessed etc... and the system bus, what about QBP and QBM? and what about the a64? this formula doesnt tell you aynthing at all about cpu performence...

[Axle Gear]

Take that up with the nation's A+ training program, not me. =3

It says that the formula is specifically made for Celeron, Pentium 1-4, Duron, Athlon, and Athlon XP processors. Which, I do beleive, disqualifies A64.

I'm not familiar with QBP and QBM. Care to ellaborate?

From what I can gather from Google searches, QBP and QBM are incorporated non-Amd/Intel, and often not x86 platform style processors. (Such as VIA's newer mobo/CPU processors)

[wimpie007]

I got myself two of those Duron 1600Mhz's as well, haven't been able to boot or benchmark them yet...
-> just moved, got a lot of DIY to do :slap:

[Penti]

What is this bull§§§§, it doesn’t belong here.

If you want to buy the Applebred do it. That formula is just bull§§§§, who the hell came up with it in the first place.


I think he means QBP = Quad Bus Pumped. Like P4's bus..
QBM = Quad Bus Memory.
BTW Via’s cpu’s are x86 based and Via’s chipset for P4 VIA PT880 will have support for QBM.


{Edit} Fixed spelling, happy?

[Axle Gear]

I'll say it again. The gov't sanctioned A+ Core book, standardized for use in nation-wide A+ Certification, is what that's listed on.

And I beleive you mean 'BUS'.

Please, try to be more civil. Construct more, bash less.

[TheDogFather]

Get the Duron, theres plenty of reports of people having nice results out of them, and you might be lucky and get the cache reinabled.

Going to get a couple myself, to set up as crunchers. A used ecs board, old vid card, choice of ram. Cheap cruncher. :)

TDF.

[Axle Gear]

That is one advantage Durons have. Overclockers wet dream. ^.^

I've heard about some guy getting 2.8 GHz on one with the cache disabled. I dunno if it's true, though.

It seems that when cache is enabled, the CPU isn't quite as overclockable.

[Pjotr]

Originally posted by Axle Gear

A 1.6 GHz Duron with 266 MHz FSB, 64/64 (128) KB L1, 64 KB L2

or

950 MHz Tbird (clocked to 1333 MHz), 133 MHz FSB, 64/64 (128) KB L1, 256 KB L2

Lets see, TBird advantage:

256 kB L2 vs 64 kB L2

Duron 1.6 advantages:

Hardware pre-fetch
SSE
20 % higher clock frequency

Duron 1.6 wins hands down, it is faster but most important, you can clock it like a Tbred-B, at least 2.2 GHz, probably 2.4+ GHz using good cooling.

[ns_ripper]

I'm afraid that the formula indeed sucks.

No one even mentions the cpu's IPC (instructions per Clockcycle)

wich is higher on amd cpu's compared to intel cpu's.