The 2600+ is official boys

[MrIcee]

The press release came out at 11:00pm Eastern time....you can read it here http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,51_104_543~41677,00.html

Heres the info direct from AMD http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_756_3734,00.html

According to their own benches and specs here http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_1274_3734^3746,00.html the puppy runs at 2133Mhz...so its official:toast:

Here is the official price list http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,51_104_609,00.html

Enjoy the reading my friends...this is the best news I've heard in a long time....let the games begin:toast:

Randi:D

[JBELL]

benchmark time!!!

[AKRedneck]

Check out the review of the 2600+ over at tomshardware... I'm not a big fan of tomshardware but they always seem to have a quick review....some interesting info on these new cores..

There 2600+ ran stable at 2666mhz...woohoo.. :toast:

I wonder what there cooling was?

[QuadDamage]

Hi McIcee: THG was already able to hit 2.8ghz (3100+) and it seems that Intel has lost its speed crown, so once again we shall regain our place on top of the charts, stay tuned.


a significantly higher clock rate (this top model now runs at 2133 MHz) automatically means greater speed. In the benchmark tests, the Athlon XP 2600+ manages to surpass the Intel Pentium 4/2533 once more, but not in all disciplines.

This brings AMD back in the running. These excellent results were achieved by modifying the CPU core, where the manufacturer has added an additional layer of interconnects. There have been no real changes to the CPU design at its transistor layer. The new Thoroughbred core is distinguished from the previous one by the "B" at the end of its name.



There's also some good news for friends of overclocking: the Athlon XP 2400+, which is also well-suited for overclocking, is to be had for a more reasonable price. In the THG lab, we took the 2133 MHz model, combined it with a watercooling system, and were able to overclock it to 2400 MHz, which corresponds to an Athlon XP 2800+. An extreme increase in clock speed is only possible with ice-cooling, for a CPU die temperature of -41 degrees Celsius, at which even 2800 MHz (corresponds to Athlon XP 3100+) can be attained

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q3/020821/images/start2.gif

[Bulldog]

Athlon XP 2400+ & 2600+ Launched !!!
Source AMD........... 12:01 EST 08/21/02


AMD today announced the world's highest-performing processor for desktop PCs, the AMD Athlon XP processor 2600+. AMD also introduced the AMD Athlon XP processor 2400+. The AMD Athlon XP processors 2600+ and 2400+ feature QuantiSpeed(TM) architecture, which delivers performance advantages versus competitive PC processors on a broad array of real-world applications, including digital media, office productivity and 3D gaming. AMD has begun shipping samples of the AMD Athlon XP processors 2600+ and 2400+ to major computer manufacturers worldwide with expected system availability in September. The AMD Athlon XP processors 2600+ and 2400+ are priced at $297 and $193, respectively, in 1,000-unit quantities.
Detailed Info :

The 2600+ operates at 2.133GHz and the 2400+ operates at 2.00GHz. (both on the 266Mhz FSB). AMD has successfully implemented a process change for the "Thoroughbred" processor core that involved adding an additional layer of metal to reduce resistance and capacitance. AMD has also engineered additional decoupling capacitors to reduce electro magnetic interference.

Benchmark Numbers:

Business Winstone 2001: 77.07
Content Creation Winstone 2002: 38.9
3DMark 2001 (hardware t&L): 11102.00
Quake III Demo 2: 262.73

Athlon XP 2600+ Specs:

Athlon XP model number: 2600+
Operating Frequency: 2.13GHz
Manufactured: AMD's Fab 30 wafer fabrication facility in Dresden, Germany.
Process Technology: 0.13 micron copper process technology
Cache Size: L1 - 128KB and L2 - 256KB (384KB Total Cache)
Nominal Voltage: 1.65v
Die Size: 84mm2
Transistor count: Approx: 37.6 million
Infrastructure: Socket A
Max Die Temp: 85 degrees Celsius
Max Thermal Power: 68.3 W
Typical Thermal Power: 62.0 W
Icc (processor current) Max: 41.4 A
Icc Typical: 37.6 A

:banana: :banana: Well it's about time....:toast: Time me thinks

[OPPAINTER]

I wonder how they will unlock this Time:)

OPP

[sysfailur]

MMMMmmmm *drool*

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MzQx :)

[OPPAINTER]

I just just thinking, If I get one of these chips before Abit has there KT400 mobo ready, I'll have to buy an EPOX:eek:

OPP:)

[General_B]

Ooohh couple that with nforce 2...drool...drool...


General_B

[QuadDamage]

i may have an Abit mobo in 10 to 15 days:)

[OPPAINTER]

Originally posted by QuadDamage
i may have an Abit mobo in 10 to 15 days:)

QD,
What model??

OPP

[Wolf]

This is really looking good for Barton cores. I hope they release them soon. I can't wait to see what some people get out of these chips around here.

[JBELL]

Originally posted by General_B
Ooohh couple that with nforce 2...drool...drool...


General_B

now your talking.....


via who???

[candjac]

Originally posted by OPPAINTER
I wonder how they will unlock this Time:)
OPP

Yes, that's why we posted new thread saying...

If older mobos can only support 5X thru 12.5X Multipliers, as found with the Tbred 2200, then we see a problem in that 12.5X max might be "too low" for these new cpus with default Multipliers of 15X and 16X...ie...what does "upgrade" user do if he "could" oc to some high FSB at 13X, but can't set 13X cause system won't post/boot and the L3 mod can't deliver higher than 12.5X?? Interesting.
John C.

[sysfailur]

Originally posted by OPPAINTER
I just just thinking, If I get one of these chips before Abit has there KT400 mobo ready, I'll have to buy an EPOX:eek:

OPP:)

Well no you wouldn't. If you unlock it, you'd get 5.5 X or whatever right? I'm sure these unlock just like the current Tbreds.

[sysfailur]

Originally posted by General_B
Ooohh couple that with nforce 2...drool...drool...


General_B

My thoughts exactly.

[LORD]

Excellent work there MrIcee, a short time away from the comp an this gets announced.....!

This is what we've all been waiting for. It's about time AMD did this. All I will say is I hope they deliver....

[QuadDamage]

QD,
What model??

hey OPP: AT7 Max2

[majormav]

what a combo!!!!! ???

nice kt400 chipset board
2600 chip
rad 9700
256mb corsairxms3200/winbond 5ns
pelt/watercooling

front page me thinks in capable hands

[QuadDamage]

2600+? maybe 2700+ would be a smarter move, read:


SOURCES SAID that AMD's next speed step, after today's announcement of the 2400+ and 2600+ Athlon XPs, will be a 2700+ which will use a 333MHz front side bus (FSB).
But AMD may also attempt to introduce other features into the 2700+ if engineers can make that work.

source :http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=5053

[LORD]

Originally posted by OPPAINTER
I wonder how they will unlock this Time:)

OPP

There were reports originally, that they were gonna be unlocked. They never make it easy for us..:rolleyes:

Unlocking should make an interesting discovery though. Doubtless to say you all will receive them before I do.

Image of T-Bred Bridges from [H] (http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/1029878103IExZ4ZtF9I_4_2_l.jpg)

[candjac]

Originally posted by sysfailur
If you unlock it, you'd get 5.5 X or whatever right? I'm sure these unlock just like the current Tbreds.

Agree, but it would probably be 7X and 8X for the 2400 and 2600 respectively. But that's not the issue.

Issue is whether serious oc'er could oc, or how much oc, the 2600 if limited by the 12.5X max Multiplier that most current mobos seem to be limited to with the 5th L3 closing mod on the 2200. Here are the numbers.....

Tbred 2600 default = 2133MHz = 16X 133Mhz.

2133Mhz/12.5X = 171Mhz = the Host Clock at which oc'g of cpu "begins"...if limited to 12.5X, as we'd expect from 2200 experiences with most mobos.

And reviews say AMD supplied an Epox 8K3A+ with "beta" bios, which suggests not only some tweaking, but also a "fix for whatever may have required the L3 mod"???? So bottom line is that the 2600 may not be a cost-effective upgrade if it needs a new mobo as well.
But the 2400 with its lower Multiplier (and more headroom??) might be OK for older mobos which currently respond to the L3 mod.

Hope someone experiments soon on older mobo.
John C.

[Ewok]

Looking at the voltages they are still having to use to get decent clocks of 2.4ghz (yet to see one of these stable in any review at less than 1.85-1.90v) I cant say im impressed. P4s using 0.13 will and do die from anything over 1.75v, and 1.70v to be safe. tbreds also use 0.13 and even if they happen to be more resistant to migration and you add another 0.2v on for this, that still gonna leave 1.9v maximum safe voltage before you kill it from migration, and the most you can expect at 1.9v looking at all the reviews is about 2.45ghz.

Not nearly as impressive as these 2.6ghz and 2.8ghz screenshots make it out to be. Of course those like icee and oppainter who throw gobs of money at it and dont mind putting voltages through a chip thatll kill it, will be able to hit 2.8ghz for the sake of a 3dmark run. However everyone else that wants a 24/7 overclock is gonna be stuck at 2.4ghz or less and a 3ghz+p4 (which isnt too hard at 1.7v even with the stock cooler) is gonna beat that in almost every bench.

So from what I can see its good for those thatll put too much voltage up its arse just to run 3dmark etc, but still not enough for everyone else to warrant buying it over a P4 which also has much better memory bandwidth even with ddr due to VIA having crap memory controllers. Add to that the new P4 steppings for 2.8ghz is out very soon as well (which you will hopefully get on the lower speed chips as well making for huge overclocks) and it seems AMD have done nothing more than narrow the gap a little. Of course this could all be wrong but thats the way I see it from looking at 5 of these reviews.

[Nohto]

What is it with people that beat around the bush and TRY NOT TO SAY THEY DON'T LIKE AMD AND THEY THINK THAT THEIR MORE EXPENSIVE LOWER PERFORMANCE INTEL PRODUCT IS BETTER. Why don't they just have the balls to say it or better yet prove it! Even better don't say s..t about it and buy WTF they want. No one is forcing them to spend more money and then telling them to justify it to everyone.


13165 3D MARK 2001SE (http://service.madonion.com/compare?2k1=3929871)

ABIT AT7 MOBO
UNLOCKED XP 2200 2109MHZ
8 MAXTOR 20 GIG HD'S IN STRIPING 0 WITH NEW HIGHPOINT CONTROLER
GAINWARD 4600 GOLDENSAMPLE WATERCOOLED 335/775
CORSAIR 3200 512 XMS RAM

[xgman]

amdmb's review said that he tried in vein to get it unlocked in the previous ways, but no luck. I am sure someone will figure it out, but dam I wish they would just unlock the dam things and forget it. An AMD rep told me that they probably won't be in distribution to resellers until towards end of September. I guess it is time to hurry up and wait.

I also think the epox nforce2 board will see the light of day within a week or 2 with their KT400 a bit later in September, and after reading this: http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/story.html?id=1029904628 , I really think Nforce2 is the way to go. Via needs to get their act together.

[JCviggen]

Originally posted by Nohto
What is it with people that beat around the bush and TRY NOT TO SAY THEY DON'T LIKE AMD AND THEY THINK THAT THEIR MORE EXPENSIVE LOWER PERFORMANCE INTEL PRODUCT IS BETTER. Why don't they just have the balls to say it or better yet prove it! Even better don't say s..t about it and buy WTF they want. No one is forcing them to spend more money and then telling them to justify it to everyone.


13165 3D MARK 2001SE (http://service.madonion.com/compare?2k1=3929871)

ABIT AT7 MOBO
UNLOCKED XP 2200 2109MHZ
8 MAXTOR 20 GIG HD'S IN STRIPING 0 WITH NEW HIGHPOINT CONTROLER
GAINWARD 4600 GOLDENSAMPLE WATERCOOLED 335/775
CORSAIR 3200 512 XMS RAM


Chill dude...

I like AMD as much as the next guy, and these new Tbreds are a welcome improvement. Finally some kind of challenge to the P4's.
But the P4's are ahead still... the 2.66 and 2.8 cant be caught with the 2600+ Tbred i'm afraid.

And, just for educational purpases, I would be happy to show you my silent, stock intel cooled 1.6A will beat your 2100 MHz XP.
For the record, a few months ago I had a 2104 MHz 2000+ at 200 FSB... I know their speed

[calantak]

my thoughts exactly...
Have been doing the amd dance until six months ago, and loved every minute of it...
However I am NOT impressed even when I see a t'bred @ 2800 mhz, when they need 2.2 volts and a prometheia to get there (thg), how long do you think the little bugger will survive that overvolt from 1.6V=>2.2? Five days? Three hours?

[Nohto]

The difference there is that you aren't bashing AMD especially as soon as they come out with something that makes the race close. I totally agree that it will be extremely hard for them to catch up, probably impossible for a long time. AMD should of released the 2600, 2400 (and possibly the 2700) shortly after the 2200 were released. But anyway, it is still a lot more expensive to buy a new Intel MB new processor especially when they were just released the price was around $600 I believe, new ram and new cooler because half of the CPU coolers aren't interchangeable than it is to buy a AMD system that is comparable.

[Nohto]

I run my 2100, and my 2200 at 1.9 to 2.0 constantly and haven't had any problems at all.
2100 at least 5 months
2200 since they were first released 3-4 months

[JBELL]

Originally posted by calantak
my thoughts exactly...
Have been doing the amd dance until six months ago, and loved every minute of it...
However I am NOT impressed even when I see a t'bred @ 2800 mhz, when they need 2.2 volts and a prometheia to get there (thg), how long do you think the little bugger will survive that overvolt from 1.6V=>2.2? Five days? Three hours?




So having the bigger number is more important to you?? When in fact the new 2600+ shuts down the 2.53b P4 in almost everyway and bang for the buck is clearly a better chip ??

[Ewok]

actually its been proven on more than one occasion the intel works out cheaper as well as faster with a 2.26b+IT7 than amds top equivalent which would be the 2200+ and soon the 2600+. Unless of course you want to look at the 2.53ghz P4 instead, but how many people have you seen overclocking with that? and we all know why (hint it isnt the price).

as said on many occasions amd seem to have a technically superior chip in many respects but if they cant get the clock speeds out of the thing to be able to beat intels then its all for nothing.

"So having the bigger number is more important to you?? When in fact the new 2600+ shuts down the 2.53b P4 in almost everyway and bang for the buck is clearly a better chip ??"

where you getting that from? and who buys 2.53 chips to run at stock? a 2.26 will overclock up to a good 3.1-3.3ghz, overall cost less or the same as the 2600+ with cooler, and it will be faster.

And as already stated, the new chips are 'better' than the old tbreds, but they dont seem to be enough. My next system was going to be intel, from what I've seen so far.....it still is. For 2 reasons, intel has better memory controllers and hence bandwidth (and im not talking about rambus) and I think its going to take a volatge level thatll kill the tbred to get it to beat the P4. If your going to run at stock speed then of course AMD is the only one your going to consider, but the VAST majority of people here wont be running at stock.

The problem is nobody seems to know EXACTLY what voltage will kill a tbred. We know anything over 1.75 will kill a P4, due to peoples tests and intels OWN spec stating this fact. AMD afaik has no such spec on what voltages are safe and peoples tests have been sketchy at best, possibly because too few people have actually got one. Since they both use 0.13 processes, electro-migration should be a problem for both at similar voltages, unless someone can come up with a proper explamation of why its not the case with the AMD chips.

AMD may get top in 3dmark tables if people are going to ram 2.2v up its arse to get it to 2.8ghz for 5 mins while they run a 3dmark loop, but the chip wont last long at that voltage and what will interest most people is which is the fastest for 24/7 use using a SAFE voltage, and I think thats still going to be the P4. We shall see.

[SKATAN]

the only AXP cpu that will beat the PIV will be Barton (512kbs L2)


these new tbreds will reach 2.7~2.8ghz extreme cooled (Ln2 3ghz+ ?)

but the current mobos wont be able to feed theses guys with the enough bandwidth they need and that will be their only problem about beating those PIV at 3.3~4 ghz

PIv has more cache and better bandwidth that´s why it scales so good


i845E DDR mem controler is way better than any chipsets around for the athlons

maybe those kt400 and nforce 2 are way better but i doubt it

[Ewok]

from what ive read the kt400 has problems running stably at 400 with anything more than 1 stick, and ddr400 isnt officially supported on it anyway. VIA seem incapable of coming up with decent memory controllers, period.

[JBELL]

kt400 is the latest of a dying dog.... nFORCE2 with dual channel ram, hyper transport, and locked PCIs shoul dbe able to do soo much more... and the hypertransport is the reason nVIDIA does not make an INTEL board ..... can anyone tell me why INTEL would not want such a great feature?

[Ewok]

hypertransport? wot is this?

nforce2 has built in graphics tho dont it? which nobody gonna want to pay for surely? unless theres a version without it.

havent read a thing about nforce2 yet.

[JBELL]

nFORCE uses integrated graphics but NOT on ALL chip sets

nFORCE2 I believe won't have IGPs on them... at least for higher end models.

http://www.nvidia.com/docs/lo/1946/SUPP/HyperTransportFAQ.pdf

HyperTransport

Another nifty feature of nForce is the communication interface between its north and south bridge, the IGP and MCP. Instead of the traditional PCI-bus or the new 266 MB/s interface used by Intel (hub architecture) and VIA (V-Link), nForce is using AMD's HyperTransport interface, formerly known as LDT (lightning data transfer). This interface is also only 8-bit wide to keep motherboard makers happy, but it is clocked at 400 MHz and it is differential (kinda DDR), which gives it a bandwidth of 400 MB/s upstream and 400 MB/s downstream, adding up to 800 MB/s. It ensures high data throughput between the two chips, which is required by many streaming applications, such as audio and video recording or replay. Network throughput is also accelerated, especially in combination with the StreamThru-feature of the MCP.

[JBELL]

Over @ http://hypertransport.org/


What is HyperTransport™ Technology?

Answer:
HyperTransport™ technology is a high-speed, low latency, point-to-point, packetized link that enables chips to transfer data at peak rates up to 12.8 Gigabytes per second (102.4 Gigabits per second). It is a scalable architecture that can simplify connectivity by replacing legacy buses and bridges and reducing latencies and bottlenecks within systems.


02.
Question:
What applications is HyperTransport™ technology targeted at?

Answer:
HyperTransport™ technology is designed to enable integrated circuits in computers, servers, embedded systems, networking and telecommunications equipment to exchange information substantially faster than existing bus technologies.

An example is the NVIDIA¨ nForceTM chipset that utilizes HyperTransport™ technology to deliver up to a six-fold increase in bandwidth between the nForce Integrated Graphics Processor (IGP) and nForce Media and Communications Processor (MCP). In fact, the bandwidth supplied by HyperTransport™ allowed NVIDIA to implement full Dolby Digital 5.1 3D audio processing and broadband networking in the MCP, something no other existing technology allowed them to do.



03.
Question:
When will products designed with HyperTransport™ technology be available?

Answer:
Products based on HyperTransport™ are available and shipping today. There are more than 4 million pieces of silicon available today.



04.
Question:
What HyperTransport™ technology based products are available today?

Answer:
The NVIDIA nForce Platform Processing Architecture, comprised of the NVIDIA nForce Integrated Graphics Processor (IGP) and NVIDIA nForce Media and Communications Processor (MPC), are shipping in millions of units as a motherboard chipset supporting the AMD AthlonTM XP processor and as a console chipset inside the Microsoft Xbox.

HyperTransport™ technology is also shipping in MIPS based processors including the Broadcom BCM1250 MIPS based processor and the PMC Sierra RM9000X2 MIPS based processor. HyperTransport™ technology is the primary bus used in AMD's eighth-generation AMD AthlonTM and AMD OpteronTM processors and inside its supporting devices including the AMD-8111™ HyperTransport™ I/O hub, the AMD-8131™ HyperTransport™ PCI-X tunnel and the AMD-8151™ HyperTransport™ AGP 3.0 graphics tunnel. SiPackets offers a HyperTransport™ -to-PCI bridge.

HyperTransport™ technology is also shipping in the ITS 9000ZX test systems for HyperTransport™ technology devices from Schlumberger, the FS2240 HyperTransport™ Analysis Probe from FuturePlus Systems Corporation, FPGA products including the Virtex-II from Xilinx and the Apex II from Altera, a southbridge introduced by ALi, a security processor from Hifn and Cavium Networks, chip testers from Teradyne, RTL modules available from GDA Technologies, PHY modules from Nurlogic and bus functional models for high-speed verficiation from TransEDA.



05.
Question:
Quickly summed up, what are the strengths of HyperTransport™ technology?

Answer:
HyperTransport™ technology is designed to provide more bandwidth than current interconnect technologies, use low-latency responses, low pin counts, be compatible with legacy PC buses, be extensible to new SNA (Systems Network Architecture) buses, be compatible with existing and future operating systems and be software compatible with PCI. Its electrical design is designed to improve reliability and reduce board design complexity.



06.
Question:
Is a high-speed bus like HyperTransport™ technology expensive to implement?

Answer:
No. In addition to flexibility, scalability, and very high bandwidth, HyperTransport™ technology also offers the potential benefit of a very low implementation cost. Because it is part of the roadmap for several high volume desktop PCs and server systems, it will benefit from the economies of scale that come with being a part of the high volume, cost sensitive PC-driven market space. This will be similar to the phenomena experienced as PCI adoption grew beyond the PC market.


07.
Question:
What buses and technologies is HyperTransport™ technology compatible with?

Answer:
HyperTransport™ technology is designed to interface with today's I/O throughput including AGP, PCI, PCI-X, IEEE-1394, USB 2.0, PL-3, SPI-4.2, and Gigabit Ethernet as well as next generation buses including AGP 8x, Infiniband, PCI-X 2.0, PCI Express, SPI-5, and 10 Gigabit Ethernet among others. In traditional architectures, multiple devices share a single bus whereas with HyperTransport™ , each device receives its own I/O connection, reducing data bottlenecks and boosting performance. This is accomplished through bridge chips and tunnel chips that can be daisy-chained, giving the opportunity to connect multiple HyperTransport™ input/output devices to a single channel.


08.
Question:
Why is HyperTransport™ technology compared to PCI technology?

Answer:
PCI technology is more than a connection technology for PC cards and peripherals. The PCI bus is typically used to connect the processor's memory controller to I/O devices that include PCI slots, hard drives, USB and IEEE-1394 peripherals, printers, etc. In fact, PCI is the most pervasive bus in personal computing and is widely used in networking applications and servers. HyperTransport™ technology preserves the large investment that has already been made in PCI while paving the way for the future.



09.
Question:
Is HyperTransport™ technology compatible with existing software and operating systems?

Answer:
Yes, HyperTransport™ technology is compatible with existing and future operating systems as it is PCI compatible from an Operating System perspective. This has already been shown in production systems based on the NVIDIA nForce chipset.



10.
Question:
Is HyperTransport™ technology Plug & Play compatible?

Answer:
Yes. HyperTransport™ I/O devices are designed to use the standard Plug 'n Play methodology and is boot, run, and driver compatible with any standard PCI compliant operating system.

HyperTransport™ TM Technology Physical Interface



11.
Question:
At what clock speeds does HyperTransport™ technology operate?

Answer:
HyperTransport™ technology devices are designed to operate at multiple clock speeds from 200MHz up to 800MHz, and utilizes double data rate technology transferring two bits of data per clock cycle, for an effective transfer rate of up to 1,600Mb/sec in each direction. Since transfers can occur in both directions simultaneously, an aggregate transfer rate of 6.4 Gigabytes per second in a 16 bit HyperTransport™ I/O Link and an aggregate transfer rate of 12.8 Gigabytes per second in a 32-bit HyperTransport™ I/O Link can be achieved. To allow for system design optimization, the clocks of the receive and transmit links may be set at different rates.

[Ewok]

so its in the original nforce, which was a bit of a flop afaik, and it still doesnt sound like anything thats gonna make much difference, if it was any good intel would have adopted it too surely.

What might be good is the dual channel memory, but thats also in the original nforce, and was crap afaik. We shall see when some benchmarks come out I guess.

[calantak]

Originally posted by Nohto
I run my 2100, and my 2200 at 1.9 to 2.0 constantly and haven't had any problems at all.
2100 at least 5 months
2200 since they were first released 3-4 months
R those t'breds? Nope....
My xp2000+ ran at 1.95 volts all the time.
These are 0.13microns... they don't stand this kind of voltage, I've seen all kinds of weird things on my Northy when I got it @1.9 volts even at -45 ° evap and -20° cpu...



Originally posted by JBELL

So having the bigger number is more important to you?? When in fact the new 2600+ shuts down the 2.53b P4 in almost everyway and bang for the buck is clearly a better chip ??

I didn't pay a whole lot for my 2.26b and abit th7-II... it's running 3.2 ghz. That "big number" crushes the average overclocked xp2600+ I've seen in most of the reviews performancewise .

Moreover, getting the big performer is what counts for me, and I don't care for money. This hobby keeps me from going insane due the excessive amount of work I sometimes have to do, so it can cost 2000 bucks a month, I don't care.
If I see the 2.8 p4 beats everything when it's released, I'll buy it, even if it costs three times as much as the xp2600+.
If the 2800+-166 beats the p4 2800 that's the way I'll go.

I just buy what 's the fastest around.





Btw, talking of nforce2... THAT is what will bring the 2800+ back to the crown...for the first time we'll see a massive bandwith on an amd chip...and we all know that if a 166fsb amd gets higher bandwith it'll rock...

[FUGGER]

A couple of things to note, On THG review he posted a CPUID SS of 2.6Ghz with 166FSB (http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q3/020821/images/athlon2666.gif). Notice the SSE failed.

On the best data test test you see a consistant increase as the XP models goes up as expected until you reach the new B versions where 2200+ is too close to the 2600+ and the 2600+ beats the 3000+. With over 500Mhz advantage it becons the question, "where is the beef?"

Granted the new P naming convention is supposed to be closer to the P4 but it seems more was changed in the core than stated. longer pipeline? slower cache ratio to handle higher Mhz?

[JBELL]

...and AMD folds better becuase???

Neptune5k reports in with this:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2549

[JBELL]

Originally posted by calantak




Btw, talking of nforce2... THAT is what will bring the 2800+ back to the crown...for the first time we'll see a massive bandwith on an amd chip...and we all know that if a 166fsb amd gets higher bandwith it'll rock...


exactly why I stopped using VIA... too many bugs and limited bandwidth!

AMD had its hayday with the tbirds but has even bigger ones to come yet...

[calantak]

As we have mentioned, we have confirmation that the 2800+ AthlonXP will ride the 333MHz bus but now the big guessing game is will it be a Barton core with the "extra" L2 cache. I have to say that AMD is making us feel some excitement once again.

yea!!!!

I get all orgiastic when reading this...

[JBELL]

Originally posted by calantak


yea!!!!

I get all orgiastic when reading this...



*looks for towel* your gonna need it

[Ewok]

AMD seemingly folds better because the program massively benefits AMD chips. afaik it isnt the same for seti or superpi or anything else, so this would suggest folding has been optimized especially for AMD's and not for intels.....

[JBELL]

Originally posted by Ewok
AMD seemingly folds better because the program massively benefits AMD chips. afaik it isnt the same for seti or superpi or anything else, so this would suggest folding has been optimized especially for AMD's and not for intels.....

even though intel is one of the biggest supporters of foling and in fact have a scrolling banner in the graphical version itself???


hmmmmm go figure :toast:

[Ewok]

yup, even though

how else do you explain the huge difference between folding results and every other program of the same type?

Intel supportting it? well thats a hard one to fathom, why would any company support research to cure cancer?

[JBELL]

in the folding prog it says....

avaible from http://intel.com/cure/


Distributed computing is changing the world.

The Intel® Philanthropic Peer-to-Peer Program was created to demonstrate the power of distributed computing by linking millions of PCs around the globe to create one of the most powerful computing resources in the world. It was also created to increase the adoption and acceptance of this type of computing for scientific research.

Nearly 2 million PCs joined to provide resources for recording breaking research and continue to do so. We are now seeing the industry embrace distributed computing, particularly as peer-to-peer computing, web services and grid computing all merge into one model of fully distributed computing.

The number of programs are continuing to grow in all areas of research. Learn more about the researchers and programs that are involved utilizing the power of the PC and how these programs work.

[JBELL]

..

[Ewok]

so how much faster is it than an intel? and why would it not be the case for seti and superpi benches? a slight lead is explanable due to the AMD's better FPU but if its anything as huge as the link you posted makes out then something else must be happening.

Either way, in the majority of benchmarks, intel wins, making it the better chip overall (if your going to overclock), and the one I would buy if I was getting a new chip now, which im not. My current XP1600+@1800mhz will have to do for now.

It still amuses me when people keep coming up with the classic "oh, so your impressed by huge numbers" when someone says the P4 is better. Its like saying (in theory, this may not actually be true) "but Benneton has better grip than Ferarri's in F1 even though the ferarri's can go faster". Does it matter? its still the ferarri's that are winning the majority of the races and its still Ferarri's at the top of the table. :banana::D:banana:

[xgman]

Epox has an 8RDA non on-board graphics model Nforce2 and a 8RGA with graphics. They tell me they will be out around the 16th of Sept. Nforce2 sounds like the way to go. I got my 2 - 512 Twinmos DDR400 Winbond -5 sticks ready and waiting to run in dual ch. mode.

[calantak]

I prefer Porsche :-)

[Ewok]

where did u get that twinmos?

is it definately the case that 2 sticks is the way to go for dual channell boards? because Ive got 2x256mb samsung dtl and if I buy a new stick its gonna be 1x512 cos they are faster, but then im gonna be stuffed if I need 2 to get best performance from dual channel.....

[SPQQKY]

I am totally happy with this news. I already have the mobo to support one of these chips. Also, I believe the 2400+ will be the better purchase. We have seen that the XP 1600+ with the right stepping will OC just as well as a 2000+. The lower multiplier on the 2400+ will allow for higher bus speeds if you can't unlock it or don't care to. I would be quite pleased with a chip that OC's to 2.4GHz +, that's about 500MHz more than my current chip!

[DaGooch]

I will get the 2400+ as well when available local. I hope my new 8K5A2+ will support multiplier manipulation say from 13X and up. :)

[SPQQKY]

I hope my new 8K5A2+ will support multiplier manipulation say from 13X and up.

It should, but I noticed with my 8K3A+ that you only get 13, 14, 15 and 16 but there are no .5 increments.
:rolleyes:

[majormav]

spqqky i got one coming tomorrow will let u know

[LBJGH]

In one of the reviews I read, AMD encouraged the reviewer to overclock the 2600+. I guess AMD was fairly confident with the changes to the new CPU.

Another bonus for overclockers is that the CPU is now running at 1.65v down from the older Athlon's 1.75v.

Just consider this: some 2yr old socket 'a' motherboards support the latest CPU. How many Intel-based motherboards can boast that about an upgrade path.

I was a little worried about the socket 'a' format after the 2200+ was released but my confidence is now renewed with the latest releases.


__________________

[freeloader]

Hey, atleast AMD doesn't change their sockets every few months!

[LBJGH]

exactly.

Well I plan on keeping my 1ghz athlon for quit a while. Then I can upgrade to a 333mhz bus Athlon... imagine that.

hmm... from a 600mhz AMD Duron to a 2133 AthlonXP 2600+ with the same motherboard.

Let's just say you had $150 to upgrade... grab a socket 'a' mobo and keep using your current 600 Duron... then after you scrounge a few more bucks grab a faster chip, then some faster ram...

Intel prefers to screw the customer into buying a new Intel chipset motherboard for each cpu upgrade.

Intel is just arrogant.

[xgman]

Originally posted by SPQQKY


It should, but I noticed with my 8K3A+ that you only get 13, 14, 15 and 16 but there are no .5 increments.
:rolleyes:

the new bioses on epox.org add support for 2400 and 2600 in both the 8k3a and 8k5a, although the 8k5a one is calling my oc'ed 2200 at 1930 a 2400 and since AMD has slightly lowered their PR rating for the 2400 and 2600, I am not sure this will read them right without another correction, but I think the dividers will be in there. What I want to know is how to unlock these. So much for the cpu's coming factory unlocked rumourrs. How do you unlock if they start using heat plates?

[john433i]

Firingsquad has reported that unlocking the Tbred Rev. B chips only requires a simple L1 bridge connection! They used a #2 pencil, reminiscent of the Thunderbird unlocking process. Here is their coverage:

http://firingsquad.gamers.com/hardware/xp2600/page3.asp

[Nohto]

ABOUT THAT BANG FOR THE BUCK

http://home.earthlink.net/~nohto/_uimages/3dm2k11280.gif


Overclocking: Normally we don't like to mention the overclocking aspects of a chip in our official assessment, but we think it's pretty safe to say that these newer Thoroughbred processors will overclock better than their predecessors. AMD has redesigned the core for more efficient operation at high clock speeds and based on what we've seen their work was a resounding success.
Performance: The Athlon XP 2600+ is one helluva fast chip. It may only be running at 2.13GHz, but as we've seen in today's benchmarks it is more than capable of giving the Pentium 4 2.53GHz a run for its money.
The scary part is AMD is only asking $193 for the Athlon XP 2400+, and we all know much cheaper street prices are for AMD CPUs. We wouldn't be surprised to see online prices another 20-30% lower once the supply on these chips increases

[QuadDamage]

damn, i can't wait any longer for my AT7 Max2. hope friggin VIA fixed "screen tearing" thing, otherwise i'll be switching to NForce2.

[Ewok]

"Another bonus for overclockers is that the CPU is now running at 1.65v"

ALL tbred cores (for over 2 months) have run at 1.65v this is nothing new. Its not a bonus because it was meant to run at 1.5v the same as intels 0.13micron chip, such poor yields (even now) have meant they had to effectively overclock their own chips right from stock by upping the voltage, just to get them to run at stock speed. That alone shows how bad their yields were and continue to be.

Regarding not having to change motherboards, anyone with a 2 year old motherboard is going to have no support for a 133fsb, USB2, firewire, possibly raid, the latest memory speeds (infact at 2 years old it may not even support DDR let alone anything above pc2100) or anything else thats appeared in the last 2 years, so you wont be getting anywhere near the performance you could be getting after spending a mere $80 on a new motherboard.

Of course its a good thing for those that rather keep a 2 year old board.

[SKATAN]

wanna bet they run great at 1.5v without OC ?


my 1700+ palomino does 1.5ghz at 1.38v


ewok we all know the goods and bads of amd so how about stoping that negativism it´s quite bodering


Intel cpus are great when they dont die from extra voltage in a few months


stick to Intel and ill wait for an 2400+ when they are available

[Ewok]

whats a palomino got to do with anything?

the tbred is a completely diferent chip made with a completely different manufacturing process. The FACTS are that 1.5v was planned, 1.65 is what they had to use to get the yields needed. Any given tbred (especially with the new cores) might run at 1.5v (and nobody has tested this yet so you cant say it will) but the majority probably wont or AMD would be using 1.5v again as it would keep temps down, but they arent and theres surely a reason for it.

Stick to intel? so I should go buy an intel to replace my xp1600+ then go buy a 2400+ 2 weeks later? why? Ill wait and see what happens first thanks.

[Jeff]

Not to be a :banana::banana::banana::banana: or anything Ewok, but do you ever have anything nice to say? It seems like AMD can never do good by you and that's fine but you keep on bringing up that you don't like what they are doing post after post after post. I think most people who read this board(and the others you post to) are quite aware of your dislike of AMD's products and/or methods.

Try to remember to have some fun with this hobby. ;)

[Ewok]

Well I could sit here all day long saying how AMD chips are cheaper, how they go faster at the same clock speed as an intel, how they have better FPU (which I did mention earlier), but then everyone knows this already.

Id rather state the less obvious things such as, to get these new super speeds from the 2 new chips, they have had to put so much voltage through it, its likely to kill the chip before long. And as stated in my previous post, im making the FACTS clear, whether its AMD, Intel or Bob down the road, they remain facts people should be aware of before they go rushing out buying a xp2400+ and expecting to get 2.8ghz out of it like the tomshardware review....they wont.

Now if people want to go around with blinkers on to the fact that AMD havent been able to get the yields out of these chips that they wanted and everyone expected, thats up to them but Im not going to sit here and let someone mislead everyone by stating a defualt voltage of 1.65v is a good thing, when it clearly isnt.

I have no like or dislike for AMD or intel, I'll buy whatever is going to suit my needs best, hence at the moment, as already said, I'm running an xp1600+, and infact havent had an intel system for over 3 years when I had a P2 450. As I already said earlier, its an improvement over the old tbreds obviously, but it isnt the amazing jawdropping marvel that some people (like tomshardware) are making it out to be. And I'm talking from an overclocking perspective, as I already said for those that wont be overclocking, AMD is the obvious choice due to price and the fact it beats intels at stock speeds.

It isnt a 'hobby' for me, I'll buy pc stuff to use, not run benchmarks all day, that doesnt mean I dont wanna get the best stuff or get the most out of what Ive got, or know the facts about things so that I can make an informed decision about what to buy and why. I may well end up with a 2400 or 2600+ if they turn out to be better than expected, thats why im waiting to see, but that also depends on how good the nforce2 is because so far the kt400 doesnt look very good.

[SKATAN]

Originally posted by Ewok
whats a palomino got to do with anything?

the tbred is a completely diferent chip made with a completely different manufacturing process. The FACTS are that 1.5v was planned, 1.65 is what they had to use to get the yields needed. Any given tbred (especially with the new cores) might run at 1.5v (and nobody has tested this yet so you cant say it will) but the majority probably wont or AMD would be using 1.5v again as it would keep temps down, but they arent and theres surely a reason for it.

Stick to intel? so I should go buy an intel to replace my xp1600+ then go buy a 2400+ 2 weeks later? why? Ill wait and see what happens first thanks.


how about this for a fact


1700+ 0.18u default vcore 1.75v at 1466mhz

mine does 1.5ghz at 1.38v , 0.37v less than default


like I said wanna bet the 2600+ runs fine at 2133mhz with 1.5v?


everyone who listens to you thinks you have a PIV ,why dont you buy one if amd is doing a lot of "stoopid" things and all chipsets suk , blah blah blah, yada yada yada ....

[Jeff]

Originally posted by Ewok
It isnt a 'hobby' for me, I'll buy pc stuff to use, not run benchmarks all day, that doesnt mean I dont wanna get the best stuff or get the most out of what Ive got, or know the facts about things so that I can make an informed decision about what to buy and why.

Sorry 'bout assuming it was a hobby for you. Playing games, crunching SETI or Folding, emailing, general searching, and pushing things a bit farther than they were meant to be pushed are all things I consider part of the computer hobby.

No one can fault you for educating yourself about current and future products. It just seems(to me at least) that you don't enjoy any part of AMD and you like to talk about that a lot.

The good news though is that you could be in for a huge surprise when some real world benchies start coming out. And if the new AMD's are crap, then you'll have nothing to yatch about because you've already written them off. ;)

Take it easy Ewok,
Jeff

[xgman]

Originally posted by Ewok
where did u get that twinmos?

is it definately the case that 2 sticks is the way to go for dual channell boards? because Ive got 2x256mb samsung dtl and if I buy a new stick its gonna be 1x512 cos they are faster, but then im gonna be stuffed if I need 2 to get best performance from dual channel.....

direct form twinmos, but you can special order it through memoryx.com if you call them.

[LBJGH]

My point was that most motherboards max out at 1.85v so by AMD delivering a CPU with the stock voltage of 1.65v it gives the end user more voltage to play with.

Who cares if AMD had planned to run the thoroughbred at 1.1v if the final product smokes the competition with a 400mhz disadvantage.

... as far as temperatures... the discussion is generally over-rated as AMD run quit nicely at 55-60C even if that is a problem for Intel chips.


Originally posted by Ewok
whats a palomino got to do with anything?

the tbred is a completely diferent chip made with a completely different manufacturing process. The FACTS are that 1.5v was planned, 1.65 is what they had to use to get the yields needed. Any given tbred (especially with the new cores) might run at 1.5v (and nobody has tested this yet so you cant say it will) but the majority probably wont or AMD would be using 1.5v again as it would keep temps down, but they arent and theres surely a reason for it.

Stick to intel? so I should go buy an intel to replace my xp1600+ then go buy a 2400+ 2 weeks later? why? Ill wait and see what happens first thanks.

[Leo]

Ewok poses some valid, well spoken points and I personally don't see what the problem is Skatan. He's simply offering his point of view on the situation as many others are. If you can write off his posts as "blah blah blah" then I can do the same for a few members who've posted in this thread w/ pro-AMD replies.

Fact of the matter is, no one cares if the new AMD chip can beat a 2.53GHz P4. As it's been stated before, no one buys these overpriced chips anyways. 2.26Bs can be had for a reasonable (granted not quite as cheap as AMD) ~$250 and I'm sorry to say it but the current 2.26Bs running at 3.2-3.4GHz with high end cooling own the ORB, not AMD chips. People who own Prometeias, 2.26Bs, etc. are going for first page on the ORB, they aren't really ones to consider bang for the buck. The fact that the 2.26B isn't insanely overpriced is just a bonus.

As for these new 2400+ and 2600+ chips, until I see proof that the NForce2 won't flop as the original NForce did, I do believe that while the race will be much closer, the Northwood will be king of the hill for a bit longer. In other words, from a 3DMark standpoint, the success of these new Thoroughbreds more or less depends on NVidia as they seem to be the only ones offering a viable dual channel DDR solution.

Before you go off dismissing my reply as useless pro-Intel banter go tell my 1 GHz AXIA 9, 1 GHz AXIA Y , 1 GHz AYHJA-Y, 1800+ AGKGA Y, 1600+ AGOIA Y, KT7A-RAID, KR7A, KX7, GA-7DX, KK266, etc. that I'm an Intel zealot. If computer parts could talk, I'm sure they'd disagree with you.

[SPQQKY]

I don't understand ewok, what is Intel doing then if their P4's are dying with 1.7v or more. It would seem to me that if 1.7v kills them, then they are pushing up THEIR voltage to get higher yields out of their chips at 1.5v. As we can see from some of the reviews, that they are gettings some really nice OC's on the new TBreds, so I don't think they could already be maxed out and that is why the higher voltage.

[Leo]

Although I don't think I quite fully understand your post SPQQKY (as far as I know no Northwood uses 1.7v) I'll attempt a reply. Excuse my curt nature today, I've had a somewhat rough day at the Superior Courthouse :rolleyes:.

To start, generally 1.7v will give you no trouble at all. I believe Intel has specifically stated the maximum safe voltage for a Northwood is 1.75v. I tend to agree with them as most people I see with degradation problems are running 1.8 "real" volts and beyond. Generally, 1.7v will get you into the 3 GHz area with a somewhat decent chip/cooling.

The new TBreds do have nice OCs but one thing I never understood, who's to say the higher voltage won't kill these chips after some amount of time? I am not saying that TBreds necessarily have the same voltage issues that Northwoods do but with the exception of a few people - those who ran 2.0v+ core and such - Northwoods didn't see voltage degradation problems in relatively large numbers until recently, several months after their release. Yes, some people do lose their chips rather quickly but their numbers are statistically insignificant.

All I'm saying is the 2200+ hasn't been out for all that long and hasn't been purchased in the great #s that Northwoods have. I have a gut feeling (perhaps unjustified) that a few months after the 2400+ and 2600+ are released and people start really pushing them as they have done with NWs, we'll be seeing more degradation problems. It comes with the territory I guess...

[Ewok]

Originally posted by LBJGH
My point was that most motherboards max out at 1.85v so by AMD delivering a CPU with the stock voltage of 1.65v it gives the end user more voltage to play with.

Well thats fair enuff but if they had been able to get the tbreds good enough that they could have used the 1.5v which was planned, how much extra voltage would THAT give people? The end user happens to get more voltage to play with but that wasnt by design, they should infact have had a lot more to play with than they do but there ya go.

Its also unclear exactly what voltages will damage these tbreds through electro-migration, if we can work this out when we got something to reliably compare against a P4, because with the P4 we know intels spec is right, and that anything over 1.75v is going to damage it, with AMD's they dont seem to have a spec and its unclear exactly what voltages will damage the chips, personally I wont count any overclock as a proper overclock unless its with a voltage that isnt going to kill the chip in 1 week, 6 weeks or 3 months time due to electro-migration. This is exactly what that twat tom did by putting 2.2v :eek: through a 0.13 chip, I will personally guarantee that chip will not last a week after that anal reaming, yet theres no mention of THAT in his article is there. The days of ramming huge volts up a chips arse are now over, so we need to know exactly what IS safe before making any speed comparisons on overclocked chips, then its possible to make a fair comparison. Right now I dont think enough people have tbreds of any kind or for long enough, to be able to work out what voltage is safe for these chips, and AMD isnt helping by not giving a spec to say whats safe and whats not, like intels spec.

SPQQY - intel hasnt changed their planned voltage from 1.5v, and 1.7v is NOT killing northwoods. Anything over 1.75 which is intels stated maximum voltage, is killing them, so intel has it spot on. I've seen 100% primed and stable 2.26 chips running at 3.3ghz and 1.7v, I dont think intel needs to up the voltage to improve their yields, infact its pretty clear they are getting better than expected yields, this is why they have moved up release dates for the 2.8 and 3ghz chips.

"As we can see from some of the reviews, that they are gettings some really nice OC's on the new TBreds, so I don't think they could already be maxed out and that is why the higher voltage."

That statement somewhat contradicts itself, if the chips arent maxed out, they wouldnt need a default of 1.65v to get the desired yields. To get these "nice" overclocks people have been putting 1.9v and more into these chips, which is probably not going to do the chip any good. As stated, we dont yet know exactly what the safe voltages are because AMD hasnt bothered to tell us, but I would venture a guess that its going to be something close to the intel spec.

*edit* DOH leo just typed exactly what I was typing more or less :banana: :D :banana:

[LBJGH]

Well either way I can't afford a 2600+ or a new mobo and P4... that said my aged Radeon VIVO works ok with my setup but is a major bottleneck in overall gaming performance... now if only I could get my hands on at 9700pro

[mdzcpa]

A few comments:

Ewok has continued to drone on about how AMD "planned" on 1.5v core voltages for it's 13 micron process but failed to somehow achieve this goal. But I've yet to see any AMD white papers or official documents of any kind to support this. If it's just referring to what the engineers may have theorectically estimated the required voltage would be well before the Tbred was even taped out...who cares. Specifications like that change all the time during the tape out and pre production cycle. In fact, it's common.

Second, AMD may very well not experience the same type of rapid electro migration that the P4 suffers from. Intel's P4 has far more transistors and the resulting extreme close proximity of the gates to one another has been identified as the main cause of rapid degradation under higher voltages. This is certainly not a design fault, as Intel doesn't engineer in overclocking considerations. However, either way, AMD does not have such tight gate proximities and stands a much better chance of surviving under higher voltages based on this.

Third, my XP 2200 will run Prime 24/7 @ 1.55v air cooled with AMD HSF. I've done it. It works. Nuff said.

Fourth, the fact that AMD beleives it needs 1.65v to ensure stability of a 13 micron process still in it's infancy (for AMD) I again find this old news and quite common with new process technology.

Fifth, a have a few 2200's that have been getting 1.9v to 2.0v "rammed up their arse" since the middle of June without the slightest degradation. In fact, after a few weeks more overclock was gained. Granted, it's only been 2 months...but even so, I've seen P4s fall over much sooner than that.

Well...that's about it. No matter how you slice it, AMD has made it interesting again. And if you think about the fact that AMD is just buying time until the Hammer arrives it's really quite impressive. It may not be all that amazing indeed to have a 2 year old mobo support such a new processor with the limited supporting goodies....but it is damn impressive that a 1 year old first generation DDR mobo will be able to. There you will have your USB 2.0, firewire, DDR, RAID and other goodies. A drop in 2400 or 2600 upgrade will really help those running first generation DDR mobos with an original TBird or early Pally with very little lost in supporting features. A far cry from what Intel has been able to muster.

/mike decends the soap box stairs

[SPQQKY]

Although I don't think I quite fully understand your post SPQQKY (as far as I know no Northwood uses 1.7v) I'll attempt a reply. Excuse my curt nature today, I've had a somewhat rough day at the Superior Courthouse .

What's not to understand, ewok states that the new TBreds are over volted to acheive the new clocks and that they will probably die with high volts when OCed, even though there is no proof of that. If P4's are dying at 1.75v (for OCing purposes and not default)*sorry, not 1.7v*, then it would seem that they are over volted already as well. I am saying that they must not be TOO over volted if reviewers are still getting 500MHz more out of the chip. Lets not forget that these are the first we are seeing of these chips. Did the first XP 1600+ hit 1.9GHz and over like the latest steppings are? No, but in time we will see the improvements. Let's give it some time before we start speculating on what these chips are gonna do before we even get our hands on them. The bottom line is....I am happy that I can run a 2600+ and OC the shiznit out of it without having to buy a new mobo.
:toast:

[LBJGH]

Well spoken Mike.... an IF a 333mhz bus AthlonXP is release including the 512k cache the games will really begin. It is still interesting to me how people keep singing the praises of the 3Ghz P4 but how little actual performance is gained over a 2Ghz T-Bred. I guess people still get sucked into the big number means really fast.

[Leo]

Originally posted by SPQQKY

If P4's are dying at 1.75v (for OCing purposes and not default)*sorry, not 1.7v*, then it would seem that they are over volted already as well.


What I don't understand is why you have the idea that people have to overvolt to get any sort of performance out of a P4. As I said, there are many many chips out there that have no problems hitting ~3 GHz with 1.75v or less. If a TBred needs 2.2v to gain the kind of overclocks we're seeing (I'm not saying all TBreds do, just saying it for the sake of argument) those overvolted chips might very well have problems competing with 3 GHz P4s for very long; 3 GHz P4s which are running at their "everyday" speed even when being benched. Mdzcpa pointed out some compelling evidence that Tbreds are more voltage hardy than Northwoods and they very might well be but pumping 2.2v into a chip is not going to promote longevity.


Originally posted by LBJGH
Well spoken Mike.... an IF a 333mhz bus AthlonXP is release including the 512k cache the games will really begin. It is still interesting to me how people keep singing the praises of the 3Ghz P4 but how little actual performance is gained over a 2Ghz T-Bred. I guess people still get sucked into the big number means really fast.

Bartons will have 512k cache and as for bus, once again, who cares? Not like any of us will leave it at stock.

The reason people sing praises of the 3GHz+ P4 is simple. No these people are not always "sucked into the big number". A well overclocked P4 (3 GHz and beyond) is going to be faster than nearly all TBred/Palomino chips running at their limits with a few exceptions. Fact of the matter is as of now, P4s own the ORB. A lot of the members here feel that if they have to pay an extra $50-$100 for a chip that takes them to the top, so be it. Real world performance difference, not much; 3DMark difference (not counting the limited 9700s and Kamu's LN2 experiments), 500-1000 points, quite large. Guess which scale most of us are working on.

Then there are people like me who simply bought a P4 to play with it. Messing w/ computers is my hobby and after going through 6 AMD CPUs and just as many motherboards (forgot my Duron in that last list :)) I felt I needed a change.

Anyways I've hijacked this thread enough, I apologize. Feel free to PM me if you wish to continue this discussion.

[zakelwe]

I think AMD chips are better at F@H not because of AMD optimisations by Standford, but by the fact that the software seems to like a large IPc's and never seems to pop out of the cpu much, to RAM etc.

For example, even the lower amount of cache on a Duron does not handicap it much as they are the same speed as a Athlon and only 10% slower than a XP, clock for clock.

Distributed Folding is more level with Intel and AMD, whereas other DC projects are favoured on Intel cpu's.

Whatever, we want both companies to be trading blows, not one out for the count. It's better for the spectators you know ;)

Regards

Andy

[N8]

Sux a good thread got crapped on by a few simps....

Thx for the info, MrIcee....it was hard to read the good stuff thru all the junk...The new Tbreds look rather promising.

[MrIcee]

Just a quick late night update fella's:)

From what I'm hearing..and seeing here online tonight...it looks like the expected arrival of the 2400 and 2600+ is sometime in October...at least this is an ETA I observed earlier. I also saw an ETA of Nov/Dec on the 2800+. Another month's wait is truly unfortunate.

Randi:D