• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

2600+ or 2800+ 754

T

thelawnet

Member
These new socket 754 semprons have got me salivating!

I'm close to ordering either a 2600+ (1.6GHz and 128kb cache) for £49.97, or a 2800+ (1.6GHz and 256kb cache) for £56.56.

Unfortunately I can't make up my mind. My load will be general business use (MS Word, Visual Studio, JBuilder), so there are really two questions: how much does losing 128kb of cache harm the A64 architecture, and secondly, whether the reduced cache would potentially give the 2600+ better overclocking (hence better performance) due to lower heat.

Both are going to be overclocked on a cheap 754 motherboard, I'm thinking the GA-K8NS (nforce 3 250). Will this give me good overclocking? My main concern is that I will be using cheap PC3200 RAM so I need dividers. Alternative suggestions welcomed....

I don't have a graphics card, so I might look at a Via board, with integrated graphics. Will these overclock as well, or I guess overclocking the fsb will screw with the integrated gfx as well.
 
I would personally steer clear of the 2600+ and get the 2800+.
128KB of cache is just a tad too little for my tastes.

Stick with the 256KB cache version and you should be fine 🙂
 
The GA K8NS is a very stable board, but it is the worst thing I have ever had when it comes to overclocking. I know that going from 1MB to 512K L2 cache does nothing for performance on athlon 64s, and going from 512 to 256 does slow it down a bit, but not much at all. Just get whatever one you want.
 
I second dguy on that motherboard. I have that same motherboard in my second machine and it is very stable and fast......but the overclocking features are limited.
If you want better overclocking, you should look into asus motherboards.

 
I want to see a review. Remember the Durons had only 64k of level 2 cache and they were still fairly perky, don't forget that these babies have 128k of level 1 cache still.

Nat
 
Originally posted by: Azzy64
128k is horrible.. i remember my celeron 2.0, that thing sucked for games
Click to expand...

Rmemeber that the semprons are based off the athlon 64s, which do not need anywhere near as much cache as a netburst architecture. There is almost ZERO performance diff between a 256k hammer and a 1MB cache hammer, so 128k cant be that much worse.
 
Originally posted by: dguy6789
Originally posted by: Azzy64
128k is horrible.. i remember my celeron 2.0, that thing sucked for games
Click to expand...

Rmemeber that the semprons are based off the athlon 64s, which do not need anywhere near as much cache as a netburst architecture. There is almost ZERO performance diff between a 256k hammer and a 1MB cache hammer, so 128k cant be that much worse.
Click to expand...



Yes the onboard memory controller should make these chips quite zippy. 🙂
 
actually the ratings look a bit conflicting....

2600+ vs 2800+ difference is 128k cache to 256k cache
3000+ vs 3100+ difference is 128k cache to 256k cache

So why is 128k cache worth 200 PR points on a 2600+ chip, and only 100 PR points on a 3000+ chip?
 
Dont read the PR ratings. Look at the clock speed and the cache. A 2.4Ghz 256K hammer is faster than a 2.2Ghz 1MB cache hammer. When deciding between 2 Athlon 64s, or semprons, remember that more Ghz is better than more cache.
 
i've never seen a 256k CH in my life. Seen alot of 512k CHs (the orginal 3000+) before the NC came out, but no 256k'ers. These days, i don't think 128k enough, and for like $15US, its a good idea. IDK if chaintech makes cheap 939 boards, but their skt754 boards oc well for the price...
 
Originally posted by: blckgrffn
I want to see a review. Remember the Durons had only 64k of level 2 cache and they were still fairly perky, don't forget that these babies have 128k of level 1 cache still.

Nat
Click to expand...

Fear not. My 2800+ arrived today. I just need to finish up with classes. I'll be installing it in 3 hours.
 
Originally posted by: Avalon
Originally posted by: blckgrffn
I want to see a review. Remember the Durons had only 64k of level 2 cache and they were still fairly perky, don't forget that these babies have 128k of level 1 cache still.

Nat
Click to expand...

Fear not. My 2800+ arrived today. I just need to finish up with classes. I'll be installing it in 3 hours.
Click to expand...


Hurry Up Avalon !!!! Cant you cut out early. 😉 hahaha
 
I'm here, I'm here 🙂
I've been busy, unfortunately.
It was my first day off work in a while and I just felt like relaxing for the day.
I've got the stuff still in packages by my feet.
I need to study for a couple exams that I have tomorrow.
Plus, I'm still working on finishing benchmarks of my current system.
That's around 90% done.
I promise I'll open everything up and install tomorrow afternoon.
 
Originally posted by: L3p3rM355i4hThese days, i don't think 128k enough
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what you think, what matters is what is. If the cache is trivial than that is that. It'll be nice to see what the overall results are for these chips, they've got the potential to be the clear choice for the low budget.
 
Exams?!? Whatever! Are you at school to play with learn or play with computer stuff? That's what I thought! Now get movin' soldier!

😉

Nat
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top