Jaxidian
Platinum Member
Originally posted by: RideFree
I quite agree.
The $47 1700+ that runs 2200+ can't make anybody enough money to keep the toiletpaper from running out, let alone fund R&D!
Hell, my 1700 is running at 2800+ speeds and from what I hear, I'm on the low end of the OCing bandwagon with these chips. I could only get a 185MHz fsb and I'm hearing about people getting up to about 215MHz fsb with these chips. But yeah, that's pretty insanely cheap for such an awesome chip.
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Originally posted by: alm4rr
still adequately plodding along on my ol $55 duron 650
Does anyone ever stop to think about the number of computer users there are (especially in various businesses), that *only* do word processing and email? At the place I used to work, *NONE* of the supervisors did anything other than simple word processing and simple emails. (aside from frequently been seen playing solitaire). Their computers were little more than typewriters (the trickiest feature they could use in wordperfect was the tab key). Nonetheless, I can imagine all of them begging to get this processor so their computers would run faster.
(And, personally, I always hoped they'd get faster computers, because the staff below them who could really use the faster computers got the "hand me downs")
Originally posted by: DrPizza
Originally posted by: alm4rr
still adequately plodding along on my ol $55 duron 650
Does anyone ever stop to think about the number of computer users there are (especially in various businesses), that *only* do word processing and email? At the place I used to work, *NONE* of the supervisors did anything other than simple word processing and simple emails. (aside from frequently been seen playing solitaire). Their computers were little more than typewriters (the trickiest feature they could use in wordperfect was the tab key). Nonetheless, I can imagine all of them begging to get this processor so their computers would run faster.
(And, personally, I always hoped they'd get faster computers, because the staff below them who could really use the faster computers got the "hand me downs")
Ahhhh....makes me reminisce of the days I was doing Pentium 90, Windows 95, Office 97 rollouts for a company....
I think I may wait for the Athlon64 if I can keep myself from ordering one of these as they drop into the $250 range
Athlon 64: not released but already awarded
Athlon 64: not released but already awarded
For well over 500 bucks, I'm not sure how hot a deal this is, but I bet this sucker does RUN hot. For that much money, it not only damn well better be fast, but it would have to bl*w me too. The Retail box is only $602 at tcwo.com, 4 bucks more for a 3 year warrenty!
Then, there are those of us that wait for a sweet spot in the pricing in older/used models to upgrade.
You can get a Athlon 1.33 266FSB for $45 how much more sweet do you want it? Also what kind of FPS games are you playing? Doom II does not count!
Damn you can also get in on one of the Outpost/Frys deals for a 1800+ and a K7S5A for $79 then sell the motherboard on eBay for $50+ and get a 1800+ for $29. I am going to assume that you do not want to upgrade because it is so cheap just to double your current cpu speed.
You can get a Athlon 1.33 266FSB for $45 how much more sweet do you want it? Also what kind of FPS games are you playing? Doom II does not count!
Damn you can also get in on one of the Outpost/Frys deals for a 1800+ and a K7S5A for $79 then sell the motherboard on eBay for $50+ and get a 1800+ for $29. I am going to assume that you do not want to upgrade because it is so cheap just to double your current cpu speed.
The price is baffling. I have no diffinitive answer why so close to the P4 3GHz. But here's something to ponder:
Anytime a processor is released, its the same chip just with difference of quality. For example, the Barton came out with little more than an increase in cache size. It came out in 3 speeds, 2500, 2800, and 3000. Whats the architectural difference? Nothing. The chips are produced on silicon plates, and what happens is that the differences in doping quality and location (near the outside of the plate vs near the center) all have differing effects on quality. So part of the manufacturing process is to test how fast each chip will go, and place it in the 2500,2800, and the 3000 catagory. Obviously, the 3000 catagory has a much less yeild, so they charge more. But $500 is too much.
Look at the 2100+, you get close to 85% of the performance for less than $100. You can OC a sub $100 chip to close the gap on how fast it will perform compared to the Barton3000. If the Barton had more than just a new cache size, maybe it would be worth it.
PS: Im not an AMD basher. Actually, I support AMD more than Intel. Im more of a price basher. I cant see wasting hundreds just to get a whole 10% better benchmark when I know that the CPU sits and spins for 95% realtime working conditions, while it is waiting for the memory/HDD to do its thing.
Anytime a processor is released, its the same chip just with difference of quality. For example, the Barton came out with little more than an increase in cache size. It came out in 3 speeds, 2500, 2800, and 3000. Whats the architectural difference? Nothing. The chips are produced on silicon plates, and what happens is that the differences in doping quality and location (near the outside of the plate vs near the center) all have differing effects on quality. So part of the manufacturing process is to test how fast each chip will go, and place it in the 2500,2800, and the 3000 catagory. Obviously, the 3000 catagory has a much less yeild, so they charge more. But $500 is too much.
Look at the 2100+, you get close to 85% of the performance for less than $100. You can OC a sub $100 chip to close the gap on how fast it will perform compared to the Barton3000. If the Barton had more than just a new cache size, maybe it would be worth it.
PS: Im not an AMD basher. Actually, I support AMD more than Intel. Im more of a price basher. I cant see wasting hundreds just to get a whole 10% better benchmark when I know that the CPU sits and spins for 95% realtime working conditions, while it is waiting for the memory/HDD to do its thing.
Originally posted by: RideFree
I quite agree.
The $47 1700+ that runs 2200+ can't make anybody enough money to keep the toiletpaper from running out, let alone fund R&D!
1700+ at 2200+? The newer 0302 JIUHB are hitting 2700+ on air
I have the same rants about the prices of the higher-end processors. Then I remember, not everyone out there is an overclocker
So this is the only alternative for them, and hell, most of them are too uninformed to think about the better buys that are available. All they see is higher is better.TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter