AMD Athlon XP laptops packed with Athlon64's

[Xenon14]

Just got the Averatec laptop listed here: Averatec @ Walmart

First I ran add/remove program to uninstall a bunch of pre-installed stuff and noticed an Athlon64 Processor Driver.

So I ran dxdiag and for the cpu got: "AMD Opteron processor Dublin, 2800+, MMX, 3DNOW, ~1.6ghz

The label/sticker on the laptop says AMD Athlon XP-M 2800+ and those are clocked >2ghz to my knowledge.

EDIT: Ran CPU ID. - Athlon 64 it is.

Core - 1600mhz
Multiplier - 8x
HTT - 200 mhz
L1data - 64kbytes
L1code - 64kbytes
L2 - 128kbytes

 

[Chunkee]

wow

 

[XZeroII]

If it had a wide screen display, I would be very tempted to look into this farther. However, my next lappy needs to have a big screen.

 

[cessna152]

!! How much?

 

[jpeyton]

128k L2? That sucks! That's worse than a Athlon XP (those have 256-512k L2).

 

[cessna152]

Double post

 

[unclebud]

i think the price is posted in the link

 

[Childs]

The title to the OPs link says A64, but the description on the page says AXP. They probably updated the CPU and the info hasn't been updated yet.

 

[hansmuff]

That doesn't look like an Athlon64 to me.

First off, it doesn't have SSE and SSE2, which all Athlon64's have.
Second, the "HTT" speed of 200MHz is way too low. Even on the slower (in terms of HyperTransport) NForce3-150 chipset, the HTT runs at 600MHz. 800 is common, 1000 MHz available on newer chipsets.

Sorry to bust your bubble but I do not believe at all this is an Athlon64.

Try installing a x86-64 (64bit) linux distro on it, see what happens. I don't have high hopes there.

When you go into the "My Computer" properties in Windows, what does that say about the CPU?
On an Athlon64, it'll read "AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor".

 

[chibimike]

Something doesn't add up.
The cache values from cpuid don't match any mobile athlons I know of, granted I'm certainly no expert.

mike

 

[charloscarlies]

First off, it doesn't have SSE and SSE2, which all Athlon64's have.
Second, the "HTT" speed of 200MHz is way too low. Even on the slower (in terms of HyperTransport) NForce3-150 chipset, the HTT runs at 600MHz. 800 is common, 1000 MHz available on newer chipsets.

Umm....a HTT speed of 200 is normal. It's HTT x LDT multiplier....which is commonly 3 or 4...hence the 600/800 mhz.

The clock speed would be correct for a mobile A64 2800...but something still doesn't seem right.

 

[chibimike]

It looks like it is the new A64-like Athlon XP-M (see below).
It also looks like CPU-ID isn't updated to know it.
The good news is it appears to be socket 754, so you could at a later date possibly switch the CPU to an A64.


mike


From:
AMD forum

Well, basically there are two processors that are both named 'Athlon XP-M 3000+':

The first version is a 'normal' 72W DTR mobile Athlon XP-M, just like the AXP-M 2800+ but with a slightly higher clockspeed(2.2GHz) - it uses the Barton-core(model 10) with 512KB L2-cache.

The second version is currently ONLY available on Compaq/HP Notebooks(to my knowledge).
It uses the Athlon 64-based 'Dublin'-core with 256KB L2-cache.
Architecturally, it's very similar to a mobile Athlon 64, except for the smaller cache, low clockspeed and the fact that it DOES NOT support AMD64(that's why it's called an 'Athlon XP-M').
This 'Dublin' AXP-M 3000+ uses the same Socket 754 platform as the mobile Athlon 64's, so it could easily be replaced with such a part at a later time.

Also, unlike it's 'Barton'-counterpart, the 'Dublin' AXP-M 3000+ has a max power-consumption of only 62W(vs. 72W for the AXP-M 3000+ Barton).

 

[DestruyaUR]

It could be a Sempron, but then it should be L1 Data/Code of 64k apiece with an L2 of 256k.

It isn't an Applebred either - those have 64k of L2.

 

[dmw16]

Try installing the beta of windows xp 64bit and find out for sure

 

[SendTrash]

what is the weight on this thing? It looks really tempting to buy... DVD burner, free carrying case, 15in, 512MB, sub $1000 price

 

[MDE]

Like chibimike said, these are "neutered" Athlon 64s that are 32-bit only.

 

[Xenon14]

Originally posted by: SendTrash
what is the weight on this thing? It looks really tempting to buy... DVD burner, free carrying case, 15in, 512MB, sub $1000 price

It's about ~7lbs on my scale. The only other downside is it's a 15" screen with XGA (1024 x 768 max resolution)

 

[jpeyton]

Get on Newegg and buy a DTR Athlon 64 quick! Replace that beyotch!

 

[Xenon14]

Originally posted by: hansmuff
That doesn't look like an Athlon64 to me.

First off, it doesn't have SSE and SSE2, which all Athlon64's have.
Second, the "HTT" speed of 200MHz is way too low. Even on the slower (in terms of HyperTransport) NForce3-150 chipset, the HTT runs at 600MHz. 800 is common, 1000 MHz available on newer chipsets.

Sorry to bust your bubble but I do not believe at all this is an Athlon64.

Try installing a x86-64 (64bit) linux distro on it, see what happens. I don't have high hopes there.

When you go into the "My Computer" properties in Windows, what does that say about the CPU?
On an Athlon64, it'll read "AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor".

My mistake. I forgot to post more concise CPUid results. It does Recognize MMX+, 3DNOW+, SSE, and SSE2.

Specifications list it as : Family F, Model C.

 

[Chunkee]

so is it a a64 or not?

 

[Xenon14]

Originally posted by: Chunkee
so is it a a64 or not?

From the looks of it, as 'Vegetation' stated in another thread:

It's a 1.6GHz A64 with 64 bit disabled and instead of 1MB cache, it has 128k for the 2800+ and 256k for the 3000+ XP-M.

 

[HFC]

The product information sheet at Averatec shows the video chip is K8N800 so the chip should be K8 based (Athlon 64) and not K7 (Barton).

 

[user1234]

let's not forget that this is no thinkpad, and averatec is no ibm. Their previous models usually got average reviews, and were usually slower and had shorter battery life than comparable models, as well as a not so comfortable keyboard, very noisy fan/hardisk, and a case which got quite warm. The only redeeming qualities were the low price and attractive case, so if that's enough for you, then go ahead and buy it. Face it peoples, when you're trying to cut down costs and use cheap low quality components, that is usually the result. And this is just from initial impression reviews, as far as long term reliability..... don't make me laugh, you can imagine what's gonna happen...

 

[Xenon14]

Originally posted by: user1234
let's not forget that this is no thinkpad, and averatec is no ibm. Their previous models usually got average reviews, and were usually slower and had shorter battery life than comparable models, as well as a not so comfortable keyboard, very noisy fan/hardisk, and a case which got quite warm. The only redeeming qualities were the low price and attractive case, so if that's enough for you, then go ahead and buy it. Face it peoples, when you're trying to cut down costs and use cheap low quality components, that is usually the result. And this is just from initial impression reviews, as far as long term reliability..... don't make me laugh, you can imagine what's gonna happen...

Although I haven't owned this particular 5400 for more than a day, I can tell you that it's fan/hardisk noise is very quiet (much quieter than teh 12" averatec model that was all over hotdeals past few weeks and that my friend got last week).

I checked the reviews and a lot of people complained about things like inadequet memory size for video (mine was defaulted to 16mb shared, I upped it manually to 64mb - or the fact that the screen is too bright).

An Athlon is an Athlon no matter how you slice it, regardless of what laptop it's in. Plus let's face it, even if Dell uses more 'premium' componants like Ram - you're also paying for the name, not just the features. Not to mention, this Avaratec came with a warranty as well... so it offsets potential problems.

I'm not here to defend Avaratec, but I do contend that they offer one hell of a computer for low costs - Dell's with similar setups are at least $500 more.

 

[Cheapest]

So... Is it boil down to piece of cramp? No way I am going to buy cramp!!