Athlon 3200+ = possibly the last athlon xp

[touchmyichi]

Game PC recently posted their atlhon 3200+ review. The chip runs at a dissapointing 2.2 ghz. The 400 fsb does give it a decent preformance increase though. The real issue here is that there is a good chance this is going to be the last athlon xp ever made. The K7 line has done a lot of things since its release in 1999. I think this might be a little too early of a death. The athon 64 for desktops is not going to be available until this fall. AMD should maybe revise the barton core in order to give us OC'ers something to buy. What do you guys think?

 

[pspada]

That appears to be pretty much the case. I think the next desktop chip from AMD is likely to be the Athlon 64, though we may see one or two more XP's if AMD can push the multiplier up a bit.

 

[screw3d]

I don't think that coz it runs at 2.2GHz it is a disappointed. The fact that AMD could let it run at 2.2Ghz and rate it at 3200+ to compete with Intel's 3.xGHz is quite an achievement imho.

 

[Killrose]

I hope if it is the last of the XP's, that whatever they replace it with will work with my 8RDA.

 

[Duvie]

While we wouldn't go so far as to say the Athlon XP 3200+ is superior to the latest Intel Pentium 4 processors, as Intel's chip still bests the XP 3200+ in a convincing amount of benchmarks, we have no doubt that the new Athlon XP 3200+ will lead in the same are which AMD has always led, price to performance. Paired up with nVidia's nForce2 Ultra 400 chipset and a couple good sticks of DDR-400 memory, the Athlon XP 3200+ can make for an extremely powerful game rig with a price tag that's a tad easier to swallow compared to Intel.

This about sums it up!!! I think maybe this one should have been called a 3000+....

 

[EdipisReks]

the quip gamepc made about the pricing is funny, since the 3200+ is $40 more expensive than the 3.0C.

 

[bgeh]

i agree. this chip has been very dissapointing. but we had seen the benchies by xbitlabs earlier
imo, it is quite easy to understand why AMD didn't go higher in MHz
even though we have people getting 2.5GHz(i also got that), but to make it on a larger scale will be almost impossible
their process is hitting its limits and it would be difficult to mass produce 2.4GHz chips
and if AMD continued with it, they would have to bundle high-end coolers instead of the normal aluminium ones
that would cost them

 

[Wigwam]

i note what you say about costs to amd but to me it seems a bit silly for the chipset manufacturers to have gone to the effort to ensure stable boards that run at 200mhz only for amd to release on official chip to run on this fsb and then jack it in.
hopefully nvidia, asus et al know something we dont

i certainly hope so otherwise i'm somewhat disappointed to build a system with this expensive m/b only to have some upgrade headroom and find there is none.

 

[bgeh]

Originally posted by: Wigwam
i note what you say about costs to amd but to me it seems a bit silly for the chipset manufacturers to have gone to the effort to ensure stable boards that run at 200mhz only for amd to release on official chip to run on this fsb and then jack it in.
hopefully nvidia, asus et al know something we dont

i certainly hope so otherwise i'm somewhat disappointed to build a system with this expensive m/b only to have some upgrade headroom and find there is none.

i agree. maybe amd will make a Barton Rev B.

 

[pspada]

That's why I'm still using my KT400 based AN19E. Much as I want the latest NForce2 m/b, I don't want to blow the money to find that the 3200+ is the last chip I can put in it. But there is no doubt, the Athlon 64 will require a different socket, and won't be backward compatible with Athlon XP m/bs. Then again, it's also 6 months or so out before we see one. Can anyone say 3500+?

 

[bgeh]

imo, it is necessary to change. the K7 platform is getting old
i hope AMD will support socket 900 and 745 like they did with socket a