Athlon XP 3000+ Barton Reviews

[NFS4]

http://www.amdmb.com/article-display.php?ArticleID=224

http://www.amdworld.co.uk/bar3000.htm

http://www.xbitlabs.com/cpu/athlonxp-3000/

http://www.hothardware.com/hh_files/CCAM/amd_axp_3k+.shtml

http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=324

http://www.bit-tech.net/review/180/

http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=50000364

http://tech-report.com/reviews/2003q1/athlonxp-3000/index.x?pg=1

http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles/articles.hwz?cid=2&aid=628

 

[human2k]

cool, this must be first review in english! Off to read...........

 

[mechBgon]

Cool

 

[chizow]

!!!

Chiz

 

[pillage2001]

2.5Ghz?!?!?! :Q

 

[human2k]

geewiz, after reading the review, all i can say is, that 2.16GHZ cpu can really kick butt against a P4 3.06GHZ HT!


edit: in x-bit's review, the xp2800 tbred takes the cake over barton a couple times, very interesting.....

 

[chizow]

The important numbers there were the 2700+ T-bred B vs the 3000+ Barton, as they run at almost identical clockspeeds. Pretty impressive improvements in the benchmarks they actually compared the two, particularly in games. Might have to get me a 2500+ Barton :Q

Chiz

 

[pillage2001]

Originally posted by: chizow
The important numbers there were the 2700+ T-bred B vs the 3000+ Barton, as they run at almost identical clockspeeds. Pretty impressive improvements in the benchmarks they actually compared the two, particularly in games. Might have to get me a 2500+ Barton :Q

Chiz

I want your Xp2100.

 

[chizow]

If I get a Barton, you've got first dibs

Chiz

 

[pillage2001]

Originally posted by: chizow
If I get a Barton, you've got first dibs

Chiz

What are you waiting for? pre order one now. Seems like they were able to get the Xp3000+ to 2.5Ghz. Very impressive.

 

[Boogak]

In the Ace's Hardware review, under the UT 2003 Asbestos benchmark, the reviewer sez "However, the Athlon XP is beaten again by the 3.06 GHz Pentium 4, which has a very small edge thanks to Hyperthreading." Does that mean UT2003 supports Hyperthreading, and thus dual processors? Or is the reviewer just on crack??

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: Boogak
In the Ace's Hardware review, under the UT 2003 Asbestos benchmark, the reviewer sez "However, the Athlon XP is beaten again by the 3.06 GHz Pentium 4, which has a very small edge thanks to Hyperthreading." Does that mean UT2003 supports Hyperthreading, and thus dual processors? Or is the reviewer just on crack??

Yah Ace's game benches paint a somewhat different picture of the Barton in more recent games; Only 5-10% increase over a T-bred. As for UT2k3, I think that was covered in the 3.06 review here at AT. I don't think it natively supports HT, but its just very well written game code that HT benefits from. Not 100% sure on it though.

Not so sure I want a Barton now after all Not gonna pay 2x as much for a CPU for 10% increase and not knowing if it can OC to the same speed as my 2100+.

Chiz

 

[Sid59]

i read just some of the conclusions and doesn't look like it will scale that well. If what the reviewers say is true, then AMD just has enough scalability, some said 350 MHZ, to last until ClawHammer releases. I hope they meet that ClawHammer mark.

 

[Rand]

Originally posted by: Boogak
In the Ace's Hardware review, under the UT 2003 Asbestos benchmark, the reviewer sez "However, the Athlon XP is beaten again by the 3.06 GHz Pentium 4, which has a very small edge thanks to Hyperthreading." Does that mean UT2003 supports Hyperthreading, and thus dual processors? Or is the reviewer just on crack??

UT2003 does not support multithreading but that doesnt preclude seeing a minimal performance boost.
The OS can still allocate background threads to the second logical processor.
An application does not have to be specifically multithreaded to see a gain from SMP/Hyperthreading, the benefits are likely to be extremely minim,al without it but it's certainly possible to see some benefit.


This is the first time in quite awhile that a major processor release has come and gone, and neither THG nor AT were among the first 10 or so reviewers.

 

[Pocatello]

The more I know about the XP3000+ barton, the more I like the XP2100+ T-bred

 

[Shockwave]

Its fun to watch the race, but I dont cheer to much and never bet.

My XP2200 at stock speeds is more horsepower then I need in all reality. Hell, my 800 TBird was a great machine and did everything I needed it to do. I up'd to a 2200XP after cracking cores. Hell, price was right and couldnt even find anything under 1 ghz so why not?

And thus, I am MORE then happy with my 2200, and cant imagine ever really pushing the thing. So, I'll continue to just watch the race

 

[Duvie]

I find this remark rather interesting...take from t what you will but I have to sya I didn't see anything in these reviews that made me think the 3000+ barton was 8-17% faster then the p4...MOst test looked like a statistical dead heat if not leaning alittle toward the p4 or AMD based on what was the general lean to the type of applications being tested...

What I am disappointed by is the rather discontent by many that p4 scores so well in later more sse2 optimized programs...ie specviewperf7.0, photoshop 7.0, latest 3dmax, winstone 2003...what is Intel supposed to feel sorry that finally 2 years later the sse2 optimised code is starting to pay someof those 15-25% dividends....Get over it...older code is older code!!!

We have tested almost 20 different applications, but still I am not sure whether the 2.17 GHz Barton should carry the 3000+ rating. AMD marketing tells us that "The AMD Athlon XP processor 3000+ is the world's highest performing desktop PC processor". They prove this by showing that the Athlon is between 8 and 17% faster than the 3.06 GHz Pentium 4 in benchmark suites such as SYSmark 2001 Office Productivity, Business Winstone 2001 and SYSmark 2001 Internet Content Creation. But Sysmark 2001 contains old software such as Adobe Photoshop 5.5, Macromedia Dreamweaver 3.0, Netscape Navigator 4.73, and Macromedia Flash 5. I highly doubt that many Photoshop users are still using Photoshop 5.5 or that people are browsing the web with Netscape Navigator 4.73.

What this shows is that the Athlon outperforms the Pentium 4 with ease in unoptimized, slight older applications. Even our own quick testrun with a more recent benchmark suite such as Content Creation 2002 shows that the Athlon XP 3000+ outperforms the 3.06 Pentium 4 by 10% or more. So if you are using the applications in Content Creation 2002, and you won't upgrade your older software very soon, the Athlon XP 3000+ surely is the best CPU out there.

Edit: notice the big difference in specview7.0 test from acehardware and xbits....Who is the f'ing idiot or liar here??? I mean cmon....It is like they are reversed. This is why I don't trust half the review sites as being competent enough to review anything...

 

[ElFenix]

reading ace's

The Athlon was a very impressive seventh generation architecture, but it was launched with a six generation L2-cache system.

the athlon is a 6th generation part regardless of what AMD's marketing team decided to call it.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
reading ace's

The Athlon was a very impressive seventh generation architecture, but it was launched with a six generation L2-cache system.

the athlon is a 6th generation part regardless of what AMD's marketing team decided to call it.

It could be classical architecture for all I care, as long as its cheap (which it is), fast (which it is), and easily overclockable (which it is).

Chiz

 

[mechBgon]

I just finished inhaling Anand's review (ok, I skimmed!) and I have to say, it provided EXACTLY what I could not find in the other reviews... lower-end CPUs like my 1600+ and 1700+, alongside today's top-end desktop CPUs. Thank you Anand, for what must have been a darn lot of drudgery for you.

 

[Macro2]

I was reading one review. They said they could overclock the barton to 2.5 Ghz with no problem. 2.6 was a little flaky. Never the less, with that kind of headroom, Barton will likely get AMD to the clawhammer and beyond. AMD already has a barton 3200+ announced for spring early summer release.
2.5 ghz would put the barton at 3400-3500+ no?

 

[chizow]

Bleh, this page pretty much tells you what 256 more L2 will do for you.

Only significant benefits seem to be games (<10%) and office apps (as if those aren't fast enough already). I guess I won't be in any hurry to get a Barton, not unless they have significant OC'ing headroom at least. Even if a 2500+ were able to OC to 2200-2300mhz (what the 2100+ are doing), the 5% increase or so wouldn't justify spending 2x as much on it.

Chiz

 

[JavaMomma]

Originally posted by: chizow
Bleh, this page pretty much tells you what 256 more L2 will do for you.

Only significant benefits seem to be games (<10%) and office apps (as if those aren't fast enough already). I guess I won't be in any hurry to get a Barton, not unless they have significant OC'ing headroom at least. Even if a 2500+ were able to OC to 2200-2300mhz (what the 2100+ are doing), the 5% increase or so wouldn't justify spending 2x as much on it.

Chiz

Although twice the price of a 2100+
The price of the 2500+ barton is still nice
AXDA2400BOX AMD ATHLON XP 2400+ 256K 266FSB SOCKET A RETAIL BOX Yes $323
AXDA2500BOX AMD ATHLON XP 2500+ 512K 333FSB BARTON RETAIL BOX *3YR MFR. WARRANTY* $310
Prices are Canadian. From Ncix