Athlon XP Mobile CPU 2000+ or 2400+

[Froid64]

Howdy,

I am building an inexpensive AMD system and want to use an Athlon Mobile processor to get the best bang for my buck. Here is my current delima: I can purchase a used, in good shape, XP-M 2000+ processor for about $50 or spend $75 for a new 2400+ (45w) processor. Is it worth the money to go for the 2400+ ? This PC will be for my 9 year old. It will be used for homework & some games, but I don't foresee any major gaming happening.

Thanks for your opinion in advance.

Other components for the system are:
AOPEN AK79D-400 VN (Nforce2 Ultra 400)
Kingston Hypermax PC4000 512MB
ATI Radeon 9200 128MB Video
WD 200GB 8MB Cache HD
processor ?

 

[Sonic587]

I'd probably go for the XP-M 2000+. It's a good match for that system. You don't need to pump the extra CPU power into a system that has a 9200.

Oh, and 2 questions:

1.) Why such a big HDD and PC4000 RAM? IMO, that's overkill for a homework system.

2.) Why not spring for a retail processor? With kids, you always want a warranty.

 

[Froid64]

Sonic,

I agree the HD and memory are overkill for a homework system. I build several systems a year for various reasons and had these parts available so it was cheap to use them. The same is true for the video card. If the demands on the system start getting heavier, I will swap in my old ATI 128MB 9500 Pro video card and get myself a newer one for my rig. I will probably also keep my eye out for another stick of the Kingston memory to eventually double the memory and get the dual channel functioning. I confess, I do want to do some overclocking and see what kind of performance I can get out of the mobile chip. I realize I am about 12 months behind what is really cool.

Another question: I am not sure if the 2000+ is 35W or 40W. I do know that for $75, I can get either a 2200+ 35W or a 2400+ 45W. Is the 35W processor more desireable in a system like I am describing?

Thanks again.

 

[TStep]

Be careful on the XP-M 2000+. I did alot of research on the XP-Ms as of late, and found that:

- a 2000 may be a TBred A not TBred B or Barton, so no real massive overclocking potential there
- some may not be Socket A

Read here and use this tool.

 

[AkumaX]

i'd go w/ the 2200 or 2400, since they can come in barton varieties (the extra 256kb of cache (256kb => 512kb) makes a difference in real world performance)

 

[kyparrish]

Originally posted by: AkumaX
i'd go w/ the 2200 or 2400, since they can come in barton varieties (the extra 256kb of cache (256kb => 512kb) makes a difference in real world performance)

exactly

 

[Pohemi]

If you are considering going for the mobile 2400+ chip, I would spend the extra $10 to get the 35W chip and NOT the 45W one. At stock speeds, the chip will run cooler and quieter(obviously), and you always have the option to OC it better than the 45W version.

 

[proxopspete]

Originally posted by: TStep
Be careful on the XP-M 2000+. I did alot of research on the XP-Ms as of late, and found that:

- a 2000 may be a TBred A not TBred B or Barton, so no real massive overclocking potential there
- some may not be Socket A

Read here and use this tool.

I know it's a late reply...
But! I own the 2000+ Mobile and yes, it's A rev (not Barton core) but I can still run it quite high @ 2.15 GHz (see sig!).

 

[fibes]

I would go with the XP-M 2000+ also. You can always oc it if you have the right motherboard. I just built a system for a friend with a 2000+ Tbred (non-Barton) and I had it oc'ed over 1.9GHz with a stock heatsink.