BARTON's next week?

[Killrose]

Is AMD going to launch BARTON around Feb. 10th?

 

[mamisano]

Yes, 2500+, 2800+ and 3000+ will be released next week. If you check pricewatch, all the other processors are coming down in price in anticipation of the release.

 

[Killrose]

I wonder if the performance is going to excite us or FX us.

 

[BD231]

Originally posted by: Killrose
I wonder if the performance is going to excite us or FX us.

, it'll help in programs that can put it to use buddy, the fact that AMD can lower the clock yet get the performance of a higher end T-Bred should tell you something......

 

[ChampionAtTufshop]

it sounds like it will

anyways, i read here somewhere that evan said the extra cache indeed DOES help....but hte one benchy i saw a few days ago didnt show much gain....but it did show a 20% oc at default voltage....cant wait to see whats the inside scoop haha

 

[RU482]

Originally posted by: Killrose
I wonder if the performance is going to excite us or FX us.

Hey, FX you man

 

[Wingznut]

Originally posted by: BD231
the fact that AMD can lower the clock yet get the performance of a higher end T-Bred should tell you something......

True... But only in applications that take advantage of the larger cache. For others which rely more on cpu speed, a Barton will actually be slower than a Tbred of the same rating.

 

[Killrose]

Originally posted by: redly1

Originally posted by: Killrose
I wonder if the performance is going to excite us or FX us.

Hey, FX you man

I guess you could take that a couple different way's now that I look at it. But I was refering to the way the GeForce FX kinda let me down after all the hype. BARTON has been hyped-up quite a bit too, and I'm hopeing for performance, and not a let down.

 

[tbates757]

Originally posted by: Killrose
I wonder if the performance is going to excite us or FX us.

Haha! Nvidia is going to coin a new phrase with their FX, "damnit this *new product* will suck, its an FX"

 

[shortcircuits]

If the Athlon XP 3000+ (Barton core) really comes out at 2166 MHz, I think it is hardly able to compete with the Pentium 4 3,06 GHz. This probably is yet AMD's goal, launching a product that is a good alternative for Intel's fastest Pentium 4. The difference in clock speed is a whopping 900 MHz. Even the experienced customer will see that the rating system doesn't make any sense nowadays. Yes, the cache is doubled to 512 KB; however the clock speed has decreased to oldskool levels. We have to pay a huge amount of money for the larger cache size.

If you opt for the best balance between price, performance and sounding clock speed as well, the Pentium 4 (any choice from 2,40 to 2,80 GHz) is the way to go, with the best AMD choice still the Athlon XP 2400+.

I think that if AMD will stay in the race, they have to raise the clock speed to at least 2,40 GHz.

 

[OatMan]

Help my upgrade decision.
I'm only an ameter enthusiast, so reading about T-bred Bs, Bartons, and Hammers I'm a bit confused.

My dilema is that I just got a $50 1700+ T-bred B.
I think my MB is not cutting it in the OC areana. Peeps with the same stepping and weeka are getting over 2GHz consistantly. Mine poops out at 2100+ speed (1733). This is at default FSB - anyway my Abit KG7 only supports up to 2100+ cpu's so I figure that it is more likely my MB rather than bad cpu.

Sooo I was thinkin' that a new Epox 8RDA+ would be anice B-day present.

But now I'm thinking it would be nice to make sure that any MB is Barton compatable and what about Hammer???

NO board I buy in the near future will be Hammer compatable, so do I wait? my 1700+@1671 is still better than the xp1800+ it replaced. But then i get little benifit of the potential of this cpu, and I'm wasting my HyperX PC3500 RAM ta boot!

What's a boy ta do???

I'm thinking if the 8RDA+ MB is Barton Kosher, then I should just get that and get the best Barton OCer cheap when the Hammers come out, and wait for the Hammer and its chipsets to mature. How do I varify Barton Compatibility???

All advice would be appreciated, and yes I know i can't spell.

 

[Killrose]

I think HAMMER uses a totally different socket than the current XP/BARTON will use. So forget about Hammer if that's true. I would get the 8RDA/+ and get the most from that 1700+, I'm sure BARTON is going to run near the $200 range for the lowest clocked offering.

 

[ChampionAtTufshop]

Originally posted by: Killrose
I think HAMMER uses a totally different socket than the current XP/BARTON will use. So forget about Hammer if that's true. I would get the 8RDA/+ and get the most from that 1700+, I'm sure BARTON is going to run near the $200 range for the lowest clocked offering.

yteah
clawhammer~754 pins....socket 754??
sledgehammer~900something pins.....socket 900something lol

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: Wingznut

Originally posted by: BD231
the fact that AMD can lower the clock yet get the performance of a higher end T-Bred should tell you something......

True... But only in applications that take advantage of the larger cache. For others which rely more on cpu speed, a Barton will actually be slower than a Tbred of the same rating.

For me it matters how high they can overclock, if they can go just as high or close to the Tbred B's, then Barton it is for me... I've been holding out on getting a new CPU to see what Barton could offer... woohoo!!!