Is it worth going from 1700+@2.3GHz to Mobile 2x00@?GHz?

[screw3d]

I have a XP1700 doing 2.3GHz(200x11.5)@1.7v.

Is it really worth going for a Mobile XP? It would be sweet if it can run cooler as well.

 

[kyparrish]

i'd say no...i moved from a 2100 that did 11x200 to a mobile 2400 that does 11.5x200, and the difference isn't really worth it, imho

I haven't seen any applications really take use of the extra L2 cache

your 2.3 GHz @ 1.7v is a great overclock. That should tide you over until you decide to completely upgrade your system, and move, i would assume, to an A64 system

 

[BlueWeasel]

Personally, I'd probably hold off on upgrading, as you might be able to hit 2.4ghz with a mobile. I doubt you'd be able to tell much of a difference between a T-bred running at 2.3ghz compared to a Barton running at 2.4ghz. Sure, the Barton's 512k of cache is nice, but again, I don't think you'd see much of a difference in pure speed.

Another think to look at is the FSB speed. Everyone knows that the real performance gain comes from increased FSB, and you're already sitting at 200.

You might be able to pick up a used Barton off the FS/FT forum that does 210, 215, or even 220 FSB. Then again, you could probably sell that XP1700 and almost pay for the 2400+ mobile.

 

[SickBeast]

you would probably see a 15% speed increase across the board, with your gaming scores going up even more than that cuz of the added cache. go for it if you can get decent $$$ for your 1700+.

 

[rogue1979]

I'd have to disagree with a 15% increase across the board. I have both a t-bred and a Barton both running in the 2200-2300MHz range. The difference across the board is more like 3% at the same clock speed. While you could find a benchmark that benefits more from the Bartons extra L2 cache, there are also a few that don't show anything. 3Dmark shows the same 3% increase, gaming doesn't show a big increase. My advice to anyone out there is to stick with the t-bred. Until the recent mobile versions of the Barton, the average overclock was 2200MHz at best. So a 2300MHz t-bred is gonna be about 1-2% faster than a 2200MHz Barton because of the 5% increase in clock speed.

 

[suklee]

nah, I say save your $ dude... its not going to be a very noticeable difference.

Maybe a new hard drive for more storage (if you need it)?

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: rogue1979
I'd have to disagree with a 15% increase across the board. I have both a t-bred and a Barton both running in the 2200-2300MHz range. The difference across the board is more like 3% at the same clock speed. While you could find a benchmark that benefits more from the Bartons extra L2 cache, there are also a few that don't show anything. 3Dmark shows the same 3% increase, gaming doesn't show a big increase. My advice to anyone out there is to stick with the t-bred. Until the recent mobile versions of the Barton, the average overclock was 2200MHz at best. So a 2300MHz t-bred is gonna be about 1-2% faster than a 2200MHz Barton because of the 5% increase in clock speed.

I got the 15% figure because he is currently running at 2300mhz, and could potentially be running at 2600mhz with the additional 256kb of cache. You're right, as identical clock speeds, the barton is only marginally faster than the tbred. Seriously look at the gaming benches tho, Quake3 is a good example. The cache makes a substantial difference in those cases.

 

[screw3d]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: rogue1979
I'd have to disagree with a 15% increase across the board. I have both a t-bred and a Barton both running in the 2200-2300MHz range. The difference across the board is more like 3% at the same clock speed. While you could find a benchmark that benefits more from the Bartons extra L2 cache, there are also a few that don't show anything. 3Dmark shows the same 3% increase, gaming doesn't show a big increase. My advice to anyone out there is to stick with the t-bred. Until the recent mobile versions of the Barton, the average overclock was 2200MHz at best. So a 2300MHz t-bred is gonna be about 1-2% faster than a 2200MHz Barton because of the 5% increase in clock speed.

I got the 15% figure because he is currently running at 2300mhz, and could potentially be running at 2600mhz with the additional 256kb of cache. You're right, as identical clock speeds, the barton is only marginally faster than the tbred. Seriously look at the gaming benches tho, Quake3 is a good example. The cache makes a substantial difference in those cases.

My current XP1700 could go at least 2.4GHz prime stable. I guess the real selling point of the Mobile XP is potential lower temps since it's default VCore is so low. Lower = better since I'm trying to run my PC as quiet as possible.

 

[Killrose]

I'm in the same boat. I want that extra performance, but going from a nice overclocked T-bred to a Barton clock-for-clock does not really offer much. HardOCP did a nice article comparing the T-bred and Barton set-up with the same multi and FSB for a direct comparrison.



gamming comparo's

quite enlightening.