More confusion from AMD, can you handle it?

[stevejst]

Take at easy, sorry to offend your sorry computer, get something better and you won't be that much nervous.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: stevejst
Take at easy, sorry to offend your sorry computer, get something better and you won't be that much nervous.

Take at easy? That much nervous? Go to school.

 

[Megatomic]

Jeff7181, stop feeding the trolls. They stop posting when they get bored with talking to themselves.

 

[stevejst]

Jeff is the troll, just take a look at his number of posts.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Megatomic
Jeff7181, stop feeding the trolls. They stop posting when they get bored with talking to themselves.

The problem is the trolls post inaccurate and unfounded "information" and try to pass it off as the absolute truth. Look at the origional post... a link to the Inquirer. There's a great source of "facts." And look at the title of the thread... confusion? How low is your IQ if you can't understand the difference between three models?

 

[sellmen]

Originally posted by: stevejst

Performance will be lower, but you have no idea how much, seeing as how they are no benchmarks. If performance is comparible to a $640 3.2ghz P4, they will be a bargain at $350.

It won't be comparable to 3.2C, I can take a bet on that one with you. I suspect that the full fledged FX-51 won't be able to beat HT 3.2.

Performance will be lower, but you have no idea how much, seeing as how they are no benchmarks. If performance is comparible to a $640 3.2ghz P4, they will be a bargain at $350.

The Tbred line is still viable, the performance of a Barton is only 2-5% more per clock, depending on the application. If you are overclocking, a $65 1700+ @ 2.3/2.4ghz is one of the better options you have.

Overclocking 1700 to 2.3-2.4 is a gamble not reality, what exactly 1 out of 3? Beside to do that you need $30 heatsink+fan+shipping, at least. Stability is another issue as well.
Even if you can do that 2.4 GHz XP 1700 is inferior to 3.0 GHz Pentiu, shortly $170 2.4C Pentium. And everyone will do that without additional cooling.

Unless you have benchmarks to back up your statements, you don't really have much of an argument. We'll see in a month.

Overclocking a 1700+ to 2.3/2.4 is just as likely as overclocking a 2.4C to 3GHZ. Overclocking is never a given. A 2.4ghz Athlon XP will be very comparible to a 3ghz P4C, at a significantly cheaper cost.

 

[stevejst]

Overclocking a 1700+ to 2.3/2.4 is just as likely as overclocking a 2.4C to 3GHZ. Overclocking is never a given. A 2.4ghz Athlon XP will be very comparible to a 3ghz P4C, at a significantly cheaper cost.

No it is not. Overclocking XP 1700 to 2.3-2.4 GHz is unlikely. Overclocking 2.4C to 3.0 GHz is to be expected on every retail 2.4C. That according to many.

You are also comparing overclocked processor to nonoverclocked one. You can overclock 3.0C too. Beside 2.4 GHz XP 1700 is not equal to 3.0C GHz, even without overclocking. For many reasons, stability the first to start.

Benchmarks?
I said already and you can verify that here on a rather extensive set of benchmarks that Barton 3200+ is inferior to 2.6GHz Pentium C. Add another 200 MHz to Barton and you still do no match Pentium 3.0C. Is that so hard to calculate? Needless to say 2.4 GHz (unlikely) XP 1700 is not a match for 2.4 GHz Barton, should that be clear?

I am sure that every one of you that runs Barton at 2.2 GHz has, with disappointment, concluded that you cannot compete with Pentium 2.6C. It is more like a little behind 2.8B. Else you are uninformed.
I had three Bartons, on NF7-S, Chaintech Apogee, and Asus A7N8X Deluxe, all top notch N-Force 2 motherboards. Few days ago I sold Asus PC. I also have two Pentium 2.4Cs. I am able to compare and I know what the relations are. I have B XP 1700 in my AT7 computer and though this is 1.6V I think I could see what it is capable as well. I made two more PCs with XP 1700 B and one with XP 1800 B and sold them some time ago.

What else you want? For me to buy that special excalibur stepping XP 1700 and get it to 2.4 GHz and bench it intesively? That is next to impossible because it is a dreamland except for watercooling and excessive voltage increases.

 

[sellmen]

Originally posted by: stevejst

Overclocking a 1700+ to 2.3/2.4 is just as likely as overclocking a 2.4C to 3GHZ. Overclocking is never a given. A 2.4ghz Athlon XP will be very comparible to a 3ghz P4C, at a significantly cheaper cost.

No it is not. Overclocking XP 1700 to 2.3-2.4 GHz is unlikely. Overclocking 2.4C to 3.0 GHz is to be expected on every retail 2.4C. That according to many.

You are also comparing overclocked processor to nonoverclocked one. You can overclock 3.0C too. Beside 2.4 GHz XP 1700 is not equal to 3.0C GHz, even without overclocking. For many reasons, stability the first to start.

Benchmarks?
I said already and you can verify that here on a rather extensive set of benchmarks that Barton 3200+ is inferior to 2.6GHz Pentium C. Add another 200 MHz to Barton and you still do no match Pentium 3.0C. Is that so hard to calculate? Needless to say 2.4 GHz (unlikely) XP 1700 is not a match for 2.4 GHz Barton, should that be clear?

I am sure that every one of you that runs Barton at 2.2 GHz has, with disappointment, concluded that you cannot compete with Pentium 2.6C. It is more like a little behind 2.8B. Else you are uninformed.
I had three Bartons, on NF7-S, Chaintech Apogee, and Asus A7N8X Deluxe, all top notch N-Force 2 motherboards. Few days ago I sold Asus PC. I also have two Pentium 2.4Cs. I am able to compare and I know what the relations are. I have B XP 1700 in my AT7 computer and though this is 1.6V I think I could see what it is capable as well. I made two more PCs with XP 1700 B and one with XP 1800 B and sold them some time ago.

What else you want? For me to buy that special excalibur stepping XP 1700 and get it to 2.4 GHz and bench it intesively? That is next to impossible because it is a dreamland except for watercooling and excessive voltage increases.

When I said "you don't have benchmarks", I was referring to your statement that the new Athlon 64 won't be able to compete with the P4 3.2ghz. That is entirely speculation; in fact, it disagrees with the Opteron 2ghz benchmarks linked above.

I find it odd that you start this thread complaining about the price of an AMD processor, then compare a 2.4C to a 2500+; there is a $80 difference between these two processors. If you put the 2500+/1700+ on an Nforce board, you get a "free" high quality sound card as well.

 

[stevejst]

Nevermind.

 

[sellmen]

Originally posted by: stevejst

When I said "you don't have benchmarks", I was referring to your statement that the new Athlon 64 won't be able to compete with the P4 3.2ghz. That is entirely speculation; in fact, it disagrees with the Opteron 2ghz benchmarks linked above.

Don't twist my words, I said "I suspect" so yes it is a speculation, I did not claim otherwise. I also offered a bet to you.

I find it odd that you start this thread complaining about the price of an AMD processor, then compare a 2.4C to a 2500+; there is a $80 difference between these two processors. If you put the 2500+/1700+ on an Nforce board, you get a "free" high quality sound card as well .

Sound card is included with the processor? The difference between Pentium 2.4 C and Barton XP 2500 is adequate.
Pentium 2.4C is more potent processor and includes adequate heatsink and fan. Barton 2500 is inferior processor and does not include quality heatsink and fan. That is:
$165-$170 Pentium 2.4C, complete retail.
$85 OEM Barton + $30 cooling solution (talking about overclocking) = $115

The difference of $55, completely adequate based on value. In the past month I bought two 2.4Cs and no Bartons, meaning in my view, Barton is a lesser value in this comparison.
Needless to say, Intel processors have significant resale value while AMD processors' resale value is pretty much close to nill.

People usually build systems to use them. If you go the Pentium 4 route, there is no Nforce2, therefore to get quality sound, you need a sound card. Add $40-60 for a quality sound card, and you get the real difference in cost between a 2500+ and a 2.4C system.

The stock heatsink fan with the 2500+ is more than adequate for overclocking the Barton to 2.1/2.2 ghz, which is what they will do at stock voltage. An Sk7/fan is needed only if pushing the chip to its max by increasing voltage.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: stevejst

If Athlon 64 comes out in one month and outperforms the P4, will you stop whining?

And if it doesn't, will you stop cheerleading it?

"If" is all there is. AMD has no performance, what is offered as a desktop chip is miserable when compared to HT Pentium, you all know that and drool for the real thing. I can see the benchmarks of AMD PCs posted here.

You can read thread upon thread about people changing boards, processors, cooling and what not to get that misery of Barton 2500 up to overclocked 2.3 GHz where it can somehow, with a stretch, be compared to Pentium 2.8C. Humorous.

Humorous indeed... this is funny to read, considering what you posted last week. Touché?

*for the lazy, the post is the following:

Originally posted by: stevejst
This thing.
Just got them for my office, I wish I can keep my old Pentium 3. Not only that this thing is so slow but here are the PCMark 2002 benchmarks with 512 MB ram and 2.4C processor:

CPU: 5765
Mem: 4418
HDD: 476 (!)

The proof you can make real bad PC with Pentium 2.4C.

My work rig is spec'ed like this and runs stock 2500+ speeds, but it ain't slow. And it doesn't always lead an easy life, either... it doesn't have dual 15000rpm hard drives and 1.5GB of Corsair just for show. :evil:

Anyway, it's rather obvious that this thread was a clumsy attempt at flamebaiting and FUD, so I'll let you get back to it

 

[bjc112]

As far as crippled Barton are concerned, yes, I am amazed that anybody would think that is a serious business venture but I am not amazed that AMD folks would. For the rationale has long gone from that company.

What do you think a Celeron is?

Granted, the Celeron TOTALLY sucks, it's the same " serious business venture"

 

[bjc112]

Even if you can do that 2.4 GHz XP 1700 is inferior to 3.0 GHz Pentiu, shortly $170 2.4C Pentium. And everyone will do that without additional cooling.

Stop making yourself look foolish...

My $40 CPU + 20 HSF combo =$60

@ 2.4ghz that puts a serious hurtin' on the 2.8c....

And $170 for a 2.4c? Ha, i'll save my $100... ***It's still the same gamble ***

 

[stevejst]

My $40 CPU + 20 HSF combo =$60

@ 2.4ghz that puts a serious hurtin' on the 2.8c....

I actually have read the specs of your system. Now that sounds as a performance PC.
You first need to run some serious stress test on that to see what exactly is stable on your Frankestein. Then bench it. You can find various benchmarks at futuremark.com web site. You will be shocked how low will your system get there, even with that XP 1700 "1400@2400" (you might want to check the default frequency of XP 1700, it seems you don't even know what that is).

To the rest of the AMD crowd ... well, just a good laugh.

 

[mechBgon]

Or he could run some of these benchmarks: Office performance

Guess what? On Monday, you get to go back to work and use your nice new Dell Optiplex SX270 again! And I get to go back and use my nice 2500+.

:evil:

Seriously, if you peel that 5400rpm drive out of the Dell and put a respectable 7200rpm drive in it, I won't tell on you...

 

[stevejst]

Guess what? On Monday, you get to go back to work and use your nice new Dell Optiplex SX270 again!

11,000+ posts? You are the main AMD fanatic around here? Well, at least you know how to use smilies.
Anyway, I don't have Optiplex SX270 in my office yet, still on Pentium 3 933. Imagine I did not even notice it is so slow on writing word documents. Maybe I'll overclock it.

 

[bjc112]

actually have read the specs of your system. Now that sounds as a performance PC.
You first need to run some serious stress test on that to see what exactly is stable on your Frankestein. Then bench it. You can find various benchmarks at futuremark.com web site. You will be shocked how low will your system get there, even with that XP 1700 "1400@2400" (you might want to check the default frequency of XP 1700, it seems you don't even know what that is).




You my friend are a joke...

Stress test? The system is 100% stable after 12 hours of Prime 95 testing, would the be considered stable? How about 24 hour loops of 3dmark 2k1? Sandra burn in overnight? I guess not... Temps under 50C..

Futuremark? Ha, i trust Sandra over Futuremark...

I don't know what the defualt frequency of a 1700+ is? What would that be? im sorry it wasn't 1400 mhz its 1470... Damn it , i have to edit my rig immediately...

May-b the genius inside of you will come out and tell me...

 

[bjc112]

Steve get off your high horse...

3000mhz... @ only 7500..

Hell, for 600mhz less and HELL of a lot cheaper my performance is god damn close to your godly P4...

Search and Comapre...

I'm WAY down at the bottom man!

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: bjc112

As far as crippled Barton are concerned, yes, I am amazed that anybody would think that is a serious business venture but I am not amazed that AMD folks would. For the rationale has long gone from that company.

What do you think a Celeron is?

Granted, the Celeron TOTALLY sucks, it's the same " serious business venture"

Where'd ya go Steve?

And could you also answer my question about the Celeron being a chopped down version of the Pentium....?

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: stevejst

Guess what? On Monday, you get to go back to work and use your nice new Dell Optiplex SX270 again!

11,000+ posts? You are the main AMD fanatic around here? Well, at least you know how to use smilies.
Anyway, I don't have Optiplex SX270 in my office yet, still on Pentium 3 933. Imagine I did not even notice it is so slow on writing word documents. Maybe I'll overclock it.

Most of my posts weren't accumulated debating with fanboys, actually... they were accumulated by helping people troubleshoot their systems, whether Intel or AMD. I encourage you to share your talents in the same way. We could use more experienced Intel troubleshooters helping out around here.

 

[pspada]

Yea, mechbgon may have joined in 1999, but he made all those posts just last month......

 

[Jeff7181]

im sorry it wasn't 1400 mhz its 1470

If you wanted to be anal about it... it's 1466.6666666666666666666666666666666 ... you get the idea =)

 

[render]

Originally posted by: mechBgon

Originally posted by: stevejst

Guess what? On Monday, you get to go back to work and use your nice new Dell Optiplex SX270 again!

11,000+ posts? You are the main AMD fanatic around here? Well, at least you know how to use smilies.
Anyway, I don't have Optiplex SX270 in my office yet, still on Pentium 3 933. Imagine I did not even notice it is so slow on writing word documents. Maybe I'll overclock it.

Most of my posts weren't accumulated debating with fanboys, actually... they were accumulated by helping people troubleshoot their systems, whether Intel or AMD. I encourage you to share your talents in the same way. We could use more experienced Intel troubleshooters helping out around here.

mechBgon is very helpful. no doubt about it.

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

im sorry it wasn't 1400 mhz its 1470

If you wanted to be anal about it... it's 1466.6666666666666666666666666666666 ... you get the idea =)

Steve ran away from this one... No point now

 

[uunitdwestnd]

Hey Steve Don't have a heart attack on me because an underdog is doing pretty damn well all things considered. Do You read Maximum PC, well if u don't I do. You may wonder why, so I will tell you. In this month's magazine there is are two machines they hand built. One was their dream machine 2003 and one was there lean machine 2003.

The dream machine had an overclocked p4 3.2c running at 3.53 ghz, 221mhz fsb quad pumped to 884 mhz fsb. Cooler master tac-t01* case. Pc Power & cooling turbo cool 510 watt deluxe power supply. abit ic7-g motherboard. voodoo liquid cooling. two sticks corsair micro mxs4000(cl2) memory. nvidia geforce fx 5900 ultra video card at 505 mhz core and 480 mhz memory speeds. Soundblaster audigy 2 gamer. plextor premium 52/32/52 cdrw drive. pioneer dvr-ao6 dvd burner.
atech pro-9 multiple flash media card reader. two sata 36 gb wd raptor 10,000 r.p.m harddrives. two ata 250gb wd special edition caviar 7200 r.p.m harddrives. sony f250 crt monitor. sharp ll-t2020b lcd monitor. logitech z-680 5.1 speakers. keytronic life time keyboard. logitech mx700 mouse. premium wires. windows xp pro.

TOTAL COST @%#$ING 10,985 US DOLLARS or 579 Sweaty, Ballbusting hours of ME WORKING.

The Lean Machine was limited to 1,000 dollars or 53 Sweaty Ballbusting hours of ME WORKING. Inside this perfectly functional and adequately performing gaming machine they added an athlon xp, and yes steve none other than your verbal punching bag a Barton cored 2500 + athlon xp overclocked to 2.145 ghz from 1.833 ghz with a 195 mhz fsb. Fic au13 nforce 2 motherboard. 2 sticks of crucial pc 2700 ddr ram(cl 2.5) overclocked to . Ati Radeon 9600 pro overclocked to 495 mhz core and 680 mhz memory speeds. Ati tv wonder ve tv tuner. One 120 gb wd1200jb 7200 r.p.m hard drive w/ 8mb cache. pacific digital dvd-r/cdrw dual format dvd and cd burner. Antec lanboy case with 330 watt true blue power supply. windows xp home. no monitors stated. but assuming this someone usually has one who is gonna piece together a lightly priced well performing pc.

AGAIN just to recap thats TOTAL COST 1,000 US Dollars 53 hours of me working, a good used car, a few hookers if u choose, a few good parties again if u choose, a few months rent maybe even a year's worth.


Point being all in all in the end the INTEL DREAM MACHINE STILL LOST IN A BENCHMARK. Now how could this be, not a pentium against the not even top of the line athlon xp AMD MADE CHIP out at only 12 percent of the total cost. Now for a system to face that kind of disadvantage in performance or maybe even advantage because of reasonably sane price. Is just crazy. The intel guys should get back to work because the athlon is running almost 1400 mhz slower and is only around 20-30 percent slower than the INTEL DREAM MACHINE. If u think AMD is about to pull a humpty dumpty, you need to hit the gym and at least try to strengthen some thing in your body because obviously your brain has slowly developed in these troubled times we live in where the next meal could be the last and that extra 9,985 US DOLLARS can come in real handy to alot of people, maybe not you but remember the upper class monetarliy makes up only 4 percent of the polpulation. So I guess im in the other 96 percent silly me. What is wrong with a company that can relate to its consumers. And when the amd athlon 64 comes out just remember when intel's prices soar through the roof you can still buy an athlon xp barton core cheaper than an intel celeron, pentium 3's, and most pentium 4's. Now a chip that can provide performance and price like that, good luck INTEL.

Everyone here is that link to the athlon 64 performance reviews on xbitlabs.com. It May not be the second coming but it may be AMD 's Salvation. GO RED SOX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Athlon 64 Performance Review Provided Through Anand Lil Shimpi's Performance article on the athlon 64


My Rig 2800+ with 9500 pro stock speeds