***Official***BARTON watch thread - Official Launch AND REVIEWS

[DivideBYZero]

The 3000+ is the thick end of $600!!

See HERE



OFFICIAL LAUNCH of the the 3000+ HERE



Ananad

The overall performance is close enough to warrant the 3000+ rating but there's no question that it is a very close call between the two top performing CPUs.

Tom's

After running extensive tests on the Barton, we have come to the conclusion that it is time for the Athlon 64 with the Hammer core. With all due respect for its accomplishments, the Athlon XP is ready for retirement.

HardOCP

There is not a clear "winner" here between the Barton 3000+ and the Intel Pentium 4 3GHz CPU.

Lost Circuits

We could ramble on but I feel that there is really no need. From the benchmarks that we have run, it appears that it will take a GraniteBay system to beat the XP3000+ in the majority of applications, however, we also need to take into account that by the end of the day, there is no price difference left either. Then it comes down to a matter of taste again.

Firing Squad

In short, if you?re in the market for a new AMD processor, you should take a serious look at any processor based on the Barton core. You?ll get better performance, and you shouldn?t have to jump through too many hoops to find one.

 

[Actaeon]

Looks like the layout of the Inquirer.

Anyway, I am debating If I should get another processor, or wait for Barton...

Decisions...

 

[PliotronX]

169 smackers for the 2500+, not bad. Can't wait to hear how it overclocks

edit- Actaeon, an upgrade to even a 2700+ from your 1.9Gig would not offer much, I vote to wait for Barton.

 

[Soulkeeper]

makes me wish i hadn't bought my 2400+
those 2500+ bartons make me hard mmmmmmmmmmm

heh

 

[Tab]

So, will the Barton Core have a 400Mhz DDR FSB and a 512k l2 cache?

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: Actaeon
Looks like the layout of the Inquirer.

Anyway, I am debating If I should get another processor, or wait for Barton...

Decisions...

Perhaps you should just upgrade your vidio card to a Ti4200 @ $100 that should tide you over for a couple of months till cpu prices fall.

 

[Actaeon]

Well, um, I accidently chipped my CPU Core a while back, and havn't bothered to change my sig. It still runs. But it doesn't run as fast as it was in its former glory. My AXP runs at 1.4ghz stock now. I was planning to wait for Barton, but these new 2100+s are out, and I am really interested in purchasing one, they've been known to OC past 2.4ghz :Q.

Anyway, I think these are my choices.

A.) Wait for Barton to come out, save up some cash, get the "best bang for the buck", and some good steppings to come out.

B.) Get the 2100+ now, wait a while for some good Barton stepping cores to be released, and get that later.

What do you guys think? I figure I could always sell the 2100+.

 

[Budmantom]

Well yeah then in that case get the 2100+ from newegg and a Ti4200, heck seeing your 3dmark score now you should be able to get aboot 14000 with the new setup

 

[bunnyfubbles]

I know of one guy who was able to hit 2.6Ghz+ with the 2100+ on air, need to figure out htf he did it...maybe he just got lucky, but he had to have gotten lucky twice as I think he had two 2100+s go over 2.6GHz... However, Barton @ 2.4GHz + would = win...

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: Actaeon
Well, um, I accidently chipped my CPU Core a while back, and havn't bothered to change my sig. It still runs. But it doesn't run as fast as it was in its former glory. My AXP runs at 1.4ghz stock now. I was planning to wait for Barton, but these new 2100+s are out, and I am really interested in purchasing one, they've been known to OC past 2.4ghz :Q.

Anyway, I think these are my choices.

A.) Wait for Barton to come out, save up some cash, get the "best bang for the buck", and some good steppings to come out.

B.) Get the 2100+ now, wait a while for some good Barton stepping cores to be released, and get that later.

What do you guys think? I figure I could always sell the 2100+.

I'd go for option B, which I just did Figure it will take a while for Barton's to reach a decent pricepoint. Early benchies indicate Barton has around a 15% performance edge over an identically clocked T-bred, but that performance increase is factored into the PR rating, so you really don't see that 15% increase w/out paying a lot more. Also, as you mentioned in option A, its safer to wait and see how they OC; hopefully there isn't anything as dramatic as a core revision like the T-breds, but early steppings may not have much headroom. 2100+ is an awesome price/performance ratio chip and is hovering around the magical $100 price point. Should be plenty for the next 3-6 months, then see where Barton is in price/performance/stepping/OCability

Chiz

 

[DivideBYZero]

Anyone for making this the official Barton watching thread?

 

[bgeh]

waiting for the overclocking results

 

[majewski9]

600 Dollars those are Intel prices!

The performance must be very good for AMD to price them so high.

 

[mamisano]

Originally posted by: majewski9
600 Dollars those are Intel prices!

The performance must be very good for AMD to price them so high.

Or the processor VERY rare

 

[MrC4]

Or the processor VERY rare

I didn't know the term rarity applied to paper launches?

Let's hope AMD learned their lesson after the 2700+, 2800+ release debacle last summer!

 

[Killrose]

I can't wait for Barton. The Forsale/Trade forums ought to be full of good deals on 2400/2600+ T-bred B leftovers

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: MrC4

Or the processor VERY rare

I didn't know the term rarity applied to paper launches?

Let's hope AMD learned their lesson after the 2700+, 2800+ release debacle last summer!

*YAWN*

nVidia just paper launched the FX
Intel Paper launched the 1.13, etc

Drop the paper launch whinging, thats old news.

 

[bgeh]

Originally posted by: Tabb
So, will the Barton Core have a 400Mhz DDR FSB and a 512k l2 cache?

later versions may include the 400MHz FSB
\but currently the Barton will have only the 512kb level 2 cache
there will also have a Barton with 266MHz FSB

 

[aznskickass]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: Actaeon
Well, um, I accidently chipped my CPU Core a while back, and havn't bothered to change my sig. It still runs. But it doesn't run as fast as it was in its former glory. My AXP runs at 1.4ghz stock now. I was planning to wait for Barton, but these new 2100+s are out, and I am really interested in purchasing one, they've been known to OC past 2.4ghz :Q.

Anyway, I think these are my choices.

A.) Wait for Barton to come out, save up some cash, get the "best bang for the buck", and some good steppings to come out.

B.) Get the 2100+ now, wait a while for some good Barton stepping cores to be released, and get that later.

What do you guys think? I figure I could always sell the 2100+.

I'd go for option B, which I just did Figure it will take a while for Barton's to reach a decent pricepoint. Early benchies indicate Barton has around a 15% performance edge over an identically clocked T-bred, but that performance increase is factored into the PR rating, so you really don't see that 15% increase w/out paying a lot more. Also, as you mentioned in option A, its safer to wait and see how they OC; hopefully there isn't anything as dramatic as a core revision like the T-breds, but early steppings may not have much headroom. 2100+ is an awesome price/performance ratio chip and is hovering around the magical $100 price point. Should be plenty for the next 3-6 months, then see where Barton is in price/performance/stepping/OCability

Chiz

Actually, there is around a 5% difference between a Barton and a Tbred at the same clockspeed. Well, according to this Barton 2500 (p)review anyway:

http://www.flickerdown.com/pn/modul...eviews&file=index&req=showcontent&id=7&page=5

Comparison with the TBred-B

If we only look at one set of data the Barton appears to perform well, but by looking at a reference CPU as well we?ll see where the real difference lies:

Super PI 1M (lower is better)

One can see no marked performance increase ? both CPUs complete the test in 59 seconds.

CPUMark99 (higher is better)

However, there is a major difference with CPUMark99: the Barton leads by 5 points and 3%.

3DMark 2001 SE Build 330 (higher is better)

One can see that the 512K cache increases performance by a meagre 2.2%.

Content Creation Winstone 2002 1.0.1 (higher is better)/Business Winstone 2001 1.0.3 (higher is better)

In ZD?s benchmarks, the 512K variant is in the lead, but only by 1% in CC Winstone. In Business Winstone the Barton?s lead increases to 7% - it seems that the extra L2 cache?s effects will be most felt in business applications.

N-Bench v2 (higher is better)

The Barton leads by 4%. From the benchmarks it?s clear that overall the extra L2 cache provides a tangible performance boost.

PCMark 2002 Pro CPU/PCMark 2002 Pro Memory/HD (higher is better)

PCMark 2002 Pro tests three main sections: CPU, Memory and HD. In CPU tests there is only a 1.5% increase, while the memory tests show a more marked 11% improvement. The HD scores aren?t bad either, with a 5% increase.

SiSoft Sandra 2001 SP1 (higher is better)

As earlier mentioned, the 512K and 256K versions of the Athlon XP show no marked performance difference in SiSoft Sandra. Although the data shows a minor performance edge for Barton, the difference is so small as to be insignificant. Regardless, the results are clear for all to see, and there is enough data to draw a few conclusions.

Essentially, the benchmarks show there are applications where the extra cache does come in useful, but the overall performance increase isn?t great. Indeed, the performance has actually increased ? but with Barton?s 512K of L2 cache, one expects better overall performance: something that may have to wait until the 200MHz FSB variants emerge. It looks like the wait will continue for AMD enthusiasts ? and at this point it is the least one can do to ask AMD to do better.

With that in mind, I would definitely get option A, since a much cheaper 2100+ would most likely overclock to similar or better clockspeeds as a Barton... and with an average performance deficit of 5% clock for clock I'd say its much better value.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Now we have benchies on the 2500+:

Benchies - In chinese but graphs will do

 

[SFang]

I read the Chinese document/benches. I would say I am not really impressed with the Barton performance in the review. It is barely faster than the TbredB in the same clock speed.

The last page shows you how to mod a XP2200+ TbredB into 256K version of Barton.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: SFang
I read the Chinese document/benches. I would say I am not really impressed with the Barton performance in the review. It is barely faster than the TbredB in the same clock speed.

The last page shows you how to mod a XP2200+ TbredB into 256K version of Barton.

What is the advantage to that, seeing as the only difference between the two is the cache in the first place???

 

[purpledemon]

Originally posted by: Soulkeeper
makes me wish i hadn't bought my 2400+
those 2500+ bartons make me hard mmmmmmmmmmm

heh

quite disturbing

 

[LeeTJ]

AMD is really losing it if they have to release this barton chip. they should be releasing their 64 bit chip. there isn't enough of a diff between the barton and the t-bred to make it worth while to upgrade.

i got a 2700+ myself. i won't be upgrading till the opteron comes out. that's for sure.

 

[zephyrprime]

Those benchmarks looked really unimpressive. Barely faster than a tbred-b. Big whoop.