Originally posted by: Delorian
My 2.2Ghz 2500+ is read as a 3200+ in my post and windows info. Performance isn't quite as good as a 3200+ but very close.
Originally posted by: X-Man
Originally posted by: Delorian
My 2.2Ghz 2500+ is read as a 3200+ in my post and windows info. Performance isn't quite as good as a 3200+ but very close.
Unless you're not running at 200 MHz FSB, I don't buy that statement . . .
But azazal, yes, 2.2 GHz = 3200+ for Athlon XP's.
Originally posted by: Delorian
Originally posted by: X-Man
Originally posted by: Delorian
My 2.2Ghz 2500+ is read as a 3200+ in my post and windows info. Performance isn't quite as good as a 3200+ but very close.
Unless you're not running at 200 MHz FSB, I don't buy that statement . . .
But azazal, yes, 2.2 GHz = 3200+ for Athlon XP's.
I am running 11x200 with a desktop barton 2500+ reaching 2200 Mhz. I thought the 3200+ had more cache but I'm wrong, in that case my 2500+ is the same as a 3200+ barton though Sisoft's Sandra benchmarks my cpu around the 3000+ level. Not sure why though.