**POLL**which of the following CPU's are faster?

[Corporate Thug]

which is faster (which will win a majority of diverse benchmarks): an oced 1700+ to 2.4 (lets say 200*12) or a 2500+ barton oced to 2.2?

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Faster by MHz = 1700 TBred

The Barton should be the winnAr though, as it's packing 640kb of cache.

- M4H

 

[bgeh]

i'd say the 2500+ will feel more responsive because of the extra cache but the 2400+ is better

 

[Y23KC]

I never saw the reviews that showed the advantages of the extra cache. It made a small difference here and there, but overall, the 2.4ghz should be faster.

 

[Corporate Thug]

bump for more replies!

 

[Ketchup]

I would say the 1700+, but it would be close. As noted in most reviews I have read (hint) the extra cache does very little to make the Barton faster. Plus, I personally feel AMD overshot the PR rating with the Barton (probably due to problems getting yields out of these chips). I think you would be happier psychologically with the 1700+ since you are getting a bigger overclock, spending a lot less money, and will still have a faster overall speed. Depending on the multiplier, you also may be able to get a higher FSB with the t-bred, which would make up for any performance loss due to having less cache.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Why did you pick those particular speeds and not even list what multi x fsb the Barton was at I have a 2500+@2.3ghz 1.632v actual 200fsb and it outperforms the 2100+@ 2.424ghz 200fsb I was using so why is the Barton only at 2.2ghz again when very few have 1700+'s@2.4ghz on 1.85v or less again? BTW, my 2500= will do 2.4ghz@1.75v so why not ask which is faster at 2.4ghz??? This poll suX0rz :disgust:

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: bgeh
i'd say the 2500+ will feel more responsive because of the extra cache but the 2400+ is better

Where's an XP2400???? Only the 1700 and 2500 are in the poll

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Brian meant 2.4ghz Jeff, he's from Malaysia so this isn't his first language to type in so play nice I'll bet he types english a good deal better tha you or I could his first language :light:

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
Brian meant 2.4ghz Jeff, he's from Malaysia so this isn't his first language to type in so play nice I'll bet he types english a good deal better tha you or I could his first language :light:

He added the +, which is what makes it sound like he meant an XP2400

BTW... on average, a Barton core is 5% faster than a Thoroughbred core running at the same speed.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
Why did you pick those particular speeds and not even list what multi x fsb the Barton was at I have a 2500+@2.3ghz 1.632v actual 200fsb and it outperforms the 2100+@ 2.424ghz 200fsb I was using so why is the Barton only at 2.2ghz again when very few have 1700+'s@2.4ghz on 1.85v or less again? BTW, my 2500= will do 2.4ghz@1.75v so why not ask which is faster at 2.4ghz??? This poll suX0rz :disgust:

a friend of mine asked this question, he had a barton at 2.2 and a friend of his had a 1700+ at 2.4. thats why i picked the numbers, it wasnt random. and i didnt know what his FSB X multipler was, so i didnt want to just make it up

btw, what week barton do u have?

 

[DAPUNISHER]

That sounds reasonable Jeff thanx for the stat

 

[Soulkeeper]

comparing the guys' two systems would be hard by clock speed and cache only
unless they have the same chipset/ram/other hardware (cept the cpu) and the same os
just get them to compare benchmarks, that's the best way to know


my vote goes for the barton just cause the things i do would like cache

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Soulkeeper
comparing the guys' two systems would be hard by clock speed and cache only
unless they have the same chipset/ram/other hardware (cept the cpu) and the same os
just get them to compare benchmarks, that's the best way to know


my vote goes for the barton just cause the things i do would like cache

I got the 5% result from AnandTech's benchmarks in their XP3000 article. Did a little math... and the average gain of a 2.167 Ghz Barton over a 2.167 Ghz Thoroughbred is 5%

Of course sometimes it makes no difference at all, for instance, in 3D Rendering, and other times it makes a 16% difference, in their Content Creation test with SYSMark2002.

The average gain in performance in games is 5.5% And to be honest, gaming performance is my main concern.

In contrast, Intel's recent attempt to increase performance with Hyper Threading gives on average, a 0.06% improvement in games, which isn't particularly accurate because of 6 tests, the only one effected by Hyper Threading was Quake 3 Arena, and that increased the performance from 327.4 FPS to 328.7 FPS.

However, their 800 Mhz FSB increases gaming performance by an average of 4.6% Of course, as the Intel fans will point out, that's also with a drop of 66 Mhz.

 

[Soulkeeper]

yeah i have an old chipset with a slower fsb so the extra cache would prob make a larger difference

 

[bgeh]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
Brian meant 2.4ghz Jeff, he's from Malaysia so this isn't his first language to type in so play nice I'll bet he types english a good deal better tha you or I could his first language :light:

English is my first language
I'm a Malaysian Chinese, but English is my first language

sorry, i misunderstood
the 2500+ oced to 2.2 (barton) feels more responsive due to the extra cache while the 1700+ oc'ed to 2.4GHz will be faster overall except in certain benchies

 

[DAPUNISHER]

LOL! You should have played along Brian BTW, how does a Malaysian Chinese end up a native english speaker I'm just a ignorant and poorly travled American so these things are puzzling to me

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
LOL! You should have played along Brian BTW, how does a Malaysian Chinese end up a native english speaker I'm just a ignorant and poorly travled American so these things are puzzling to me

We went over there and kicked those people out... he's a product of "Americanization"

 

[BDSM]

Isn't there sposed to be some benchmark that measures multitasking performance?.. wasn't it called something like csa researchor something?

It would be really cool to see if the extra cashe would make a difference under heavy multitasking..

To see if a barton stays more responsive under load... I wish someonewould make such a review.

 

[bgeh]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
LOL! You should have played along Brian BTW, how does a Malaysian Chinese end up a native english speaker I'm just a ignorant and poorly travled American so these things are puzzling to me

We went over there and kicked those people out... he's a product of "Americanization"

wrong, we do have Mc'Donalds here, but the catalyst was British colonialism(or else i would just be some Chinese commie shouting Mao Zedong rocks, Bill Clinton sucks!!! j/k, don't take it seriously)...........my family was english educated, so english is my main language when i talk with my parents. and there's no english school here, only national school, but the lingua franca in the school is english, as with most of the national schools here in and around the capital. but i can speak a variety of chinese dialects and malay, of course which is the national language
EDITamn, too many spelling errors.

 

[bgeh]

Originally posted by: BDSM
Isn't there sposed to be some benchmark that measures multitasking performance?.. wasn't it called something like csa researchor something?

It would be really cool to see if the extra cashe would make a difference under heavy multitasking..

To see if a barton stays more responsive under load... I wish someonewould make such a review.

by theory, most probably that would be the case........more cache to store threads is better

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: bgeh

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
LOL! You should have played along Brian BTW, how does a Malaysian Chinese end up a native english speaker I'm just a ignorant and poorly travled American so these things are puzzling to me

We went over there and kicked those people out... he's a product of "Americanization"

wrong, we do have Mc'Donalds here, but the catalyst was British colonializm(or else i would just be some Chinese commie shouting Mao Zedong rocks, Bill Clinton sucks!!! j/k, don't take it seriously)...........my family was english educated, so english is my main language when i talk with my parents. and there's no english school here, only national school, but the lingua franca in the school is english, as with most of the national schools here in and around the capital. but i can seak a variety of chinese dialects and malay, of course which is the national language

I agree, Bill Clinton does suck =) Not everybody in America liked him... just like not everybody likes George Bush.