So how are those Barton's doing? Overclocks? Performance?

MichaelD

Lifer
Jan 16, 2001
31,528
3
76
Was just browsing around and saw an article on the Bartons. They've been out awhile, but haven't seemed (IMO) to have the impact of say, those overclockable XP2100s that everyone got. (me too!)

AFAIK, the Barton has 512kb of L2 cache (I think it's L2) and a default speed of 166MHz. That's it, right?

How are they overclocking? Anything like the 2.1GHz I get out of my XP2100?
 

bgeh

Platinum Member
Nov 16, 2001
2,946
0
0
they usually hit 2.2-2.3GHz on 1.85v
and yes, the Barton has 512kb of L2 cache
its fsb is 166
 

HappyCracker

Senior member
Mar 10, 2001
939
5
81
My 2500 hit 2250 at 1.8v. Stock cooler at that (Delta 38 on top though). Seriously, I think that fan would make anything a decent cooler. I digress, You probably won't be hitting the 2400 MHz I've seen people with on their 1700+, unless you've got badass cooling like VapoChill or Prometia. I read some guy on a VC got 2600 MHz out of his. If only they cooled more stuff like the vid card and chipset, those things would be sick. Rambling.....END
 

MichaelD

Lifer
Jan 16, 2001
31,528
3
76
Cool. Thanks guys.

I guess the Bartons aren't all that popular w/the enthusiast crowd, huh?

We're all waiting for Opterons (sp?) huh?
 

mrman3k

Senior member
Dec 15, 2001
959
0
0
Bartons don't overclock as high as the Tbreds. As for Opterons, don't expect anything as far as overclocking, they are pretty much the same as current Athlon XP's with a bit more cache, etc.
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,999
307
126
FSB probably isn't as necessary for the Barton cores. Perhaps people should try to scale back the FSB and play with the larger multipliers?
 

HappyCracker

Senior member
Mar 10, 2001
939
5
81
While you could probably get a higher multiplier, it would hurt overall system performance. Given DDR400 and running the FSB at 200 (400DDR), you would probably see better performance a cross the board due to the fact that the system can talk to its components faster. This is also why AMD kicked the FSB up to 400, it's a known way to yup, you guessed it, performance. Same goes for Intel and their 800 (200 QDR) bus speed they just instantiated. Reading something somewhere (red hill page linked off of sandpile.org i believe) they show (or say rather) that the systems with higher bus speeds win out in the long run because the components attached to the processor can keep it fed with that good old data lovin'