• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

which athlon xp-m for my antec aria HTPC system...

H

homestarmy

Diamond Member
I haven't been really keeping up, but I am looking at two processors. I will be running them on my mini-atx Shuttle MN31N board, and if I remember correctly, my only option is to up the FSB to OC these babies. I cannot up the voltage to my knowledge.

Processor 1

Processor 2

I see they are both rated the same, but the second processor is operating at a higher frequency? Which of these chips is newer? Is the first chip doing the same work but more efficiently in real life?

And would one be more likely to OC than the other? I am looking to run them at 166 at stock voltage, and if that won't do, I'll just go with a 2600+ @ 333. I would really like to stick with one of these babies to keep the temps down in what can be a somewhat hot case. I will be using only air cooling, with a thermalright... sk7 I believe? I forget exactly the model, but it's nothing cheap and inefficient.

Sorry I've been out of the loop for so long!

BTW, these will be running XP Media Center Edition... that should give me enough oomph, right?

Thanks!!
 
I'd get the cheaper one. They both came out at the same time (roughly). Stock speed doesn't really matter because chances are your bios won't recognize and it'll default to 600 mhz or something along those lines.

I'd really say to get the 35 watt 2400 mobile, the lower voltage usually will give you a little more room to overclock it.
 
I would get the AMD Mobile 2600. There is only $3 difference and what you gain is an extra step on multipliers. These mobile chips have the multipliers top locked, my Mobile 2600 came with a cap of 15X133=2000. My first OC was a simply increase of FSB to 166. 15x166=2500. I got faster Ram and lowered the multiplier to increase the FSB even more.

On the 2500, the top multiplier I think is 14. The 2600 has a top multiplier of 15.

What memory do you have? That might make a difference as well. Need to make sure you run your RAM synchronous with the processor.
 
Originally posted by: homestarmy
I haven't been really keeping up, but I am looking at two processors. I will be running them on my mini-atx Shuttle MN31N board, and if I remember correctly, my only option is to up the FSB to OC these babies. I cannot up the voltage to my knowledge.

Processor 1

Processor 2

I see they are both rated the same, but the second processor is operating at a higher frequency? Yes, the cpu's multiplier is slightly higher Which of these chips is newer?If you're talking manufacturering dates, can't tell without looking at the stepping codes. But otherwise, they are same core, same cpu archetecture. If that's what you're talking about, neither is "newer", one just graded out higher in the binning process.- Is the first chip doing the same work but more efficiently in real life? No, same chip

And would one be more likely to OC than the other? I am looking to run them at 166 at stock voltage Stock voltage (vcore) is 1.45v. From what I can tell the mobo you mentioned doesn't have vcore adjustments. Unless there are some new or modded BIOS which allow this mobo to recognize the cpu you may be stuck with whatever the mobo defaults too, and if that won't do, I'll just go with a 2600+ @ 333. I would really like to stick with one of these babies to keep the temps down If the mobo defaults to vcore of 1.65v, you may not be getting the extra-cool runing cpu yuo seek. But it shouldl run (OC) pretty high at 1.65v. The mobile in my sig is running at 1.55v in what can be a somewhat hot case. I will be using only air cooling, with a thermalright... sk7 I believe? I forget exactly the model, but it's nothing cheap and inefficient.

Sorry I've been out of the loop for so long!

BTW, these will be running XP Media Center Edition... that should give me enough oomph, right?

Thanks!!
Click to expand...

Your other concern s/b whether your mobo has cpu multiplier adjustments. If it doesn't, your mobo may default to a multi of 6, leaving you with a real slow cpu.

Fern

 
Wow, I can't realize how blind I was not realizing that one was 2500 and one was 2600, I must have been really sleepy.

My board DOES NOT have multiplier adjustments.... why would it default to 6x?!
 
Originally posted by: frootbooter
I'd really say to get the 35 watt 2400 mobile, the lower voltage usually will give you a little more room to overclock it.
Click to expand...

But the 2400 is 45 watt... no?

And again, no voltage or multiplier adjustments!
 
Originally posted by: Zardnok
These mobile chips have the multipliers top locked
Click to expand...
No they don't.

It'll probably default to 6x or something crazy low like that because your bios won't recognize it.

You can get the 2400 in 45 watt or 35 watt versions. The desktop chips run 72 watts or something along those lines.
 
Yikes, so there really is a huge difference. Not to beat a dead horse, but if I don't have another outlet for the mobile chip, I better stay away since I do not have another outlet for it if it does default to 600 MHz, huh?

Also, are any of you guys familiar with what an Averatec 3150 can be upgraded to? It's one of the ultra small laptops... I'd like to put a 2400 or so in it...
 
Also, roughly, what do you think the chances are of getting a 2600+ 266 running at 2.133 up to a 166 FSB? The core listed is AXDC2600DKV3C. Stock voltage probably wouldn't work, would it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top