Wut chip should i get (not overclocking) Athlon 2500+ Barton vs 2600+

niwi7

Golden Member
Feb 21, 2003
1,095
0
0
which 1 is faster? i dont care about cash its a difference of like 5 bucks
 

Richdog

Golden Member
Feb 10, 2003
1,658
0
0
depends on the apps your running, the 2600+ is quicker in terms of raw Mhz, but the 2500+ can benefit from the extra cache sometimes. Go to a hardware site and read some comparisons and benchmarks, thats the obvious thing to do.
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
31,769
31,774
146
I'm presuming it's the 2600+ 333fsb variety, and if that's the case it will be faster overall just as the PR rating suggests. The 266fsb version gets beat by the 2500+ in many games and apps despite the faster clockspeed because of the extra bandwidth even more so than the extra cache. Take away the bandwidth advantage and the extra cache doesn't quite compensate for the mhz disadvantage in most tasks.
 

Chumpman

Banned
Feb 26, 2003
1,389
0
0
Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
I'm presuming it's the 2600+ 333fsb variety, and if that's the case it will be faster overall just as the PR rating suggests. The 266fsb version gets beat by the 2500+ in many games and apps despite the faster clockspeed because of the extra bandwidth even more so than the extra cache. Take away the bandwidth advantage and the extra cache doesn't quite compensate for the mhz disadvantage in most tasks.

Aye, what does the 2600 have? A 350 MHz clockspeed advantage?
 

asadovsky

Member
Jul 13, 2003
76
0
0
I would go for the 2500+... at least on newegg, the 2500+ is a Barton, while the 2600+ is a thoroughbred
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
31,769
31,774
146
Originally posted by: Chumpman
Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
I'm presuming it's the 2600+ 333fsb variety, and if that's the case it will be faster overall just as the PR rating suggests. The 266fsb version gets beat by the 2500+ in many games and apps despite the faster clockspeed because of the extra bandwidth even more so than the extra cache. Take away the bandwidth advantage and the extra cache doesn't quite compensate for the mhz disadvantage in most tasks.

Aye, what does the 2600 have? A 350 MHz clockspeed advantage?
250mhz to the 333fsb and 300mhz to the 266fsb version. Many feel AMD was a bit liberal with the PR rating on the Bartons to begin with and expecting just the extra cache to compensate for 250mhz at the same fsb just isn't going to play out in most usage.
 

Richdog

Golden Member
Feb 10, 2003
1,658
0
0
And yet in many gaming benchmarks the 2500+ beats the 2600+ so its not all so clear cut. :)
 
Apr 17, 2003
37,622
0
76
if u look at the benchies over at toms, the 2500+ has a slight edge in gaming performance but the 2600+ wins in everything else. on average, the 2600+ is a faster chip
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
31,769
31,774
146
Originally posted by: shady06
if u look at the benchies over at toms, the 2500+ has a slight edge in gaming performance but the 2600+ wins in everything else. on average, the 2600+ is a faster chip
You guys sure you aren't looking at the benchies for the 266fsb 2600+ version from the big shootout? link