xp2000+

[IGBT]

Noticed an upward trend in price for the xp2000+. Was 230.00 now 255.00 at newegg. Thought these things get cheaper over time. Was it under priced to start with??

 

[lane42]

I don't know if this is case in question, but newegg gives FREE SHIPPING all of a sudden, then jacks up the price.

 

[hoihtah]

why spend 255 on xp2000+
when you can spend about that much on P4 1.6a + Mobo for faster setup?
even with moderately o/ced spec of 1.6a... you can compete with xp2000+

i guess the only reason that i see is if you're a die hard amd fan.
but... isn't that what all amd fans were arguing over...
the pentiums were not cost effective.

i still love my athlon 1ghz and duron 950.

but i also can't complain about my 1.8a doing 2790 either.

 

[Duvie]

hoihta, nice oc man...

What is your power supply and hsf???

I have 1.8@2.52 w/ 1.775 though it post at that speed even as low as 1.625v...I think my 12v rail in the sparkle is too weak and may be reson I haven't been able to get 1.8 stable at 2.52ghz at a lower voltage...I think there is still room left in this baby...my temps are 50c for most part in load...I may go with a higher rpm fan and bring that down a bit so I can push it up a bit more. however since I may have to give it too much voltage now maybe that alone can take care of heat...

 

[Uclagamer_99]

just for the sake of arguing not everyone overclocks

but yeah i have a 1.8a @2400

 

[bunnyfubbles]

<< why spend 255 on xp2000+
when you can spend about that much on P4 1.6a + Mobo for faster setup?
even with moderately o/ced spec of 1.6a... you can compete with xp2000+ >>



I have to agree with that, I don't understand why people are willing to spend roughly $100 more for the 2000+ over say an 1800+ when the clock difference is 1666MHz vs 1533MHz, a whopping 133 some odd MHz. Paying $100 for the extra Hz will get you the extra performance, but for $100 you have almost enough to buy another 1600+-1800+ CPU.

But spend on an Intel setup? Sure you could get great performance if you do over-clock it. Some people aren't willing to nor are some people even educated enough to pull off such an over-clock. Also, I don't see much hope for intel after the 1.6A and 1.8A. The 2.0A and the 2.2s definitely do not come close to having the same over-clocking potential as the 1.6A or the 1.8A, so how will one upgrade for the future? Well I don't see a solution. The large over-clocks are achieved by stepping up the fsb speeds from 100 which allows for big results in the end. But intel will be switching the P4 over to a 133x4 fsb. This means newer processors won't gain as much of a performance increase by over-clocking the fsb from 133.

On the other hand, AMD consumers have the T-breds to look for when the time comes to upgrade. A .13 micron fabrication process did wonders for intel and their Northwood P4s, I truly expect to see similar things happen to AMD when the Athlon gets a .13 micron core.

So IMO, AMD still stands as the better overall deal. I was tempted to look into getting myself an intel Northwood setup, but one either needs to spend big $ to get performance from intel or take some risks.

 

[AGodspeed]

Please understand that not everyone engages in extreme overclocking. Heck, a recent poll on Anandtech suggests that only 56% of Anandtech members overclock consistently.

It all depends on what you're looking for in your system. If you don't overclock or only overclock occasionally, then any Athlon or Duron will do much better than a P4 or Celeron. However, if you're really into overclocking (i.e. you overclock almost 24/7), then a 1.6A setup is the only way to go.

Just keep that in mind.