2.4c vs xp2500

[POL-tec2002]

witch one is better??

[Maxvla]

paper or plastic? which is better?

personal preference really. they are both great processors. both overclock a ton.

the barton is alot cheaper than the p4 but the p4 probably outperforms the barton even both fully overclocked by at least 5% in most benchies. now you got to ask yourself... is that 5% worth the extra cost? do the athlon based motherboards have all the features i like? maybe the intel boards have more of the features i like... what kind of ram am i going to buy? if i'm going to stay around 200-215 then i could buy cheaper ram and go with amd and be fine. if i'm going to really push the envelope i would need more expensive nicer ram i could really maximize the potential the intel rig can offer.

lots of questions you need to ask yourself and answer. what are your goals? whats your budget? how are you going to cool it?

asking which one is better leaves alot of room to discuss. please narrow it down or at least answer the questions i have put in this post.

[POL-tec2002]

cooling slk-900u and smart fan 2

Ram hyper x pc 3500 or XMZ 3500????

Mony isnt a issue....well dont over do it

[climbski]

Unfortunately for us AMD *****s the 2.4C is kicking the crap out of us.... It is BY FAR the better CPU. Not a matter of opiniop that is fact.

[Richdog1980]

Overclock the Barton 2500+ to 2.2-2.3 Ghz at 400Mhz FSB and it is as quick as a 3.06 P4 in most things, especially 3D Gaming.

[climbski]

Yes an OCd AMD can beat a non OCd Intel (easily)... But there is no AMD that can beat a well OCd 2.4C assuming similar cooling.

[#18]

Barton 2500+ and P4 2.4C...two "greatest" processors from AMD and Intel in the term of price : performance.

I have seen with my own eyes. A Barton 2500+ overclock at 2.2GHZ get about the same score in Sandra CPU test compare to a P4 3.06GHZ. Average Barton 2500+ can overclock to 2.2~2.3GHZ. Consider the fact a retail Barton 2500+ is only about $90 at newegg.com . a P4 2.4C is almost twice the price(about $170+), average 2.4C overclock to around 3.2~3.4GHZ. It will outperform a overclocked Barton 2500+ by a little bit.

It all depend on your budget.
Now you decide which one to get ;)

[climbski]

If your looking price/perf ratio the 1700dlt3c is by far the best. And it quite often beats the 2500+ at top oc on benches due to getting 100+ more mhz generally.

[#18]

It is not guaranteed to get a good stepping 1700+. Just read the feedback of 1700+ on newegg. Some people are getting bad stepping, cannot break 2GHZ. Barton 2500+ is guaranteed to do 2.2GHZ+ as far as I can see. With extra cache, Barton definatly outperform a Tbred clocked at the same speed.

[climbski]

Goto excaliberpc.com if you buy their best ($63) 1700 dlt3c you WIll get 2.4ghz with good aircooling and a decent system. They guarantee good stepping. Otherwise you could get stuck with crap and 2ghz. Handpick it if you know what to look for at your local comp store.

[Chris_F]

Originally posted by POL-tec2002
cooling slk-900u and smart fan 2

Ram hyper x pc 3500 or XMZ 3500????

Mony isnt a issue....well dont over do it

In that case, why wouldn't you go with a 2.4C?

Go with Intel. :)

[climbski]

Money not an issue than def go 2.4C

[Dragonprince]

Originally posted by climbski
Goto excaliberpc.com if you buy their best ($63) 1700 dlt3c you WIll get 2.4ghz with good aircooling and a decent system. They guarantee good stepping. Otherwise you could get stuck with crap and 2ghz. Handpick it if you know what to look for at your local comp store.

I hardly consider a 52 dollar AthlonXP 1700 that will do 2Ghz "crap" when its only supposed to do 1.47Ghz....:rolleyes:

The 2.4Ghz 800Mhz FSB P4 is selling for 170 dollars...so...

Lets see 170/52=3.2 so you can buy 3 "crap" AthlonXP's or one super duper whammy slammy 2.4 P4 and get 5% better performance...I bet Intel loves the old saying "A sucker and his money...."

I think when anyone does the math and see's that they can buy an XP 2800 that will absolutely b$%tch slap a P4 2.4 when both are OC'd might want to reconsider compairing the 2.4 P4 against an XP2500......lets compair equal money spent and see where we land. :rolleyes:

[Chris_F]

Originally posted by Dragonprince


I hardly consider a 52 dollar AthlonXP 1700 that will do 2Ghz "crap" when its only supposed to do 1.47Ghz....:rolleyes:

The 2.4Ghz 800Mhz FSB P4 is selling for 170 dollars...so...

Lets see 170/52=3.2 so you can buy 3 "crap" AthlonXP's or one super duper whammy slammy 2.4 P4 and get 5% better performance...I bet Intel loves the old saying "A sucker and his money...."

I think when anyone does the math and see's that they can buy an XP 2800 that will absolutely b$%tch slap a P4 2.4 when both are OC'd might want to reconsider compairing the 2.4 P4 against an XP2500......lets compair equal money spent and see where we land. :rolleyes:

So your saying everyone with a P4 2.4C wasted their money? Your saying they should all spend 1 third of that money and get an AMD chip?

OK. Now here this, now here this. Let it be know to all Intel users. You have wasted all your money. You should have just bought 3 crappy chips. :rolleyes:

I guess I'll go cry because I've wasted money on every high performance Intel chip I've bought through the course of my life.

[adelphia83]

If you want speed no matter the expense -- Intel is definately the way to go right now. These chips are faster due to the platform they are based on (quad-pumped 200fsb), and the memory bandwidth they achieve as a result.

Nobody with a P4C is wasting their money. Rather they want the fastest rig avail for a decent price. I consider 170$ on a CPU to be a decent price. It depends on a person's preference to determine whether that increase in speed justifies the price.

Lets face it though.... Anybody who buys Intel 100% of the time (and knowing AMD kicks it's a$$ in the price/performance category *almost* all of the time) obviously has more money than brains. IMO of course.

[Top Hat Theater]

Lets face it though.... Anybody who buys Intel 100% of the time (and knowing AMD kicks it's a$$ in the price/performance category *almost* all of the time) obviously has more money than brains. IMO of course.

Not necessarily. Intel has really turned their product line around in the past 24 months. The new "C" chips with HT are very fine performers and those people who buy them do so because they see the value in them that justifies the cost. Intel systems are more stable and run cooler than comparable AMD systems from what I've seen/read. Now if we were talking about the original Willamette P4, I'd agree with you wholeheartedly as IMO that chip line was terrible.

And some people may buy Intel all the time because they need to. Those people who do a lot of rendering and other memory-intensive tasks definitely benefit from the quad-pumped 800MHz FSB of the P4. We AMD'ers have about half the available bandwidth of the P4s and that just doesn't make sense to invest in regardless of price. People buy what they need; especially the people of this forum as we're "in the know."

~THT

[Gautam]

I just get whatever is the best. At the time that I was purchasing my rig, AMD seemed the obvious choice, being before the P4C's even existed. If I had waited longer, I would've undoubtedly gone Intel. Intels have numerous strengths; currently they're stronger than AMD by a smidge in just about everything. How much that smidge is worth is different to different people. For some, paying $100 to $200 more just for the latest and greatest is well worth it. Please try to refrain from such strong statements regarding other people's preferences in the future.

[adelphia83]

Please reread my post if you somehow regarded it as a flame of sort. I pointed out that price vs performance differs among different people. Some may choose to pay that extra 100$ for the added 5% performance.

I have done so before, and I see the reason behind doing so. I'm not disagreeing with anyones personal preferences at all.

I merely stated, the people who choose Intel 100% of the time, while disregarding the price vs performance factor has more money than brains. Obviously this isn't the case whilst the P4C's are out. They ARE better performers, and while some may choose to spend larger amounts of money for high dollar performance, that is purely up to them. Given the choice (if I was to buy a new rig), I would definately choose intel, no doubt.

I was moreso talking about buying Intel 100% of the time, in regards to their previous line of processors which suffered performance-wise in comparison to other chips. And still Intel was more expensive.

Maybe more $ than brains was a bad analogy, but think of all the people who have (and many still do) soak money into Intel, but fail(ed) to get the performance of a cheaper AMD chip.

[POL-tec2002]

ok ok i thought about it and im getting a 2.8c but that wont be for another 1/2 year. Is intel going to come out with a new socket??? I dont want to buy something and then a day later it is not upgradible because of the sockets...

[Chris_F]

Originally posted by POL-tec2002
ok ok i thought about it and im getting a 2.8c but that wont be for another 1/2 year. Is intel going to come out with a new socket??? I dont want to buy something and then a day later it is not upgradible because of the sockets...

Sadly, that exactly what going to happen. The new line of prescott is quickly going to move to the T socket.

[Top Hat Theater]

Gotta love how AMD has used a single socket design for four years :)

~THT

[Maxvla]

Originally posted by Top Hat Theater
Gotta love how AMD has used a single socket design for four years :)

~THT
well they are going to make up for it with 3 seperate sockets for the Athlon64/Opteron. ;)

[POL-tec2002]

when is this going to happen?? What are speeds and prices going to be???

[Maxvla]

in a month or two. supposed to be released in september.. but we'll just see if that happens :rolleyes:

[POL-tec2002]

do u guys know what the speeds are going to be??cpu??FsB???

[Chris_F]

Originally posted by POL-tec2002
do u guys know what the speeds are going to be??cpu??FsB???

3.4GHz 800MHz, Quad Pumped FSB, 1MB L2, HT2

By Q4 of 2004, they should have a 4.4GHz with 1066 FSB processor. :clap:

[Gautam]

This (http://www.pbase.com/image/17079307/original) should answer most of your questions very well. It has an 800mhz hypertransport bus for communicating with peripherals and a double pumped 200mhz memory bus.

[POL-tec2002]

OMG 4GHZ JEBUS

[AKULA]

2.4c vs XP 2500+........If you remove price from the picture then it's a simple matter of flipping a coin. You really can't go wrong picking between the two.

Personaly I would give the edge to the XP chip due to price. The money saved there can mean the difference between a 9700 and a 9800 video card. Think about it....PCs are the sum of the parts after all as CPU speed isn't the "end all be all" of the equation.

[gesteve]

Forget Price performance... if you can keep an AMD board from dying from overclocking that would be a great trick.

I had 3 Nforce boards from 1.04 through 2.0 all died...

I now have a great Intel board and a great Intel CPU and I don't have to hold my breath everytime I go into the bios.

I loved my xp2100 at 2.3. I wish the chipset was better to support it............ :(

[whatever2003]

I have both processors and while I can reach 2.2 GHz on Barton using SK-7/TMD, I can also reach 3.4 GHz on Pentium using the same cooling. The difference is not 5% but rather 12%-15% or more and that is not a small difference by any standards.
Pentium 2.4C has upper hand.

[fafnir]

yah, well my barton2500+'s been running at 2500mhz @2.1/2.2v vcore and the only thing that i've seen beating it IS some dude on these forums with a P4 @3.5ghz on a canterwood,... (beat me by ONE SECOND on superpi)

so that makes both of us watercooled and faster than anything else out there just short of either going prometeia or the centrino on canterwood rigs thats outgunning xeon's...

so, 2500+barton, nf7-s2.0, 1gbHyperX, and a koolance exos =about the same price as that dude's (forgot who he was) p4, IC7-G, 1gb cosair, and i think he had swiftech... but wasn't a complete kit, so go figure....

SO WHAT I SAY IS SAVE YOUR MONEY, BUY THE LOWEST POSSIBLE PROCESSOR IN THE SERIES AND GO WATERCOOLING...
(e.g. 1700+tbred/2500+ barton w/nforce2 or P4 2.4c wspringdale)

AND GO WATER....

http://www3.sympatico.ca/scanido/images/top.jpg

http://www.bit-tech.net/images/review/228/m4b1.jpg


i mean its really pointless to debate who's got the better system, amd or intel cause i got a better system than most of you "hot air" people cause all you do is blow hot air right?:rolleyes:

so grab anything, go water, get a better job, then a better car, and then a better girlfriend, then go work out non-stop, and then a bigger better house, and then a yacht, and then a rocket car, and then a learjet, and then build a giant laser on the moon and take over switzerland (no offense switzland) and then blackmail other countries for switz cheese that you know they don't have and then eat great food like there's no tomorrow and quit raving about stuff you don't have....

so in other words, dont rave about a 2.4C unless you got one and its great....

edit: if you do happen to have a via c3 or a mac or something, THEN you should rave about it like there's no tomorrow, and then create a distraction and run like forrest gump....

[ajrettke]

Ok this thread should be locked, and stickied to the top with fafnir's post and make it a must read for everyone!!!!!

LOL not only was it funny as hell, It's true! Get water
Watercooling is awesome, fun, a lot easier than you think, better performance, and is literaly cool!

*edit* BTW very clean setup fafnir!

[Sir Barton]

all i gotta say.....there sure are alot of fanboys in here. i buy whatever is gonna get me the most performance for the least amount of money. if AMD fits my budget nicely, i buy AMD....and vice versa. this argument is about as pathetic as a couple hillbillies arguing that cletus's charger is better than cooter's trans am.

[Bengan]

Yo, I'm going to sell my 2.4c, it's only making 3.2 ghz at 266 fsb, memory on like 420 mhz... ocz tech 433 mhz cas2 and stuff, it's overclocking too little... So I'm going to buy a 2.5+ barton with stepping AQXEA 0327VPMW and Abit NF7 V2.0
nForce2SPP/MCP/Ultra 400 with waterchill and pc3700 twinmos twister 2.5cas memory... will this oc better than my p4c? I need help real bad...

[Gautam]

I think that your P4C is going to be a far better option. First of all, the maximum that you're likely to reach with a Barton is 2.5ghz, which basically equates to 3.2ghz on a P4. You haven't even tried raising the voltage or increasing the vcore on your P4. The highest 3Dmark score on these forums is held by system just aobut identical to yours, a 2.4C at 3.5ghz with an SLK900. The P4C is better than the Barton, without a doubt. And I say this after owning a heavily overclocked AMD system myself.

[theotherphil]

I've just sold a 2.4C. It'd hit 3.6GHz aircooled with SLK900 and 1.7V. No barton will get near that performance without phase change which is hardly good for the price/ performance ratio.

CPU-Z (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/phil.harling/images/P4/300cpuz.gif)
Sandra CPU (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/phil.harling/images/P4/300cpu.gif)
Sandra MMX (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/phil.harling/images/P4/300mmx.gif)

My current 2.8C is running 3640MHz....I'm just waiting on some DDR500 to run 1:1 @ 250fsb+.

[ajrettke]

Hmm well if you sold your 2.4C and went with a 2500+ (I reccomend a 1700 dlt3c, it's gonna be the same performance) I don't think it would eprform better, very close, but not better. However, next time around your gonna have WCing for whatever setup you decide to get, whether it be AMD or Intel. Idealy you should just buy a watercooling setup and keep the 2.4C though. selling stuff is a hassle and your going to lose some cash.

[Gautam]

In terms of raw integer calculation, the ratio between T-Breds and P4C's is 1.28:1, meaning that one would need to get a T-Bred to 2.8ghz to match a P4C at 3.6ghz. That along with hyperthreading and the immense memory bandwidth make the Intel better by quite a bit. Not enough to be humanly noticeable; once you cross around 2.0ghz with an Athlon, it all looks the same IMHO, but a 2.5ghz Athlon would be slaughtered by a 3.6ghz P4C in just about all benchmarks.

[#18]

Originally posted by Gautam
In terms of raw integer calculation, the ratio between T-Breds and P4C's is 1.28:1, meaning that one would need to get a T-Bred to 2.8ghz to match a P4C at 3.6ghz. That along with hyperthreading and the immense memory bandwidth make the Intel better by quite a bit. Not enough to be humanly noticeable; once you cross around 2.0ghz with an Athlon, it all looks the same IMHO, but a 2.5ghz Athlon would be slaughtered by a 3.6ghz P4C in just about all benchmarks.


You got it all wrong. Barton > Tbred at same MHZ mostly due to extra cache. You cannot use the Tbred's number system on Barton, they are different.
Your another post said Barton at 2.5GHZ only match a 3.2GHZ P4, it is also very wrong. I tested it myself a while ago, Barton at 2.2GHZ match a 3.06GHZ P4 already. A 2.5GHZ Barton should match a P4 around 3.4GHZ.
At the same time, P4 does have extra large memory bandwidth compare to Barton, but memory bandwidth isn't really as important as most people think.

From your signature, I see you don't have either P4 or Barton. I did :)

[Anaxagoras1986]

Originally posted by Chris_F


So your saying everyone with a P4 2.4C wasted their money? Your saying they should all spend 1 third of that money and get an AMD chip?

OK. Now here this, now here this. Let it be know to all Intel users. You have wasted all your money. You should have just bought 3 crappy chips. :rolleyes:

I guess I'll go cry because I've wasted money on every high performance Intel chip I've bought through the course of my life.

Well I think it is all preference. But you can say that you wasted your money in some cases (perf/buck), depending on what you need.


Originally posted by fafnir
edit: if you do happen to have a via c3 or a mac or something, THEN you should rave about it like there's no tomorrow, and then create a distraction and run like forrest gump....

Hey I have a Cyrix PR150 overclocked to a PR200 rating and it will cream anyone here. Want to play Duke Nukem 3D, bring it on! :p

[Joris]

If you've got money what are you asking for?
Read a review and buy the best which seems to be the highest clocked P4C.
If you don't have so much money and you don't like to waste your money a 1700dlt or a barton 2500+ will be fine, more than fine :mad:

[Anaxagoras1986]

Do all Bartons go to about 2.3-2.5Ghz?

[c627627]

Yes, as long as you have something like Thermalright-nForce2 combo, even all $67 2100+ T-Bred B's should hit 2.3.

[fafnir]

Edited by cw823. Some opinions are better left unsaid.

[Chowdy]

a tbred @ 2.3 will equal a 3.2 P4. Well, according to sandra anyway.

[whatever2003]

Watercooling ?
When you consider that then there is no point buying AMD at all. The cheapest decent watercooling will cost you $200, that is more than 2 times the Barton 2500 CPU. So what is the point on saving on CPU???
By the way with Prometeia or liquid nitrogen Pentium IV C will go over 4.5 GHz and I've seen WCPUID with over 5.1 GHz. That blows out of the water anything AMD has and will have in the next 12 months.
You gotta be AMD fanatic to deny that, once you have your very own first Pentium HT you'll change your mind. I have three NForce II boards with Bartons and T'breds and one Pentium C Springdale board. The last one rules benchmarks in my house, undisputed and unchallenged.

[madcow235]

Well i just want to debunk something someone said and what was said was P4's run cooler. Sorry but umm how do i put this nicely NO! A p4 3.06 puts out more then a thunderbird did and ranks in at the #1 hottest processor putting out 90watts or so. The 3200+ puts out 55-65watts at full load. So think about this a highly overclocked 2.4c will be putting out near 100watts and a highly overclocked TBred or barton will be putting out 80-90 watts. Thats a bi difference in heat. You may proceed

[theotherphil]

Originally posted by madcow235
Well i just want to debunk something someone said and what was said was P4's run cooler. Sorry but umm how do i put this nicely NO! A p4 3.06 puts out more then a thunderbird did and ranks in at the #1 hottest processor putting out 90watts or so. The 3200+ puts out 55-65watts at full load. So think about this a highly overclocked 2.4c will be putting out near 100watts and a highly overclocked TBred or barton will be putting out 80-90 watts. Thats a bi difference in heat. You may proceed


The big difference is a 2.4C will run 3.4-3.6GHz on air. To have the XP even start to compete in performance will need watercooling at the very least. This makes the argument of AMD having better price/ performance null and void.

The vast majority of people don't want to mess about with watercooling....that is a specialist area. To these people, overclocking the P4 on air to 3.4GHz+ is a godsend. Why would they even think about spending $150+ (at least!) on watercooling and then $50 on a chip when they can get the 2.4C for $180 (max) and then overclock it on air and achieve performance that wouldn't be possible with the AMD system?

[Anaxagoras1986]

Originally posted by c627627
Yes, as long as you have something like Thermalright-nForce2 combo, even all $67 2100+ T-Bred B's should hit 2.3.

What about with my little old Iwill thing?

[c627627]

Your RAM will not let you go above 150ish FSB.
VIA's no PCI lock may or may not hold you back.

You list your DVD and CDRW in your overclockers forum sig instead of listing your heatsink. List the heat sink.

Here's what PC2100 can do though:

_____________________
2100+ AIUHB 0248
256MB Crucial PC2100 + 2x 256MB Kingston (Hynix chip) PC2100 @ 6 3 3 2
[152] FSB x 15 = 2280 MHz @ 1.8 Vcore with memory frequency at 100% [152] @ 2.77 Vdimm
37(min) C to 46(max) C Winter ; 42(min) C to 50(max) C Summer
Epox 8RDA+
Thermalright SK-7 with variable speed 80x25mm YS-Tech FD1281259B-2F
BFG GeForce4 Ti4200 8X 128MB; Antec SX-835II case ; 350W Antec SmartPower SL350

[Mark Larson]

Hehe deja vu - i stirred up some major **** in the last 2.4C vs 2500+ thread (in the Intel forum)

[Anaxagoras1986]

Originally posted by c627627
Your RAM will not let you go above 150ish FSB.
VIA's no PCI lock may or may not hold you back.

You list your DVD and CDRW in your overclockers forum sig instead of listing your heatsink. List the heat sink.

My heat sink actually works pretty well. It is a Vantec CCK - 6035D that has been lapped and with AS3, and I am pleased with my temps, it claims 110 idle temps, I dont remember what the load temps were. Besides the thermal prob on the mobo kinda stinks. I dont have a VIA chipset btw. And I have a 1/5 divider too. I know people have brought the FSB on the Iwills to 200 before. I know my RAM cannot go to 150, it tops at like 145 or soemthign terrible like that. I dont mind if I stay at a slow FSB either.

[c627627]

200? with a /5 divider?

That's like 20% above specs...
Hard drives get scrambled around there somewheres...
"Do not try this at home."

[Chowdy]

The average Barton 2500+ OC is a 27% OC mhz-wise.
The average P4 2.4C OC is a 37% OC mhz-wise.

The P4 2.4C is 77% more expensive than the Barton 2500+.

The highest Barton 2500+ OC is a 56% OC on Prommy.
The highest P4 2.4C OC is a 62% OC, also, on Prommy.

The point of these mindless statistics? The higher cost of the P4 2.4C does not necessarily justify the purchase of it over the Barton 2500+ in terms of overclocking. You will, however, get more performance (typically) out of a 2.4 OC'd than a 2500+ OC'd (at a 77% price premium).

my $0.02



Overclocking results recorded from overclockers.com's CPU database as of 8-7-03. Prices recorded from www.tcwo.com as of 8-7-03.

[OC Detective]

Unfortunately a quick glance at the cpu database and the lack of any need to verify data submitted to it makes your %age overclock stats somewhat shaky.

[Chowdy]

Yeah, i'm aware that dishonest people cause my stats to be somewhat foobar'd, but they still workout to some extent. :(

[theotherphil]

What's with all the percentages? They mean squat. The *fact* is, you will need a highly clocked AMD on water/ vapo to match the performance of a 2.4C overclocked on air. This totally destroys any price/ performance ratio that AMD once had.

If you are going compare at stock speeds, then I'll agree that the AMD is better value. But, as somebody mentioned overclocking (and using water) it only seems fair for me to mention the above.

[fafnir]

hey, just outta curiousity, is sudden nwood death syndromes still out there or is it over yet?

cause i'm always jumping the voltage so high these days and i can't bear to lose a chip to some uknown out there...

just like that direct to die cooling that i screwed up earlier.. dunno...

[dippy_skoodlez]

Originally posted by Top Hat Theater


Not necessarily. Intel has really turned their product line around in the past 24 months. The new "C" chips with HT are very fine performers and those people who buy them do so because they see the value in them that justifies the cost. Intel systems are more stable and run cooler than comparable AMD systems from what I've seen/read. Now if we were talking about the original Willamette P4, I'd agree with you wholeheartedly as IMO that chip line was terrible.

And some people may buy Intel all the time because they need to. Those people who do a lot of rendering and other memory-intensive tasks definitely benefit from the quad-pumped 800MHz FSB of the P4. We AMD'ers have about half the available bandwidth of the P4s and that just doesn't make sense to invest in regardless of price. People buy what they need; especially the people of this forum as we're "in the know."

~THT

Run cooler? I think not:

Maximum Thermal Power of Athlon XP 3200+ is 76.8 W. (page 25)

http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/white_papers_and_tech_docs/26237.PDF

Maximum Thermal Power of P4 3.2C Ghz is 82.0 W. (page 63)

ftp://download.intel.com/design/Pentium4/datashts/29864310.pdf

[dippy_skoodlez]

Originally posted by whatever2003
By the way with Prometeia or liquid nitrogen Pentium IV C will go over 4.5 GHz and I've seen WCPUID with over 5.1 GHz. That blows out of the water anything AMD has and will have in the next 12 months.

You not considring that a prommy/LN2 costs like $900 for a good one. Using the same cooling(prommy) then the AMD will come in cheaper. Seen the barton benchies with LN2, or A prommy?
3.6Ghz with Ln2.

http://www.vr-zone.com/guides/AMD/Barton/

[Anaxagoras1986]

Originally posted by c627627
200? with a /5 divider?

That's like 20% above specs...
Hard drives get scrambled around there somewheres...
"Do not try this at home."

Must have been /6. Ill check it out a little later.

[c627627]

Originally posted by gesteve
Forget Price performance... if you can keep an AMD board from dying from overclocking that would be a great trick.

I had 3 Nforce boards from 1.04 through 2.0 all died...

I now have a great Intel board and a great Intel CPU and I don't have to hold my breath everytime I go into the bios.

I loved my xp2100 at 2.3. I wish the chipset was better to support it............ :(
__________________
ASUS P4C800-E Intel P4 2.6c Philippines Fpo/Batch 7318A433
Version C30418-002 06/05/03
13x255 3.3ghz 1.58 Ccore
Corsair XMS 3500 2x256 5.2.2.2.8
TI- 4200 128meg 8x agp 311 600
Logitech Z-680...Wow!!



You fried three boards and you think it's because of the chipset?
Man, SNDS stands for Sudden Northwood Death Syndrome not Sudden nForce Death Syndrome...

List the brand of your power supply instead of them Logitech speakers and maybe we could be on to the source of your problem...

[Anaxagoras1986]

I havent had a prob with any AMD mobos. This little Iwill has taken a beating, and it has no problems. My brother has an old KT133 board (with Tbird 1.2) and some other Slot A mobo (with Classic 750) that have both taken more abuse than this Iwill and they dont have any probs either. Then there is my old K6-2 400 that has been around a while and is just plain...old and it doesnt have any probs.

[Mark Larson]

Originally posted by dippy_skoodlez


Run cooler? I think not:

Maximum Thermal Power of Athlon XP 3200+ is 76.8 W. (page 25)

http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/white_papers_and_tech_docs/26237.PDF

Maximum Thermal Power of P4 3.2C Ghz is 82.0 W. (page 63)

ftp://download.intel.com/design/Pentium4/datashts/29864310.pdf
That's not the maximum, that's just the TDP, which is a number Intel can modify with their processors to suit their needs. (Why do you think the 3.2 has only 0.1 increase over the 3.0 with a 200Mhz increase?)

In short, it means nothing if you actually want to compare the wattages of AthlonXPs and P4s.

Max of a 3.2 P4 is ~103 W (3.2D GHz 0.13 µm µPGA478 @ 1.525 V with HTT) from http://www.sandpile.org/impl/p4.htm

If you want to compare the TDP, compare it with the AthlonXP's typical power, which is 2200D MHz BT: 60.4 W (1.65 V).

Hmm. A 21.6W difference at typical power, and a 26.2W difference at max power.

[tillyoubreakit]

Hi all, I think that the P4C due to the Heat Spreader is able to run much cooler than a comparable AMD Solution. I have sold 156 AMD Systems in my Shop last year . (i am still small) :rolleyes:

And I had about 50 or so calls tellingme that their machines would not run because of the hot waether. Well the sad thing is that I only had Problems with AMD Solutions. My friend sold his Abit AT7 Max 2 XP with a 2500+ Barton in favor of an Intel System. And BTW Sandra 2003 sucks so bad it isnt even funny. Sometimes I get over 6000 MB/S in Memory, on a Staurday I get 5500 or 3700..... It depeds on how lucky you get. In a real time benschmark the Intel Solution simply kills the AMD.

Id say buy Abit IC7 and a 2.4C incl. 2x256MB XMS3500. And if you dont have the money, then just wait.....until you have it.

I am sorry to say this but,,,,, in the times of the 1.4GHz Athon vs. The Willie P4 the AMD Solution kicked Intels AS. But those days are over !!!! We are talkin at a Difference of about 1-1.8GHz in raw clock speed. Hyper Threading over 6000MB/S in mem bandwith. A much more stable solution, with lower temps and by far better chipset drivers than via will ever have.

I had sooo many AMD Systems,,,,,and sooo many intel Systems that I have lost count. And in my opinion the Intel wins hands down. There is no point in saying that the AMD does more work per clock cycel anymore. The AMD solution no matter how far its overclockes, doesnt hold a candle against the new P4-C.

Just my to cents

-Florian

PS; And please exeause my english, i am not american.

[dropadrop]

edit: *wops... missed a page*

[hipro5]

Originally posted by fafnir
yah, well my barton2500+'s been running at 2500mhz @2.1/2.2v vcore and the only thing that i've seen beating it IS some dude on these forums with a P4 @3.5ghz on a canterwood,... (beat me by ONE SECOND on superpi)


I think that you just DIDN'T compair it with something else exept the Super-Pi one........P4 is the leader whatever you'll run and at the most benchies and apps , is outperforming a LOT better than the Barton one..... ;)

[tillyoubreakit]

Originally posted by hipro5


I think that you just DIDN'T compair it with something else exept the Super-Pi one........P4 is the leader whatever you'll run and at the most benchies and apps , is outperforming a LOT better than the Barton one..... ;)

i think your right. I never found an AMD System that beat me in any Benschmark. Its just not the past anymore. AMD got run over them, the slept a bit too long. :-)

-Florian

PS: I dont mean to brag....but thats just the fact

[Supertrucker]

everyone here already knows that the intel is A LITTLE BIT faster than the amd, so im not going to try to comment on that.

but as for the heat issue, the p4 does not run cooler than the axp, however, the retail intel hsf is worlds beyond the retail amd hsf, so under those circumstances, the p4 would appear cooler

[tillyoubreakit]

Well, If we compare the Stock AMD Solution and the Stock intel Solution than we find out that the intel is faster has more features and runs cooler with all Standart Heatsinks and Thermal Pad.

-Florian

PS: This is just a discussion, dont let it go personal :cool:

[Jarlax]

Man this battle goes on and on. I have been saving up for a new rig and have been considering this exact same question for a while now and reading everything I can on both sides of the fence. This is what I have found (as stated above in the thread):

Intel 2.4c: It performs better at stock or overclocked. It is roughly double the cost of the barton 2500 (170 vs 85).

AMD Barton 2500+: It performs well, not as good as Intel, but is half the cost.

So great, we are all on board so far. But this is only half the battle. Next was finding motherboards, memory, and cooling. After I looked at it all this is what I found:

The difference in the setups was about $85.00 in favor of the AMD. Big deal! Where the Intel CPU was cheaper, the cooling for the XP was more expensive. I found deals on the motherboards that got them within 5 dollars of each other.

Go with whichever you want to go with and be done with it. If you are more comfortable or have a warm fuzzy with Intel, then go that way. If you think the 85 could be better spent, then go that way. It really is a matter of preference and all the bickering will take you from one side to the other and back again.

Close your eyes and imagine both CPU's in front of you. THey are 100% equal and so you don't have to worry about it. Now, which one do you want? That is your answer!

[tillyoubreakit]

Originally posted by Jarlax


Close your eyes and imagine both CPU's in front of you. THey are 100% equal and so you don't have to worry about it.

But thats the problem THEY ARE NOT THE SAME!!!!!! The intel is FASTER, COOLER, and has more GOODIES!!!! But it is a little bit more expensive. If you want to spend little money go for the AMD. If you have the money buy an Intel.

-Florian

[Claw13Angel]

I would definitely recommend getting xp2500+ for now so it'll hold you for awhile then when prescott and athlon64 came out with all the testing/datas, then you can decide which to go for. Beside Xp2500+ o/ced not gonna go out of date that soon as long as you got a good video card to back it up.

[tillyoubreakit]

Now that is a good idea. Its not that long until both come out anyway.

-Florian

[zabomb4163]

all this fanboyism is almost making me puke. i have comments for both sides.

to the amd fanboys - Yes, the 2400C is fasterif the other components remain the same regardless of the cpu that is chosen.

to the intel fanboys- rant all you like about how hot amd chips run, but the fact of the matter is intel chips produce more heat. its not a matter of opinion, its a fact. note, i did not say "p4s run hot" i said they make more heat. the reason p4s often run cooler is the die on the northwood is twice the size of the die on a tbredB. the larger die tranfers more heat and thus lets it run cooler.

intel boys again (seems to be a lot of them)- you cannot just "memory bandwidth" as a valid argument. you are going to need to provide real world benchmarks.

amd fanboys- don't bring up the % stuff. saying "the intel cost 2x as much" is deceptive. its just 70$. depending on the budget it can mean a lot or very little. put it into relative terms. the difference for instance is would you rather have a 9600pro or 42000, 80 extra gigs of space, twice the memory, or 9800np vs 9600pro.

[tillyoubreakit]

Ok, i am out. All I gotta say is I know that my 1.1GHz FSB and 6GB/S mem power with HT cannot be matched by any AMD System.

-Florian

PS: This discussin is going nowhere


-----Cheap=AMD
-----Power, more money=Intel

[dippy_skoodlez]

Originally posted by zabomb4163
or 9800np vs 9600pro.

Thats quite a difference ;)

[zabomb4163]

as of now

ATI RADEON 9800 128MB Non Pro cost 250$
ATI RADEON 9600 PRO cost 170$

88$ 2500+
170$ 2.4C

for some people the 80$ can mean a lot. for some it won't. But i would be willing to bet that not one person will tell me a 2.4C with a 9600pro will best a 2500+ with a 9800np.

don't minunderstand me. if you can still buy the 9800np and the 2.4 then by all means do it. just don't sacrifice your video performance for a little bit extra cpu power.

[RedDawg41]

xp1700 week 0319 wmpw stock speed 1466MHz, OC'd to 2535MHz, FSB230MHz sync. SLK900u w/tornado 92mm 119cfm
xp1800 week 0322 umpw stock speed 1533MHz, OC'd to
2415MHz, AX-7HS w/tornado 82mm 84cfm (1st cpu)
xp1800 week 0322 umpw (2nd cpu) OC'd to 2433MHz with AX-7 w/tornado 82mm 84cfm
xp2100 week 0248 wmpw stock1733mhz, oc'd to 2490MHz, AX-7
same fan. 1st cpu
xp2100 week 0249 wmpw,(2ndCPU) oc'd to 2450MHz, Vantec Aeroflow w/TMD fan

Point of all this? Just showing you that the AMD XP (TBred) cpu are excellent Overclockers. the xp1800 set I picked up for 48.50 each @FRYs electronic getting over 900MHz in oc, the XP2100's I'm getting over 700MHz oc, xp1700 is over 1100MHz in oc, $59 at the time of purchase.
Just picked up a couple of XP2500 AQXEA 0330 VPMW: stock'd 1833MHz, OC'd 2233MHz @default vcore(200FSB). That's 400mhz oc ($85). do the math, and as important to those who OC, keeping enough $$ in youpocket for the next upgrade is our number 1 concern. No watercooling was ever used on these CPU's. Imagine the possibilities?? :)

[zabomb4163]

RedDawg41- as good as your overclocks were......the 2.4C still beats them in overall peformance.

[RedDawg41]

There's no denying that fact at all... My hats off to those who figured out Intell's way of producing excellent cpu's inwhich you're paying for. Needless to say about the premium $$ that's paid for an establish OC intel board as well. No question about it's performance, good to the last drop as they say. I, however, have my preference based on how much I "Can" spend and how much I "could" spend on cpu's/mobo's/memory. hell, I've gotten through with the underdog (AMD) and will stick it out and I just hate not being able to adjust the multiplier on Intell based Mobos. just my 2cents.

[#18]

Originally posted by zabomb4163
as of now

ATI RADEON 9800 128MB Non Pro cost 250$
ATI RADEON 9600 PRO cost 170$

88$ 2500+
170$ 2.4C

for some people the 80$ can mean a lot. for some it won't. But i would be willing to bet that not one person will tell me a 2.4C with a 9600pro will best a 2500+ with a 9800np.

don't minunderstand me. if you can still buy the 9800np and the 2.4 then by all means do it. just don't sacrifice your video performance for a little bit extra cpu power.

I agree it is all about your budget. The difference in performance after overclocking between Barton 2500+ and P4 2.4C is around 5%. The price difference is 2x. For people who have limited budget, extra $80+ can be spent on the video card. For people with no budget problem, then go for 2.4C and a good video card.

[Maxvla]

this thread is still alive eh?

redawg i agree that your processors are consistent but the 2.4c is more consistent than any of the amd chips without breaking it down into steppings, weeks, etc. if you look at my 2.4c poll in the intel forums you will see the huge glob of users reporting higher than 3ghz while your 1700+ poll shows a steady line moving from stock to very fast instead of the sharply increasing line in my poll.

so what was this thread about anyways? ;)

[OC Detective]

Exactly the original poster has already made his decision - let it go!

[#18]

Originally posted by Maxvla
this thread is still alive eh?



so what was this thread about anyways? ;)

Come on, just trying to help pathetic AMD here.

[-=Mr_B=-]

Sorry, i just have to, but i noticed that the fella who said his OC'ed Barton XP 2500+ would beast any Intel 3.06Ghz cpu... Dident you guys see it? "3.06", offcourse he beasts it, its the P4B at best... back then there was no question, an overclocked barton would win.. with the P4C he might have tried, and failed... so thats why he dont comment?

Anyway, thanks all, was entertaining to read, had a few mins to spoil :- )
B!

[Demont]

Originally posted by zabomb4163
RedDawg41- as good as your overclocks were......the 2.4C still beats them in overall peformance.

define overall performance.

[zabomb4163]

gaming, encoding, ect

[gazzrawly]

i think that answer is obvious........AMD all the way

[Steven4563]

lol @ gaz

yeah id rather have a 2500+ with a 9800np than a p4C 2.4 and a 9600pro

but thats if money matters to u

[gazzrawly]

lol yea.....glad some1 has commen sence :) i like being able to afford bog roll at the end of the week

[Steven4563]

LOL........................:cool:

[zabomb4163]

Originally posted by Steven4563
lol @ gaz

yeah id rather have a 2500+ with a 9800np than a p4C 2.4 and a 9600pro

but thats if money matters to u

exactly. somtimes who has the fastest processor doesn't matter.

[Mark Larson]

Its all about the needs. If you want to run Sciencemark instead of 3DMark, i could show you a very nice AMD-based solution, untouchable by any Intel. If you want to run Sandra or WMV Encoder, i could show you an Intel-based solution, untouchable by any AMD.

[Maxvla]

sorry to interject and go off topic of this gloriously insightful thread...

but what is bog roll? :confused:

[zabomb4163]

bog roll?

[Mark Larson]

aka fapping paper

[zabomb4163]

fapping paper?

[Mark Larson]

toilet paper

[Maxvla]

oh ok. them crazy englanders :D

[zabomb4163]

lol, so it seems

[Cjwinnit]

I think this 'interesting' sequence of posts can be described well in smilies....

Originally posted by gazzrawly
lol yea.....glad some1 has commen sence :) i like being able to afford bog roll at the end of the week

:cool:

Originally posted by zabomb4163
bog roll?

:-/

Originally posted by Mark Larson
aka fapping paper

:eek:

Originally posted by Maxvla
oh ok. them crazy englanders :D

;)

[dippy_skoodlez]

Originally posted by Mark Larson
Its all about the needs. If you want to run Sciencemark instead of 3DMark, i could show you a very nice AMD-based solution, untouchable by any Intel. If you want to run Sandra or WMV Encoder, i could show you an Intel-based solution, untouchable by any AMD.

Sciencemark? I would like to see this "sciencemark" ;)

[Demont]

Originally posted by dippy_skoodlez


Sciencemark? I would like to see this "sciencemark" ;)
Are you doubting its existence or is it a joke I don't get...?

http://www.sciencemark.org/

Many reputable hardware sites use or have used this in the past.

[gamefoo21]

oooh off i go to see how slow my lil intel cele-t 1398.422852 mhz processor is :D

[dippy_skoodlez]

Originally posted by Demont

Are you doubting its existence or is it a joke I don't get...?

http://www.sciencemark.org/

Many reputable hardware sites use or have used this in the past.

I see... never heard of it.. LOL...;)

[AMD_Me]

Originally posted by Maxvla
paper or plastic? which is better?

personal preference really. they are both great processors. both overclock a ton.

the barton is alot cheaper than the p4 but the p4 probably outperforms the barton even both fully overclocked by at least 5% in most benchies. now you got to ask yourself... is that 5% worth the extra cost? do the athlon based motherboards have all the features i like? maybe the intel boards have more of the features i like... what kind of ram am i going to buy? if i'm going to stay around 200-215 then i could buy cheaper ram and go with amd and be fine. if i'm going to really push the envelope i would need more expensive nicer ram i could really maximize the potential the intel rig can offer.

lots of questions you need to ask yourself and answer. what are your goals? whats your budget? how are you going to cool it?

asking which one is better leaves alot of room to discuss. please narrow it down or at least answer the questions i have put in this post.

Fully overclocked, It is like running approximately a 3200-3400+ Barton (which gets beaten by the 3.0C) against atleast a P4 3.2GHz. The Pentium can also do this overclock on stock cooling, and you need to invest in $35+ worth of heatsink and fan to do it with the Barton.

[emericanchaos]

well i'm not gonnag et into all the fanboy crap again but here's how i see it.

i have my AMD system running synthetics and scoring better then a P4 2.66HT with RDRAM. considering the memory on that machine costs more then my CPU motherboard and memory combined i think i made out pretty well.

show me a $60 P4 that can put out the same numbers or can do the same in folding.

[Lithan]

Bottom line. If you spend the same amount on mobo/sound/net/video/ram. The 2500+ and 2.4c will be neck and neck. You dunk an extra 200-300$ buying two sticks of pc4000 ram, a good intel mobo, etc. You will beat the amd.

2200 Is not the max overclock for a barton despite what AMD_Me says... and it is EASILY attainable with stock cooling. Go look at neweggs reviews. Good ones max at 2500 (air and reasonable voltages to 2700 (with very good cooling and a nice hunk of voltage)

[amsties]

A copy and paste from a earlier post on same subject,

the argument was max overclocking performance between p4 2.8 and xp2500. its a know fact the average max overclock on 2500 is about 2500MHZ and for the p42.8-/-3.2 is about 3.4Mhz. the 2.4c in most cases will just beat 3ghz if you lucky.

http://4gamingfiles.com/uploaded/americasarmy//toms.JPG

p4
3200
237.3 divided by 32 = 7.41 fps per 100mhz

Barton
3200
225.3 divided by 32 = 7.04 fps per 100mhz equivalent

Barton
3200 divided by 2200 = 1.45 x its true Mhz will give its p4 equivalent

2500Mhz x 1.45 = 3625 roughly a xp3600

Barton
36 x 7.04 = 253.44 fps@2500Mhz $130

p4
34 x 7.41 = 251.94 fps@3400Mhz $450





the xp2500's max performance is equivalent to the new p4s @ 3.4 at 1/4 the cost. so the 2500 is the better chip. I my self am @ 2530Mhz on my 2500 on air.

[Blunt]

the P2.4C in most cases will just beat 3ghz if your lucky

uhh..... try reading the intel forum once in a while before you go spouting off wrong info P42.4c does on avg 3.2-3.4 ghz if you don't break 3ghz with a 2.4c your doing something wrong.

[Yodums]

Well it depends on your budget and as well as what you're interested in.

People can say bang of the buck when a lot of us do this for a hobby and you could probably just get another system with the money we invest in our systems just for an overclock when you could have already bought a new system. For example, look at the people who buy Prometeia, they probably realize with that money it could go into another system but they don't care, they just want to have fun and get the best overclock possible as it is FUN.

Now, if I had a choice, I'd go with the Intel since they seem to be hitting insane FSBs and speeds. :cool: I'm a lil burnt out from AMD since I had my rig for almost a year and I want to try Intel P4s again since their overclocking are hitting insane percentages.

[aftermath]

Originally posted by Top Hat Theater


Intel systems are more stable and run cooler than comparable AMD systems from what I've seen/read.
~THT

ok they may run cooler but i ran gimps for 8 mounths on a 1.2@1.5 t-bird with only restarts for sytem updates/upgrades and not many of them.
the point is that on any pc that is intsaled properly with adiquate cooling and a good psu will be solid no mater who makes the cpu.
(iv seen intel systems that were woberly cos of cheep psu, I owened one.)

the system im running now was slowed because it was geting a little warm. my case was not best suited for a dual rig and my summer temps were a bit hot. when it hit 35*c ambiant out side (god knows what it was in a small room upstairs with the door shut) it would crash.
but so would most of the oem pcs that ive seen. now iv got my new case and air flow sorted this thing is solid! there is no crashing it. sure i could if i put the fsb up to 150 and left it at stock voltage but thats not the point.
and yes 150 is the max fsb on this board but thats not my point.

Id say go with the intel tho as you can get a good oc out of it and ht will become more usefull. the socket A is being replaced so its life will be lessusefull/shorter/harder to get a faster chip for little bother/sister/person who's going to buy it next door in a year or 2
(my temps are currently less than in the sig)

[Lithan]

Looking at how cheap intel boards are in newegg refurbs gives me ideas. If I only had a spare 250$ kicking around I might build a bare intel system with a 2.4c and a dirt cheap dual ddr 800mhz board, put my ram in it and see what it does against my amd system without investing extra in other components. (Price difference would be a little more than the cost of the motherboard.) And maybe keep it if it impressed me as much as some of you seem to think it would. Sadly. I am very poor right now. But I did just get a great deal on an intel heatsink. Looks like it's right around the volcano 7+ or 11 in performance... Oh well. It's getting hacked up for a possible northbridge and mosfet cooler. Such a shame... Mwahahaha.

20$ for a smartfan2 and an allcopper sink shipped doesn't sound bad to me.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3427623314&category=42003

[Malakai]

Originally posted by Maxvla
sorry to interject and go off topic of this gloriously insightful thread...

but what is bog roll? :confused:


:p

baka

[hangten]

I have built an intel rig with a 2.4c $249.99 with an MSI NEO board 229.99 mildly overclocked to 2.66 and an fx5200ultra(149.99). Bought the chip when it first came out and sadly to say it flopped. My overclocked1800dlt3c@2370mhz 69.99 AMD rig (ati9700pro299.99)Knocks out my intel so badly its sad. What hurts the most was my wallet.

"You dunk an extra 200-300$ buying two sticks of pc4000 ram, a good intel mobo, etc. You will beat the amd."

Yeah i agree but the extra saved for the amd setup will get u more. When i first built the system pc3700 was not even out. Things must get better with age.

[KuNFuSHuN]

most new intel chips comin out are pretty bad and its luck to get a good o/c chip..

[hipro5]

Originally posted by KuNFuSHuN
most new intel chips comin out are pretty bad and its luck to get a good o/c chip..

The secret is to learn and know how to Overclock Intel CPUs........ ;)

Luck with nowadays Intel CPUs, is to find one NOT to Overclock well.......:D

[Gautam]

Originally posted by Yodums
Well it depends on your budget and as well as what you're interested in.

People can say bang of the buck when a lot of us do this for a hobby and you could probably just get another system with the money we invest in our systems just for an overclock when you could have already bought a new system. For example, look at the people who buy Prometeia, they probably realize with that money it could go into another system but they don't care, they just want to have fun and get the best overclock possible as it is FUN.

Now, if I had a choice, I'd go with the Intel since they seem to be hitting insane FSBs and speeds. :cool: I'm a lil burnt out from AMD since I had my rig for almost a year and I want to try Intel P4s again since their overclocking are hitting insane percentages.

My sentiments 110%.

Originally posted by hipro5
The secret is to learn and know how to Overclock Intel CPUs........

Luck with nowadays Intel CPUs, is to find one NOT to Overclock well.......
:D Well, can't argue with this, but if you know your steppings, virtually the same is true with AMD's.

[whatever2003]

exactly. somtimes who has the fastest processor doesn't matter.
Man, what are you doing on overclockers board?
You can as well stick to Pentium 3 for that matter, or Duron, or Celeron. All of them work fine for word processing and browsing.
most new intel chips comin out are pretty bad and its luck to get a good o/c chip..
You gotta be kidding? Do you actually know what are you talking about?

[funnyperson1]

Originally posted by whatever2003

Man, what are you doing on overclockers board?
You can as well stick to Pentium 3 for that matter, or Duron, or Celeron. All of them work fine for word processing and browsing.

You gotta be kidding? Do you actually know what are you talking about?

If you read the post, you would have seen that he made that comment in reference to the post "I would rather have a 2500+ and a 9800np than a 2.4C and a 9600." That is why he said that the fastest cpu doesn't matter. I don't know about you, but I would take the 9800 anyday.

As for the other comment, I almost agree. The P4s nowadays are very good overclockers.

[whatever2003]

If you read the post, you would have seen that he made that comment in reference to the post "I would rather have a 2500+ and a 9800np than a 2.4C and a 9600."
That makes sense only if you have that exact amount of money and not a $50 more. For $50 more, since you need no extra cooler for 2.4C, you can have both 2.4C and 9800 non-pro.
And since you are ready to spend couple of hundreds for graphic card, what sense it makes to go bonkers on half as much for the CPU? Overclocked 2.4C will make 2,000 more on 3DMark2001 than overclocked Barton. That means perhaps $100-200 more in terms of graphic cards, if this is how one values PC.

[emericanchaos]

Originally posted by whatever2003

That makes sense only if you have that exact amount of money and not a $50 more. For $50 more, since you need no extra cooler for 2.4C, you can have both 2.4C and 9800 non-pro.
And since you are ready to spend couple of hundreds for graphic card, what sense it makes to go bonkers on half as much for the CPU? Overclocked 2.4C will make 2,000 more on 3DMark2001 than overclocked Barton. That means perhaps $100-200 more in terms of graphic cards, if this is how one values PC.

right you're saying that if both machines have a 9800 then the P4 will be faster. and you're right. but the 2.4C costs 3 times more then the barton. it doesn't perform 3 times better. why is it worth the money? i wouldn't pay an extra $160 or whatever it is to gain 2000 3dmarks. and your "if this is how one values a PC" remark. if you're building a computer to do well in 3dmark then why do you really need a computer? bottom line is a 2500 with a 9800 pro is going to play any game available perfectly and the extra money spent on the intel won't mean squat because it can't do it any better then perfect.

i'd love to have a P4 they overclock like mad and look like tons of fun. but when it comes down to what i use a computer for and how much intel systems cost it's just not worth the money.

the difference in power is arguable and more importantly negligable. either machine overclocked would be overkill. that's the point of overclocking. so some people like ford and some like chevy. one may be superior or it may not. it doesn't really matter because both are perfectly capable of picking up groceries and driving the kids to soccer practice. after all that's what we need these large over bearing trucks for anyways. and it's exactly the same with computers.

an overclocked barton with a 9800 is using a cannonball to kill a mosquito. an overclocked 2.4C with a 9800 is just a bigger cannonball.

[whatever2003]

Two times not three times. Retail Barton 2500 is about $90, retail 2.4C is about $170.
I might agree with you to some degree but this is not how the prices work. XP 3200 costs almost 5 times as much as 2500 but it is not 5 times faster, far away from it.

[emericanchaos]

sorry about the cost mistake. i don't keep up on CPU prices really. even so performance won't double by going with a 2.4C. you would also have to factor in the cost of the motherboard and memory of the intel system. motherboards for intels cost about 50% more and if you really want to push the new intel chipsets you're going to need some exotic memory. (exotic is my word for today apparently). all of these add up.

if you're into overclocking then you don't buy a 3200. i don't know why anyone would buy a 3200. what's the clock difference from a 2500? can't be THAT much. they're supposed to officially support 200Mhz FSB but about any Tbred B athlon can do that so that's not a selling point either.

[whatever2003]

you would also have to factor in the cost of the motherboard and memory of the intel system. motherboards for intels cost about 50% more and if you really want to push the new intel chipsets you're going to need some exotic memory.
Neither is true. First you can get the top notch quality overclocking motherboard for Intel that is $95 or less, namely IS7-E. And quality NForce 2 motherboards are not exactly that much cheaper than Intel quality motherboards.

Second you can achieve excellent memory performance with PC 2700 since Intel uses ratios. The better you have the bigger bandwidth will be but with PC2700 you'll have exceptional scores that no AMD motherboard can even dream about.
Intel processors come with adequate coolers while for AMD processors you have to pay another $40+ for a quality cooler. That difference is way more than the difference in prices of motherboards.

[c627627]

Hey whatever2003 and all you all stop talking the talk, it's been 25 days and none of you replied with hard facts to the thread
http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=222201
in which you've been clearly asked to
from the thread http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=222201 Originally posted by c627627
I'm genuinely interested but none of the Intel boys ever reply:
instead of saying "...but that's just me", list the whole lot, like the 5th post did above for AMD so people can take a look and make they're decision based on cost vs. what you get for it.

No one is saying 2.4c wouldn't be "better". Of course it would.
But where's the deal for Intel heatsink, mobo, ram, etc.
I'm genuinely interested.

Assemble the links to all the Intel parts and let's compare dollars to cents.

[Lithan]

People who say "Ooo you can o/c intels on stock cooling but amd's need a 50$ heatsink" are so full of garbage it's amazing they can talk without it shooting out their mouth. (Oh wait, they can't.) Intel's heatsink is a whopping .04c/w lower than amd's. 66% of the difference between alpha pal 8045 and the ax-7. Oh yeah, and intels put out more heat at stock than amd's. Furthermore, my 1466mhz processor can do 800mhz over default with stock voltage. I'd wager that keeps right up there with intel's capability for overclocking on stock voltage, so don't even try the "Amd's need more voltage" arguement with me.

Intel's aren't more stable
Intel's aren't cooler
Intel's aren't better at overclocking on stock voltage or with stock heatsinks. (Amd users simply haven't emptied their bank accounts... so they can afford a better heatsink.)

These BS arguements won't fly. You want to talk facts... I suggest you sort them from your fantasies first.

[hipro5]

Originally posted by Lithan
People who say "Ooo you can o/c intels on stock cooling but amd's need a 50$ heatsink" are so full of garbage it's amazing they can talk without it shooting out their mouth. (Oh wait, they can't.) Intel's heatsink is a whopping .04c/w lower than amd's. 66% of the difference between alpha pal 8045 and the ax-7. Oh yeah, and intels put out more heat at stock than amd's. Furthermore, my 1466mhz processor can do 800mhz over default with stock voltage. I'd wager that keeps right up there with intel's capability for overclocking on stock voltage, so don't even try the "Amd's need more voltage" arguement with me.

Intel's aren't more stable
Intel's aren't cooler
Intel's aren't better at overclocking on stock voltage or with stock heatsinks. (Amd users simply haven't emptied their bank accounts... so they can afford a better heatsink.)

These BS arguements won't fly. You want to talk facts... I suggest you sort them from your fantasies first.

Yeap......You're absolutely right.......Pentiium4 CPU's can't overclock well with stock heatsink and default VCore.......They are crap......... :D

Ahhh.....BTW .....This is a P4 with stock heatsink(modded at 6000rpms max) and Default VCore.........Cheers............ ;)

http://www.pctech.gr/hipro5/photos/IC7_P4_3C/png/P4_3C@3,8_air_png.png


This is the modded default heatsink for 6000rpms......

http://www.pctech.gr/hipro5/photos/Modds/Intel_P4_fan/Intelfan3.jpg

[Burning Phoenix]

HIPRO
I just seen your post and had to smile. I guess you showed them.
:)

Oh by the way when it was mentioned about stability i am one who will always believe that Intel based are the most stable. I have 3 Intel and 2 AMD which run SETI 24/7 except for one AMD at the moment. Guess which one has to be restarted at least twice a month. I put together approx. 7 months ago the second system in my sig and just a couple of weeks ago i had to restart because i swapped it's PC1066 for PC800 otherwise it would still be running non-stop.

[hipro5]

Originally posted by Burning Phoenix
HIPRO
I just seen your post and had to smile. I guess you showed them.
:)

Not me M8.......The facts........ ;) :D

[whatever2003]

Assemble the links to all the Intel parts and let's compare dollars to cents.
I buy my stuff using temporary sales like refurbished etc, so what I do and how I find the deals won't help you. I payed my last Pentium 2.4C $124 and few cents. That Costarican is my the latest Pentium (I have three) and it runs cool 3.3 GHz for now. I used SK-7 with 478 socket adapter, I believe that was like $14 since I bought it refurbished too. The fan is my old ball bearing case fan, which I think I payed like $2. I'd probably use retail heatsink but the CPU was bought OEM, meaning I didn't get the heatsink. The motherboard is refurbished (see patern?) P4P800 which I payed $79.
Hard drive is Maxtor 80 gig which was I think was $50 plus tax after rebate.
Basically, not much more than what I would pay for Athlon system, I have those as well.

[keio]

AMD is cheaper than Intel :) i just love AMD and thats it

[c627627]

Originally posted by c627627
Hey whatever2003 and all you all stop talking the talk, it's been 25 days and none of you replied with hard facts to the thread
http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=222201
in which you've been clearly asked to


Assemble the links to all the Intel parts and let's compare dollars to cents.

Originally posted by whatever2003
I buy my stuff using temporary sales like refurbished etc...

mm-k.. :rolleyes:... so you agree that when it comes to buying new stuff Intel has no argument here value-wise.

[whatever2003]

mm-k.. ... so you agree that when it comes to buying new stuff Intel has no argument here value-wise.
I buy refurbished AMD as well. :D
I have nothing against AMD, only Intel has better processors now, and I can afford them, at least refurbished. ;)

[Lithan]

"I'd wager that keeps right up there with intel's capability for overclocking on stock voltage,"

Umm Hipro. I got 800 amd mhz overclock stock. You got 794 intel mhz overclock.

Way to show me... by proving me right... wait.... hmm

[Lithan]

And phenix. Your intels are on abit and asus and your amd are on gigabyte and you consider this a fair compairison? You can't be serious.


FYI My buddies amd 1900+ has ran nonstop since he upgraded the heatsink... oh, about 8 months now I think. I'm not an always on sort I'm afraid. But I've gone two weeks doing massive file transfers solid uptime. Didn't even reboot before I played some CS when it finished.

[unreal]

but isnt the 2.4c 800fsb only one with HT over amd? wouldnt it make it a better cpu?

[Fallen Phoenix]

I'm not up to date on the Hyper Threading thing but I'd really like to know what actually supports it. If the program isn't written to take advantage of it then what use is it? It's kind of like Directx. I downloaded directx 9.0 for some reason even though my card supports 7.1 max. That's not a great comparison but you get the point, if you can't use it it's just another way for them to charge more.

I just made the move back to AMD with my 1700+ and I can't believe Intel charges what they do. Some of the cost is in marketing which AMD does practically zero compared to Intel (remember those cool commercials with the guys in colored clean suits, I loved those). But it can't be that much difference just because Intel advertises more.

In my opinion, Intels are only more expensive because people will pay more for them, they aren't worth it to me. My 2 pennies

[funnyperson1]

Originally posted by Fallen Phoenix
I'm not up to date on the Hyper Threading thing but I'd really like to know what actually supports it. If the program isn't written to take advantage of it then what use is it? It's kind of like Directx. I downloaded directx 9.0 for some reason even though my card supports 7.1 max. That's not a great comparison but you get the point, if you can't use it it's just another way for them to charge more.

I just made the move back to AMD with my 1700+ and I can't believe Intel charges what they do. Some of the cost is in marketing which AMD does practically zero compared to Intel (remember those cool commercials with the guys in colored clean suits, I loved those). But it can't be that much difference just because Intel advertises more.

In my opinion, Intels are only more expensive because people will pay more for them, they aren't worth it to me. My 2 pennies

Any program that supports dual cpus will support HT and will see some performance increase. In other words any NT or Unix based OS (excluding XP Home), most workstation apps like CAD and 3D rendering, photoshop and even QuakeIII. But most apps that the average user uses won't see much of an improvement except when multitasking in a good OS like 2kPro, XP Pro, or Linux.

[whatever2003]

Umm Hipro. I got 800 amd mhz overclock stock. You got 794 intel mhz overclock.
He overclocked Pentium 3.0 HT, the real processor and showed you the proof. You are only talking. There is no way you will overclock Barton to 2.5 GHz on stock voltage and stock cooling as you claim. You can perhaps do that with watercooling and 1.9-2.0V but in that case all the arguments about the cheap processor are out of the window.

[hipro5]

Yeap.......Another BAD overclocker P4 2.4GHz with stock cooling and default VCore.......Gee those chips are crap men...... :D

http://www.pctech.gr/hipro5/photos/SL6RZ_png.png

[hipro5]

Oooopppppsssss......Wait ... I found another "crap" P4 CPU's......Those P4's are "CRAP" men......I'll NEVER buy those CPU's again.......Si(f)t........ :D

http://www.pctech.gr/hipro5/photos/P4_1,8@3753_png.png

http://www.pctech.gr/hipro5/photos/P4_2.4@3834_png.png

[Maxvla]

that start button looks quite odd. lol :D

[hipro5]

Originally posted by Maxvla
that start button looks quite odd. lol :D

:D

[Lithan]

Wow whatever. Your mathmatics are astounding me. 1466 + 800 = 2500! You have mucho smartness in your headbox! Oh and fyi No barton runs at 1466 stock. (Yes I realize this thread compairs a 2500 to a 2.4, but that's a foolish compairison in this case. You are compairing intels best overclocking current cpu to an amd somewhere between 5 and 10. And I made clear I was speaking of a 1700+)

Oh no. Hipro. Now I have to do a work compairison, or a % overclock compairison. Wow. My clock is still more impressive. Good for me. And the 3.8. Nice try, but that aren't no stock cooling y'all got thar suhn.

And why are you acting like an ass? I never said 2.4's were crap. I said That they weren't more stable, cooler or better overclockers on stock cooling/volts. The only one you even have a chance at argueing and not sounding like an idiot fanboy is the the last. And so far the best you've done is post a 903 mhz overclock (about 700 mhz if translated to amd mhz).

Oh, and my chip isn't even a dlt3c, by the by.

[zabomb4163]

Excelent points Lithan. i think we have a pretty good discussion going on here. i've yet to see any other threads with a discussion this civil. On the topic of stock coolers and stock volts for amd in my personal experience.

2500+ (1830) @ 2300 stock cooler, stock volts 25% overclock....if you go by % oc thats a 2400p4 oc'ed to 3gig.

--off topic....i'm more impressed with the 9500np i bought. fillrate of 1000 mult-itexture when i bought it now it pulls more than 2500 multi.. 2700 3dmark03 score to 5000.
150% increase in fillrate :)

[hipro5]

The 1.8GHz RZ C1 CPU on stock was about 3475MHz..........NOT bad at all I think......... ;) :D

BTW.....I see EVERY DAY in INTEL forums a lot of ppl coming to INTEL side........As a matter of fact have you seen anyone coming to AMD side lately????......Just wonder!!!.......

Ahhh.......Keep trying to persuade some ppl to come to AMD side.....It's never too late....... ;)

[whatever2003]

Wow whatever. Your mathmatics are astounding me. 1466 + 800 = 2500!
Really?
This is your post:
2200 Is not the max overclock for a barton despite what AMD_Me says... and it is EASILY attainable with stock cooling. Go look at neweggs reviews. Good ones max at 2500 (air and reasonable voltages to 2700 (with very good cooling and a nice hunk of voltage)

Talking about Barton.

In either case you are prone to exeggeration and nonsense that you are not able to back up with proofs. Hipro offered those to you and now it would be your turn to shut up or put up. :D

It is somewhat obvious to me (as an owner of three Bartons) that you have none because if you do you would know that they do not overclock to 2500, under no "reasonable" air cooling, much less to 2700. If so why don't you show CPU-Z + Prime95, on the same screen, of that magic CPU you have?

[Lithan]

Ok whatever. Listen closely. Stop lying about what I say. it only makes you look either stupid or desperate. I never once said you could take a barton to 2500 on stock cooling and volts. In fact I made very clear that it wasn't on stock cooling or volts with parenthesis addressing just the issue of cooling and voltage.


I don't own a barton. But I've seen dozens of people hitting 2.2-2.3 on stock cooling and voltage. And 2.4-2.5 with very minor voltage boosts. You either have crappy rigs or just godawful luck not to get a single 2.5 barton out of 3. My tbred which is almost a year old does 2500 on reasonable air (not silent, but reasonably quiet). I can hit close to 2625 stable if I cram voltage down it's throat. Are you saying despite hundreds of reports to the contrary, that amd processors haven't improved enough to increase 75mhz on overclock in a year? I don't buy it.

As for screens. I could easily post a screenshot of me running at twelve million gigahertz on .01volts. My point? If you don't trust my word anyway, posting screens wont do anything.

And Hipro. I recall 3 recent threads of first time amd users. I remember seeing two in one day. As for amd users switching to intel... I think you're full of it. Intel and amd haven't done much of anything in the past few months, so there's nothing to incite daily converts as you claim. Oh wait... post screenshots of every thread with the date started in view, then I will believe you. :P

And yeah, can't beat a moddable 9500np.

[Fallen Phoenix]

uhhh I'm a new AMD user :D Of course I did switch from one of Intel's worst chips (1.5Ghz Willy) to a decent AMD Tbred. I was very impressed with AMD though, my past experience with them was less than stellar with my dad's 1.2Ghz Athlon (just athlon) which wants to melt itself albeit under less than ideal circumstances and before that a K6-2 333Mhz which well... was too dang slow but did have a IHS.

AMD had it's problems in the past but they've excelled in the past couple years and have made amazing chips while still charging what they're worth. I would give a big toe if an Intel rep could PROVE to me they cost that much more to make than AMD.

[Maxvla]

Originally posted by Lithan
And Hipro. I recall 3 recent threads of first time amd users. I remember seeing two in one day. As for amd users switching to intel... I think you're full of it. Intel and amd haven't done much of anything in the past few months, so there's nothing to incite daily converts as you claim. Oh wait... post screenshots of every thread with the date started in view, then I will believe you. :P
you missed the mass exodus which happened a few months ago. there were literally 2-4 new threads *each day* for a week or two discussing amd people moving to intel systems.

[whatever2003]

I don't own a barton. But I've seen dozens of people hitting 2.2-2.3 on stock cooling and voltage. And 2.4-2.5 with very minor voltage boosts. You either have crappy rigs or just godawful luck not to get a single 2.5 barton out of 3.

You don't own a single Barton but you've seen it? :D

My setups are nothing to laugh about. One is with NF7-S, another with A7N8X Deluxe, and the third is with Chaintech Apogee, basically three the top N-Force 2 boards out there. There are no board/setup limitations and I use the top quality air cooling, meaning Thermalright.
You won't see 2.5 GHz Barton on air cooling, as simple as that. Your exaggerations, in terms of few hundreds of MHz are plain and obvious in what you posted.

I own 3 Pentiums, two of them are 2.4C and they overclock better than Barton and score significantly higher benchmarks. Not that my Barton systems are bad, just they are not equal in terms of performance, as simple as that. I use both AMD (for years) and Intel (as of recently).

[NoxioN]

I dont know whats worse the people that start these threads or the ones posting in it, oops i just became stupid by posting :rolleyes:

[Mark Larson]

Originally posted by NoxioN
I dont know whats worse the people that start these threads or the ones posting in it, oops i just became stupid by posting :rolleyes:
I just lollerskated across the lawn when i read that.

[zabomb4163]

"You won't see 2.5 GHz on air cooling"

http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=226358

(i am NOT saying it happens a lot. but 2.5Ghz on air DOES happen.. 2.3-2.4 is the average clock)

i've seen 2.6Ghz amd on air. (note, i believe intels are still faster overclocked)

[Maxvla]

it wasn't an xp2500 but my 2100+ did 2520 on a slk800 with a medium noise ystech fan. though at 1.95v.

[funnyperson1]

1700+ cant dp what on aircooling???

http://www.aoaforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20519

:p. too bad this dude cant get his pics right.

heres a good screenie:

http://www.aoaforums.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=7059

[Lithan]

I was replying... but I think funnyperson did that well enough for me.

[whatever2003]

2.2V core.
You think that was on air cooling? What air? Condensed nitrogen?
Air my foot, smells good.

With extreme cooling everything is possible but you won't be cooling 2.2V on XP using air cooler. With liquid Nitrogen it is possible to get Pentium well over 4 GHz, the biggest you can see on VR-zone as 5.1 GHz. It is possible to get XP over 3 GHz too.

[Lithan]

You dont need nitro for 2.2 I can run 2.2 all day on maze3 water.

You can run 2.2 on impressive air, but I wouldn't do it personally. Hell, I've seen folks running 2.35 on air to burn in with. Dropped mhz though. Most I've seen everyday on air was 2.15 I think it was in a members sig here awhile ago. These aren't intels remember... a little voltage doesn't make amds run crying for their mommies like 'some' chips. :cool:

[Lithan]

Wow Qwerty has done some impressive stuff. A 1700+ at 2800mhz, oh yeah, and this...


air slk-800 =80mm 75cfm fan
agoia-y 0213=2004mhz at 2.05v at 49-53c load
aroia-y 0220=2046mhz at 2.2v at 52-55c load

Not even the best air out now.


S-s-s-s-s-s-s-shot down.

[whatever2003]

Enough nonsense, go to sleep kiddie.

[Lithan]

I work evenings/nights and took half a day off tonight. I'm up till 3am at least. I'm sorry you are so ashamed at being proven wrong so blatantly and repeatedly by a "kiddie".

Now where were we before Whatever decided to interject and challenge my genius?

Hmmm... I wonder how much vdd I'd need to get 250FSB on my nf7-s. Mmmm 250fsb on my nf7-s.

This compairison is rather silly. Buy whatever you want. Both chips are among the best available from their manufacturers. Although I personally prefer 1700's over 2500's... as the 1700's price stays immoble and the 2500's keeps dropping every month or so, that may soon change. As long as you dont sink 250+$ on a cpu these days, and dont buy anything starting in cele... you really can't do too badly. Frankly, I think motherboards are what needs more discussion. Nothing is really gained from these cpu debates.

[hipro5]

Guys.........Stop this "little fight"........ ;)

All of us HAVE to admit that :

1. Celeron IS cheep and IS BAD
2. AMD IS good BUT NOT as good enough for the time been.....OF caurce it's cheep too(the "lower" CPU's)
3. INTEL is better for the time been in almost the most of the apps out there........

NOONE can say nothing but that.........Those are the facts nowadays......

.......and PLEASE DON'T tell me about AMD's stock cooling and stock VCore and 2300MHz cos you know that this is BS.......Not even 2300MHz at More VCore AND STOCK cooling running ALL day stable.......No way men.......IF someone believes that , it's better to go and get a CPU on his own so as to test it at 2300MHz and above frequency at stock cooling....Then repost here with his opinion about that..... ;)

[OC Detective]

Ah so these are the facts nowadays - not according to some....
http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,110923,pg,1,00.asp
As for the stock cooling argument and vcore - why are you getting hung up about them? The thing about buying a premium cooler with AMD is that you can utilise it time and again with newer generations of AMD cpus (From Tbird to Barton) so the net cost reduces. Besides why should anyone be forced to use the HSF a company recommends?
Oh and just in case you wanted a 2.3GHz on stock cooling - here you go - fairly recent
http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=228602
OMG now I have been drawn into this!

[Tyranos]

Originally posted by OC Detective

OMG now I have been drawn into this!

Luckily I haven't yet.... wait, does this post count? :(

[hipro5]

Originally posted by OC Detective
Ah so these are the facts nowadays - not according to some....
http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,110923,pg,1,00.asp
As for the stock cooling argument and vcore - why are you getting hung up about them? The thing about buying a premium cooler with AMD is that you can utilise it time and again with newer generations of AMD cpus (From Tbird to Barton) so the net cost reduces. Besides why should anyone be forced to use the HSF a company recommends?
Oh and just in case you wanted a 2.3GHz on stock cooling - here you go - fairly recent
http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=228602
OMG now I have been drawn into this!

BAD examples......NO stock VCore.......and NOT posting any screenies about the stability of his rig with stock cooling...........This goes to the second link you gave us........ :D

.....as for the first link......no coments(cos we are going to start a new fight again)........ ;) :D

[pacino]

pacman is about to pull the trigger too :D

[Lithan]

http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=218527&highlight=stock+vcore


See that? 2.2. And that's not even overclocking. That is bios accidentally defaulting to the wrong FSB. I've seen dozens of cases just like this. Nearly every 2500+ sold nowadays can hit 2200 with stocks. 100 mhz between the 10th percentile and the 90th could be assumed, but bearing this....

"I have had so much fun with this processor. It runs right out of the box on my IWill XP333-R and it comes with a factory unlocked multiplier. I OC'd it to just under 2.4 ghz with 1.65v and 42 degrees celcius. I can only imagine what it can do with higher voltages." - retail amd 2500+ reviews

Oh and the DOZENS of reviews placing their 2500+ at 2.2-2.3 with stock cooling and voltage. (Hmm where have I heard 2.2-2.3 before? Oh yeah, I SAID IT.) I'd say we can assume one thing. You are wrong. Just admit it and move on.

[dropadrop]

I must say I'm hearing alot of xp2500's going up to 2.3ghz with stock voltage and a decent heatsink these days...

[Malakai]

Everyone remember, you're flaming each other over little tiny pieces of silicon.

[Maxvla]

i could run 2.2v on my 2100+ with slk800 and 80mm fan with reasonable temps. approx 52c full load. that was at 2580mhz.

it appears in this thread that both sides have been proven wrong and proven right but noone seems to understand what has been proven. they are so mired in their lust for their particular company that they are blind to any information that passes their eyes.

any useful information is simply passed over and the battle of stupidity continues.

[xcelerator]

P4 2.4c kicks the 2500+ ass cuz.....of the high fsb...you can prolly use like 230fsb......im usin 260fsb on a pc3200 memory :)

[BGPatterson]

Wasn't this thread talking about the 2.4C VS. the XP 2500?

[zabomb4163]

Originally posted by hipro5


[BNot even 2300MHz at More VCore AND STOCK cooling running ALL day stable.......No way men ;) [/B]

the link might have higher than stock vcore, but it does meet your qualifications for the "impossible" oc.

[hipro5]

Originally posted by Lithan
http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=218527&highlight=stock+vcore


See that? 2.2. And that's not even overclocking. That is bios accidentally defaulting to the wrong FSB. I've seen dozens of cases just like this. Nearly every 2500+ sold nowadays can hit 2200 with stocks. 100 mhz between the 10th percentile and the 90th could be assumed, but bearing this....

"I have had so much fun with this processor. It runs right out of the box on my IWill XP333-R and it comes with a factory unlocked multiplier. I OC'd it to just under 2.4 ghz with 1.65v and 42 degrees celcius. I can only imagine what it can do with higher voltages." - retail amd 2500+ reviews

Oh and the DOZENS of reviews placing their 2500+ at 2.2-2.3 with stock cooling and voltage. (Hmm where have I heard 2.2-2.3 before? Oh yeah, I SAID IT.) I'd say we can assume one thing. You are wrong. Just admit it and move on.

See what??????.........ONLY letters and "talking".........Not even ONE single benchie......... :D

OK..........I quit........... :D

[Mark Larson]

Originally posted by xcelerator
P4 2.4c kicks the 2500+ ass cuz.....of the high fsb...you can prolly use like 230fsb......im usin 260fsb on a pc3200 memory :) Yes of course, because we all know very high FSB suddenly became the most important thing in a computer when Intel deemed it so. :rolleyes:

HAY GUYZ WHAT LOOK AT MY COMPUTAR IT HAS 10000MHZ FSB AND NO CACHE LOLOLOL

[whatever2003]

Yes of course, because we all know very high FSB suddenly became the most important thing in a computer when Intel deemed it so.
Really?
Go to any AMD forum and you'll see how there are threads after threads after threads about reaching that magic 200 FSB and trying to go over. The "champions" go over 220 if possible. What are you talking about??? Of course that high FSB is crucial for the performance, more than anything else.
What do you think why was 333 FSB Barton introduced? Or 400 FSB one? Think about that.

2.2V on air? Bull. You cannot cool XP processor with air cooling for any extended period of time on 2.2V. That kind of setup will wind down very fast. Not with air you can breathe. Maybe with pressurized Artic air. The guys that claim that are lying and the guys that have experience know that.

[Tyranos]

I did 2.15 on air with no problems on my 2100+ besides the large drain on my psu. Stable as the devil.

[whatever2003]

So why are you using 1.95V now?
I mean 1.95 is to 2.15 what 1.75 is to 1.95. Why don't you run 2.15V when it is "stable"? Afraid of something?
Looks like you bolted rather large heatsink with an airplane noise fan. What stops you making voltage higher?

[Tyranos]

Because I don't have the 2100 anymore. This is a 1700 dlt3c.

[Demont]

Originally posted by whatever2003

Really?
Go to any AMD forum and you'll see how there are threads after threads after threads about reaching that magic 200 FSB and trying to go over. The "champions" go over 220 if possible. What are you talking about??? Of course that high FSB is crucial for the performance, more than anything else.
What do you think why was 333 FSB Barton introduced? Or 400 FSB one? Think about that.

2.2V on air? Bull. You cannot cool XP processor with air cooling for any extended period of time on 2.2V. That kind of setup will wind down very fast. Not with air you can breathe. Maybe with pressurized Artic air. The guys that claim that are lying and the guys that have experience know that.

Have you been to an AMD forum? Since you are aware they actually sell AMD motherboards and processors that are at 200mhz stock I think it is pretty evident that 200 is no longer some magic goal. Countless people are hitting 240+ and even maxing out their boards at 250... heck someone did that on an 8rda+ not even month after they came out.

I probably shouldn't get involved in this thread but I will say that memory bandwidth is so very often sputtered about by Intel fans as if every mhz translated directly to 10fps in a game. It is yet another number that is fairly meaningless outside of an apple to apple comparison. (if that even) I assume that was Mark's point, not that FSB is entirely useless... but that it is overinflated... especially in the case of Intel machines which are not limited in memory bandwidth in the way AMD's are. (where every bit of FSB matters that much more. )

And he's right you know, nobody outside of enthusiast circles cared what FSB or Memory speed or memory bandwidth was until AMD started razzing Intel about the "MHZ Myth" and they had to make a new fantasy number. :D

[funnyperson1]

Really?
Go to any AMD forum and you'll see how there are threads after threads after threads about reaching that magic 200 FSB and trying to go over. The "champions" go over 220 if possible. What are you talking about??? Of course that high FSB is crucial for the performance, more than anything else.
What do you think why was 333 FSB Barton introduced? Or 400 FSB one? Think about that.

and thats why my 60$ motherboard does 230 fsb without busting a sweat?


what you said only applies to via chipsets. Nforce2 boards can do 250 fsb and above.

[funnyperson1]

I think this thread has outlived its usefulness and so I will make what is probably my last post.

For price/performance AMD is unbeatable.

My Computer:
1700+@2ghz 44$
Mushkin 3200 66$
AN35Ultra 63$
80gb 8mb cache hdd 60$
CDRW 48X 30$
Case/PSU/fans 100$
Radeon 8500 80$
SK6+/fan 20$

Total=$463

Show me a P4 with comparable performance for a similar price.
ALSO, refurbs don't count. All my components where bought new.



NOW, for overall performance Intel is on top.
An average overclocked 2.4C will beat an average overclocked barton 2500+ or TbredB 1700+ in most apps by a large margin, especially video encoding and in dual cpu enable apps.

Also who cares how far you can go on stock voltage. How many people here honestly run their chips at stock voltage? Thats like saying my **** is bigger than yours, but only when both of ours are limp.

[Lithan]

hahahaha.

But seriously. Mine's bigger. ;)

[dippy_skoodlez]

Takin Y'er pills again eh?

[Lithan]

only 50$ for a months supply!

[Maxvla]

Originally posted by whatever2003
2.2V on air? Bull. You cannot cool XP processor with air cooling for any extended period of time on 2.2V. That kind of setup will wind down very fast. Not with air you can breathe. Maybe with pressurized Artic air. The guys that claim that are lying and the guys that have experience know that.
are you questioning me?

i assure you i have the necessary experience. :rolleyes:

also.. JDXNC now has that chip and its working perfectly as far as i know.

[zabomb4163]

Maxvla- 2.1V is pretty dangerous for a .13 core. I wouldn't even go that high with water, let alone air.

[zabomb4163]

Maxvla- your 2.1V statement just sounds unlikely for any 0.13 core.

http://www.vr-zone.com/guides/AMD/TBred/

those guys are on l2n and most won't even touch 2.1. I seriously doubt you modded you board because it didnt give you enough voltage on an slk-800.



*edit*
http://www.benchtest.com/calc.html
your chip......160watts of heat
52c load

http://www.overclockers.com/articles698/
our slk-900 has C/W of 0.22

so what does that make your ambient?

[Lithan]

There are alot of variables here zabomb.

1. Temp sensors blow. He might have been above 52*C
2. Die simulator tends to get a higher c/w than seen in actual use.
3. that calculator is known to be a load of horse vomit.


2.3v on prommy in there.
Found two now.
Three.

2.3 on water.

2.1 on crappy air. "DRAGON ORB LOW NOISE 5000 RPM "

2.2 on alpha pal8045

2.1 on same

2.1 on "Vantec VA4-C7040" aka aeroflow

2.2 on slk800
And another

2.325 on water.

Have I made my point yet?

[Maxvla]

Originally posted by zabomb4163
Maxvla- your 2.1V statement just sounds unlikely for any 0.13 core.

http://www.vr-zone.com/guides/AMD/TBred/

those guys are on l2n and most won't even touch 2.1. I seriously doubt you modded you board because it didnt give you enough voltage on an slk-800.



*edit*
http://www.benchtest.com/calc.html
your chip......160watts of heat
52c load

http://www.overclockers.com/articles698/
our slk-900 has C/W of 0.22

so what does that make your ambient?
most of those guys don't need 2.1v because they have NEWER chips that don't require it for those speeds when combined with their extreme cooling. mine was OLDER and required those voltages for that speed when combined with air cooling.

something else.. according to your calculator... my 2.4b is producing 155W of heat at 3662mhz with 1.75vcore. i'm using watercooling and my highest load temp is 42 degrees. most would agree that the gap from the best aircooling to the best watercooling (no chillers, etc) is around 7-10 degrees. which is what i have. sure motherboard temp sensors can be wrong, but my athlon rig at 2.2v was stable so i know it wasn't overheating or it would have been crashing left and right.

btw my ambient is 70-72f all day every day. (damn electric bills killing me the last couple months! :()

[Maxvla]

i love your little calc... when i was messing around with my chip the other day i was at about 3890mhz with 1.9v. it would boot but thats about it. it was producing 194W :eek:

[whatever2003]

Because I don't have the 2100 anymore. This is a 1700 dlt3c.

Right, because you cannot apply 2.15V and keep the CPU. Or 2.2V . It would fry it and you know it. Your air cooling isn't adequate for that.
By the way what happened to your 2100?

Have I made my point yet?
The points are backed up with evidence, you only blabber and exaggerate what "you have seen" that somebody else did.

=====
In short, yeah you can apply 3V on your processor, and not to use fan at all. Your CPU will last a second or less. Maybe you can apply 2.2V with air cooling and boot in Windows to get a WCPUID shot but you won't run this processor for any extended time. That is not an evidence what your CPU can do, it is an evidence of your hotheaded stupidity. :D

In particular it is silly that people that are buying processors repeatedly (to find that "magic" one) and frying processors talk about price/performance ratios. Yeah, you really know the value of money. How many CPUs you bought that are rated between 1.4 GHZ and 1.833 GHz? Think about that. ;)
That is like buying used cars repeteadly and claiming how great they are. The reasons why you are doing so is because you simply cannot afford to buy just one decent.
That is how AMD thrives, selling repeatedly to a dummie because they always have that "new" 50 MHz faster stepping. :D

[funnyperson1]

i lied, i will post again...

Right, because you cannot apply 2.15V and keep the CPU. Or 2.2V . It would fry it and you know it. Your air cooling isn't adequate for that.
By the way what happened to your 2100?

also.. JDXNC now has that chip and its working perfectly as far as i know.


Read the man's post before questioning him.

[whatever2003]

?
I was talking to Tyranos. He has DLT3C XP 1700 and keeps it at 1.95V. That is what I read from his sig.
Beside he uses a SLK-800 which is quite a large heatsink with a Sunon jet blower fan that goes under the name of "Vantec Tornado."
This was rethorical, I don't really need him to tell me, I know why he cannot afford to go higher with that voltage (and there is a long way to 2.2V). It is because he knows that would fry his precious "performer." Ain't that easy to find the XP 1700 that works for a while at 2500 MHz, he knows that. So he'd like to keep it for a while.

2.2V is only for showup, for WCPUID and CPU-Z shots. Whoever overclocks, and I do, knows that cannot last long with air cooling.

[funnyperson1]

I don't know why you don't understand this, but AMD does not have SNDS. Running an AMD at high voltage with adequate cooling will not kill your chip.

[whatever2003]

Running an AMD at high voltage with adequate cooling will not kill your chip.
Keep on dreaming.

[funnyperson1]

Originally posted by whatever2003

Keep on dreaming.

Believe what you want, but the fact is that stuff like SNDS is a new development with the northwoods. PIIIs and Athlons always could run at high voltages when good cooling was provided. If they had heatsinks as good as Thermalright puts out now back in the day most people would have been running their PIIIs at 2Volts and up.

[Lithan]

I've run 2.10 on water 24/7 priming the whole time for about a week. My chip didn't lose any overclock, didn't take any damage. It's happy as a clam. I don't run 2.2v, because I personally don't feel the need to. My goal isn't max overclock. That's fun to do, have a larf and then go back to my standard overclock. (2200-2450). 2.2v will shorten the life of an amd I believe. But it won't kill it outright. Our processors aren't sissy little threads of silicon who might break a nail. Ours are big manly hunks of silicon. Like ahhhnuld. You've got to dunk them into molten metal to kill them.

[Maxvla]

Originally posted by whatever2003
?
I was talking to Tyranos. He has DLT3C XP 1700 and keeps it at 1.95V. That is what I read from his sig.
Beside he uses a SLK-800 which is quite a large heatsink with a Sunon jet blower fan that goes under the name of "Vantec Tornado."
This was rethorical, I don't really need him to tell me, I know why he cannot afford to go higher with that voltage (and there is a long way to 2.2V). It is because he knows that would fry his precious "performer." Ain't that easy to find the XP 1700 that works for a while at 2500 MHz, he knows that. So he'd like to keep it for a while.

2.2V is only for showup, for WCPUID and CPU-Z shots. Whoever overclocks, and I do, knows that cannot last long with air cooling.
you sure like to assume things.

perhaps his 1700 doesn't give any gains when he uses more than 1.95v? ever think of that? it would be pointless for him to run it at 2.2v if he gets nothing out of the processor.

in my own case.. i could run with 1.85v on my p4 if i wanted but i would only gain 18mhz of stability. the small increase in speed does not justify the large increase in vcore.