If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
johny wrote:
Hmmm, interesting, there is actualy two different A64 3200+Processors. 2.2 w/512K and 2.0 w/1MB. Outpost.com has both in sale. AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200AXBOX AMD Athlon 64 Processor : Outpost #: 4035562 a.. CPU Speed: 2.2GHz a.. Cache: 512K a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz This one for $319 AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200BOX AMD Athlon 64 Processor : Outpost #: 3793666 a.. CPU Speed: 2.0GHz a.. Cache: 1152K a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz This one for $299 It'd be interesting to see benchmark for these two, which one performs better. I'd like to see benchmarks too; AMD seems to have slipped the new chip out very quietly -- Derek |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"Derek Baker" wrote in
: johny wrote: Hmmm, interesting, there is actualy two different A64 3200+Processors. 2.2 w/512K and 2.0 w/1MB. Outpost.com has both in sale. AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200AXBOX AMD Athlon 64 Processor : Outpost #: 4035562 a.. CPU Speed: 2.2GHz a.. Cache: 512K a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz This one for $319 AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200BOX AMD Athlon 64 Processor : Outpost #: 3793666 a.. CPU Speed: 2.0GHz a.. Cache: 1152K a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz This one for $299 It'd be interesting to see benchmark for these two, which one performs better. I'd like to see benchmarks too; AMD seems to have slipped the new chip out very quietly The 2.2 will perform better. I've had my 3200+/1ML2 running at 2.2 for several months. I filled the 3rd ram slot (754) which cuts the ram speed in half but the extra 200 mhz is quite a bit faster than doubling ram speed. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
goblin wrote:
"Derek Baker" wrote in : johny wrote: Hmmm, interesting, there is actualy two different A64 3200+Processors. 2.2 w/512K and 2.0 w/1MB. Outpost.com has both in sale. AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200AXBOX AMD Athlon 64 Processor : Outpost #: 4035562 a.. CPU Speed: 2.2GHz a.. Cache: 512K a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz This one for $319 AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200BOX AMD Athlon 64 Processor : Outpost #: 3793666 a.. CPU Speed: 2.0GHz a.. Cache: 1152K a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz This one for $299 It'd be interesting to see benchmark for these two, which one performs better. I'd like to see benchmarks too; AMD seems to have slipped the new chip out very quietly The 2.2 will perform better. I've had my 3200+/1ML2 running at 2.2 for several months. I filled the 3rd ram slot (754) which cuts the ram speed in half but the extra 200 mhz is quite a bit faster than doubling ram speed. Yeah, but halving main memory speed is a bit different from halving cache size. -- Derek |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"Derek Baker" wrote in
: goblin wrote: "Derek Baker" wrote in : johny wrote: Hmmm, interesting, there is actualy two different A64 3200+Processors. 2.2 w/512K and 2.0 w/1MB. Outpost.com has both in sale. AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200AXBOX AMD Athlon 64 Processor : Outpost #: 4035562 a.. CPU Speed: 2.2GHz a.. Cache: 512K a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz This one for $319 AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200BOX AMD Athlon 64 Processor : Outpost #: 3793666 a.. CPU Speed: 2.0GHz a.. Cache: 1152K a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz This one for $299 It'd be interesting to see benchmark for these two, which one performs better. I'd like to see benchmarks too; AMD seems to have slipped the new chip out very quietly The 2.2 will perform better. I've had my 3200+/1ML2 running at 2.2 for several months. I filled the 3rd ram slot (754) which cuts the ram speed in half but the extra 200 mhz is quite a bit faster than doubling ram speed. Yeah, but halving main memory speed is a bit different from halving cache size. You have a point there. I've just noticed that an extra 200 mhz of 64-bits is a boost I never saw proportionately out of any 32-bitter so I don't think twice the cache would outdue an overclock either. Based on AMD's price difference of cache vs clock, I don't see the cache making that much difference or they would have reflected it in the price. 200 mhz more is a big jump in price. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"goblin" wrote in message 30... | "Derek Baker" wrote in | : | | goblin wrote: | "Derek Baker" wrote in | : | | johny wrote: | Hmmm, interesting, there is actualy two different A64 | 3200+Processors. 2.2 w/512K and 2.0 w/1MB. Outpost.com has both in | sale. AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200AXBOX | | AMD Athlon 64 Processor : | Outpost #: 4035562 | a.. CPU Speed: 2.2GHz | a.. Cache: 512K | a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz | This one for $319 | | AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200BOX | | AMD Athlon 64 Processor : | Outpost #: 3793666 | a.. CPU Speed: 2.0GHz | a.. Cache: 1152K | a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz | | | This one for $299 | | It'd be interesting to see benchmark for these two, | which one performs better. | | | I'd like to see benchmarks too; AMD seems to have slipped the new | chip out very quietly | | | The 2.2 will perform better. I've had my 3200+/1ML2 running at 2.2 | for several months. I filled the 3rd ram slot (754) which cuts the | ram speed in half but the extra 200 mhz is quite a bit faster than | doubling ram speed. | | Yeah, but halving main memory speed is a bit different from halving | cache size. | | | You have a point there. I've just noticed that an extra 200 mhz of | 64-bits is a boost I never saw proportionately out of any 32-bitter so I | don't think twice the cache would outdue an overclock either. Based on | AMD's price difference of cache vs clock, I don't see the cache making | that much difference or they would have reflected it in the price. 200 | mhz more is a big jump in price. When I OC my 2GHz/1MB 3200+ to 2.2, I "feel" no difference, and see very little difference on benchmarks. Unfortunately, I don't have a "stock" 2.2/512MB to compare it to. It would really depend on how dependent your apps are on raw MHz, but for most instances, I would think the increased cache would result in higher overall performance. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 13:24:24 -0500, goblin wrote:
"Derek Baker" wrote in : goblin wrote: "Derek Baker" wrote in : johny wrote: Hmmm, interesting, there is actualy two different A64 3200+Processors. 2.2 w/512K and 2.0 w/1MB. Outpost.com has both in sale. AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200AXBOX AMD Athlon 64 Processor : Outpost #: 4035562 a.. CPU Speed: 2.2GHz a.. Cache: 512K a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz This one for $319 AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200BOX AMD Athlon 64 Processor : Outpost #: 3793666 a.. CPU Speed: 2.0GHz a.. Cache: 1152K a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz This one for $299 It'd be interesting to see benchmark for these two, which one performs better. I'd like to see benchmarks too; AMD seems to have slipped the new chip out very quietly The 2.2 will perform better. I've had my 3200+/1ML2 running at 2.2 for several months. I filled the 3rd ram slot (754) which cuts the ram speed in half but the extra 200 mhz is quite a bit faster than doubling ram speed. Yeah, but halving main memory speed is a bit different from halving cache size. You have a point there. I've just noticed that an extra 200 mhz of 64-bits is a boost I never saw proportionately out of any 32-bitter so I don't think twice the cache would outdue an overclock either. Based on AMD's price difference of cache vs clock, I don't see the cache making that much difference or they would have reflected it in the price. 200 mhz more is a big jump in price. I've had my 3200+(1gig cache) 64 at 2.2 since the day I got it home...She is watered now with 20c differnce (cooler)in temp now compared to the crap retail hsf sent with cpu ...... |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"Jason Cothran" wrote in
: "goblin" wrote in message 30... | "Derek Baker" wrote in | : | | goblin wrote: | "Derek Baker" wrote in | : | | johny wrote: | Hmmm, interesting, there is actualy two different A64 | 3200+Processors. 2.2 w/512K and 2.0 w/1MB. Outpost.com has both | in | sale. AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200AXBOX | | AMD Athlon 64 Processor : | Outpost #: 4035562 | a.. CPU Speed: 2.2GHz | a.. Cache: 512K | a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz | This one for $319 | | AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200BOX | | AMD Athlon 64 Processor : | Outpost #: 3793666 | a.. CPU Speed: 2.0GHz | a.. Cache: 1152K | a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz | | | This one for $299 | | It'd be interesting to see benchmark for these two, | which one performs better. | | | I'd like to see benchmarks too; AMD seems to have slipped the new | chip out very quietly | | | The 2.2 will perform better. I've had my 3200+/1ML2 running at 2.2 | for several months. I filled the 3rd ram slot (754) which cuts the | ram speed in half but the extra 200 mhz is quite a bit faster than | doubling ram speed. | | Yeah, but halving main memory speed is a bit different from halving | cache size. | | | You have a point there. I've just noticed that an extra 200 mhz of | 64-bits is a boost I never saw proportionately out of any 32-bitter | so I don't think twice the cache would outdue an overclock either. | Based on AMD's price difference of cache vs clock, I don't see the | cache making that much difference or they would have reflected it in | the price. 200 mhz more is a big jump in price. When I OC my 2GHz/1MB 3200+ to 2.2, I "feel" no difference, and see very little difference on benchmarks. Unfortunately, I don't have a "stock" 2.2/512MB to compare it to. It would really depend on how dependent your apps are on raw MHz, but for most instances, I would think the increased cache would result in higher overall performance. Most of my usage is in audio compression but just manipulating windows is snappier for me. I can feel the difference but when I OC my Athlon32 2400+ to 2.2 GHz I don't feel any real boost there. I've not run any benchmark comparisons but things like audio encoding and ray tracing do show an improvement in encoding time. MP3 encoding jumps from 180MB/min to 200. Considering the smaller percentage of bits that would fall into the L2 I don't see where it would make much difference. L2 is only used when needed but raw clock speed affects every single bit all the time. I still think the price gives away just how useful the extra L2 is. It may be that a lot of the boost I am seeing is additional ram, 1G vs 1.5G, for the only way for me to OC is by adding/removing the 3rd ram stick; there is a disadvantage there -- slower clock w/ less ram vs faster clock w/ 50% more ram, and that seem to be what's happening since you don't see any performance boost. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
neil s wrote in
news On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 13:24:24 -0500, goblin wrote: "Derek Baker" wrote in : goblin wrote: "Derek Baker" wrote in : johny wrote: Hmmm, interesting, there is actualy two different A64 3200+Processors. 2.2 w/512K and 2.0 w/1MB. Outpost.com has both in sale. AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200AXBOX AMD Athlon 64 Processor : Outpost #: 4035562 a.. CPU Speed: 2.2GHz a.. Cache: 512K a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz This one for $319 AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Boxed Processor - ADA3200BOX AMD Athlon 64 Processor : Outpost #: 3793666 a.. CPU Speed: 2.0GHz a.. Cache: 1152K a.. Bus Speed: 800MHz This one for $299 It'd be interesting to see benchmark for these two, which one performs better. I'd like to see benchmarks too; AMD seems to have slipped the new chip out very quietly The 2.2 will perform better. I've had my 3200+/1ML2 running at 2.2 for several months. I filled the 3rd ram slot (754) which cuts the ram speed in half but the extra 200 mhz is quite a bit faster than doubling ram speed. Yeah, but halving main memory speed is a bit different from halving cache size. You have a point there. I've just noticed that an extra 200 mhz of 64-bits is a boost I never saw proportionately out of any 32-bitter so I don't think twice the cache would outdue an overclock either. Based on AMD's price difference of cache vs clock, I don't see the cache making that much difference or they would have reflected it in the price. 200 mhz more is a big jump in price. I've had my 3200+(1gig cache) 64 at 2.2 since the day I got it home...She is watered now with 20c differnce (cooler)in temp now compared to the crap retail hsf sent with cpu ...... Mine runs at 46c with the retail hsf. My Athlon32 2400+ is the silicon furnace... it's been up to 70c at times but keeps on ticking. Shouldn't you be able to get more than 2.2 if it's watercooled? Mine will go to 2.24 then locks up quickly. I could probably run DOS programs stable at 2.24 but nothing else. Mine actually runs stable at 2.22 but I feel safer with it left at 2.20. Also, I had to increase the cpu voltage by ..1V to get it to OC at all. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
The 2.2 will perform better. I've had my 3200+/1ML2 running at 2.2 for several months. I filled the 3rd ram slot (754) which cuts the ram speed in half but the extra 200 mhz is quite a bit faster than doubling ram speed. Please explain that. How does filling 3rd ram slot, cut the rem speed in half? Does the ram perform as Dual Channel if you only have two sticks, but if you have 1 or 3, it runs as Single Channel? And if so, is it a chipset thing, cpu, mobo? I'm running my A64 on MSI K8T Neo FIS2R with two sticks of RAM, is it running as dual channel? GOBLIN WROTE: It may be that a lot of the boost I am seeing is additional ram, 1G vs 1.5G, for the only way for me to OC is by adding/removing the 3rd ram stick; there is a disadvantage there -- slower clock w/ less ram vs faster clock w/ 50% more ram, and that seem to be what's happening since you don't see any performance boost. I say: Seems to me like Goblin is saying totaly the opposite here. Adding 3rd stick of RAM makes the memory run faster "higher clock freq."? did I miss something here? |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
2 mb VS 8 mb hd cache | Mitchua | General | 16 | May 2nd 04 02:11 AM |
CPU speed AMD 2800 vs 300 ? | Mike | General | 7 | April 18th 04 12:15 PM |
Why is my HDD 133 mhz the speed of HDD 33 mhz? help | space_ship_earth | General | 22 | December 25th 03 03:07 PM |
Hard Drive Speed?? | PawsForThought | General | 14 | November 17th 03 01:28 AM |
Serial-ATA HD with 8MB cache | Pearlf | General | 5 | October 5th 03 09:25 AM |