CORES: Barton vs Thoroughbred

[moboteaser]

i just cant decide which would be good "lasting" so to speak for like a year or two... I would like to get an AMD with 512k(XP2500) Cache tho...(XP2400) but speed is also good too.. I'm so confused about these different cores and the micron die... ughhh! Need postings please... just would like to know which would be more lasting. And well worth the money to buy a new chip.

 

[slvr_phoenix]

I'm afraid that you're not really making much sense.

Which would be more 'lasting'? <i>Theoretically</i> their performance is so similar that they would both become 'too slow for modern software' at exactly the same time. (Which would be a <i>long</i> time from now.) So how could anyone choose which would be outdated first?

Further, the Barton and the ThoroughbredB are both using the same micron etching, which is .13 microns. But the question is, does this matter anyway? The only difference it makes is how far the processor line can scale up to before it uses too much power and generates too much heat. It has no real bearing on how long a specific CPU speed will last.

The die size of the Barton however <i>is</i> slightly larger, because it has more cache. Yet this also doesn't really affect anything either. It's completely unimportant really as you'll still be fitting it into the same socket and you'll still be throwing the same heat sink on top.

The only <i>real</i> difference between the Barton and other Athlon XPs is the amount of L2 cache. And to know that right now any Athlon XP <i>over</i> 2400+ comes with a 333MHz FSB.

Comparing a Barton 2500+ to a TBred 2400+ or a TBred 2600+ is where AMD makes things really confusing. Their stats are as follows:
A 2400+ is 2.0GHz, has a 266MHz FSB, and 256KB L2 cache.
A 2500+ is 1.83GHz, has a 333MHz FSB, and 512KB L2 cache.
A 2600+ is 2.13GHz, has a 333MHz FSB, and 256KB L2 cache.

Performance-wise, you really want a faster FSB and more L2 cache. So I'd say that you're probably best going with the Barton, if you don't mind waiting for it to come out. To support the Barton though, you'll need a motherboard with a chipset which officially supports a 333MHz FSB, such as the KT333, KT400, or nForce2. The 2400+ however is officially supported in a lot of 'older' motherboards, as it only has a 266MHz FSB.

One must really wonder just exactly what PR rating AMD will give the next fastest Barton after the 2500+, and how badly this will confuse their progression of PR ratings.


PC Repair-Vol 1:Getting To Know Your PC.
PC Repair-Vol 2:Troubleshooting Your PC.
PC Repair-Vol 3:Having Trouble Troubleshooting Your PC?
PC Repair-Vol 4:Having Trouble Shooting Your PC?

 

[Anthony1234]

You mean if I have a system with nforce2 chipset today, with a thoroughbred CPU, I can later dump that and buy a Barton and just plop it in and it works?

Does that mean that "upgradability" wise, I better off getting an AMD system with nforce2 chipset now than a p4 system with Sis655 when it comes out? Because Sis655 cannot support the Hammer p4s. But Nforce2 can support Barton.

Will the Barton CPUs simply be the same performance as the throughbred's but running at a lower clock speed, and thus "more efficient" or will they make "Higher performance" CPUs with the barton than the througoughbreds? (i.e., 3200+, 3600+ etc.)

 

[MeTaLrOcKeR]

Well this is all true...but there's other differences in the Barton also.....

I dunno if ne of u noticed but it does indeed have a hardware Thermal Throttling feature like the P4's do......and who knows what else theres prolyl a whole wack load of other little things that are insignificant but exist in the Barton....

As for the Original Poster to answer your question....as long as ur motherboard supports it....which it shoudl if it supports 333Mhz FSB Cpu's.....the Barton 2500+ is the way to go.....it may be around 200Mhz SLOWER than the 2400+ but its got that 256KB of L2 cache to compensate for it and it does a grate job of it to as the 1833MHz 2500+ Barton is slightly faster than the 2400+ T-Bred @ 2000MHz......and not only that but the Barton 2500+ Overclocks quite well just like the T-Bred B's are.....so i definently say get a 1833Mhz 2500+ Barton Athlon XP.....Overclock it to 2.2Ghz OR beyond and ull have that 2.2Ghz with 512KB of cache...man that'd be a SWEET Performance king....

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=13597" target="_new">-MeTaL RoCkEr</A>

 

[slvr_phoenix]

I dunno if ne of u noticed but it does indeed have a hardware Thermal Throttling feature like the P4's do......and who knows what else theres prolyl a whole wack load of other little things that are insignificant but exist in the Barton....

That's true, there is thermal throttling. However, it may very well turn out to be more of a hinderance to OCing than a boon in Barton. We'll have to wait and see how it turns out. (Though I am glad to see that AMD is <i>finally</i> taking thermal issues seriously.)

As for other little things, AMD isn't really known for bothering to spend time on tweaking performance on the little things. I don't think they really have the resources to spend time making this operation or that one cycle faster like Intel does. I would be willing to wager though that AMD has finally trimmed the latency of their cache.


PC Repair-Vol 1:Getting To Know Your PC.
PC Repair-Vol 2:Troubleshooting Your PC.
PC Repair-Vol 3:Having Trouble Troubleshooting Your PC?
PC Repair-Vol 4:Having Trouble Shooting Your PC?

 

[slvr_phoenix]

You mean if I have a system with nforce2 chipset today, with a thoroughbred CPU, I can later dump that and buy a Barton and just plop it in and it works?

A Barton with a 333MHz FSB, yes. A Barton with a 400MHz FSB (as they're meant to go up to in the future), not officially, but possibly.

Does that mean that "upgradability" wise, I better off getting an AMD system with nforce2 chipset now than a p4 system with Sis655 when it comes out? Because Sis655 cannot support the Hammer p4s. But Nforce2 can support Barton.

That's a loaded question and a little confusing. (For example, the Hammers are AMD products to replace ThoroughBreds and Bartons. They are not P4s. The next P4 is Prescott.)

If you go AMD, you should have a reasonable upgrade path. However, I don't think <i>any</i> AMD-compatible motherboards <i>officially</i> support a 400MHz FSB yet. So when (if) Barton moves up to a 400MHz FSB, you <i>may</i> need a new mobo anyway.

If you just wait a little bit on Intel and their next FSB jump, then you should have a long upgradability path. You probably will even have one just as long as AMD's current options if you buy Intel right now.

AMD and Intel are <i>both</i> planning on moving onto the next big thing soon. Neither really has a guarantee of a long upgradability path at the moment.

Will the Barton CPUs simply be the same performance as the throughbred's but running at a lower clock speed, and thus "more efficient" or will they make "Higher performance" CPUs with the barton than the througoughbreds? (i.e., 3200+, 3600+ etc.)

In theory, both. I think AMD is just planning on testing out their Barton core changes at lower speeds at first, but once they're sure that the product line is without major flaws (or once they're sure that a ClawHammer will outperform a Barton), they'll ramp the speeds of Barton up.


PC Repair-Vol 1:Getting To Know Your PC.
PC Repair-Vol 2:Troubleshooting Your PC.
PC Repair-Vol 3:Having Trouble Troubleshooting Your PC?
PC Repair-Vol 4:Having Trouble Shooting Your PC?

 

[Anthony1234]

When are they expected to make the Bartons 400mhz instead of 333?

 

[Spitfire_x86]

I dunno if ne of u noticed but it does indeed have a hardware Thermal Throttling feature like the P4's do......and who knows what else theres prolyl a whole wack load of other little things that are insignificant but exist in the Barton....

If Barton comes with SSE2, then it will be virtually unbeatable.

<b> "You can put lipstick on a pig, but hey, it's still a pig!" - RobD </b>

 

[eden]

I would be very surprised if AMD now has a CPU throttle feature. Why it'd go untalked about, or at least hyped in the hardware market, seeing as everyone has been waiting for AMD to develop something against core frying, is something I don't get, if true.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden.

 

[ad_rach]

I don't think any AMD-compatible motherboards officially support a 400MHz FSB yet

True.But all of the nforce 2 can do 400MHz fsb as an overclock so it would work perfectly with a true 400MHz fsb cpu.Besides, by the time 400fsb bartons come out, there will be bios revisions and a change in marketing for these boards to make 400fsb support more 'official'.

no matter how hard you try, you can't polish a turd. :]

 

[slvr_phoenix]

True.But all of the nforce 2 can do 400MHz fsb as an overclock so it would work perfectly with a true 400MHz fsb cpu.Besides, by the time 400fsb bartons come out, there will be bios revisions and a change in marketing for these boards to make 400fsb support more 'official'.

Exactly. Why buy something now that you can't return it if turns out not to actually work at a 400Mhz FSB when you can just wait a little bit for the official support to come along and be guaranteed that it'll work?


PC Repair-Vol 1:Getting To Know Your PC.
PC Repair-Vol 2:Troubleshooting Your PC.
PC Repair-Vol 3:Having Trouble Troubleshooting Your PC?
PC Repair-Vol 4:Having Trouble Shooting Your PC?

 

[slvr_phoenix]

I would be very surprised if AMD now has a CPU throttle feature.

Eden, did you even <i>read</i> the actual <A HREF="http://www.thetechboard.com/reviews/barton.php" target="_new">review</A> in the '<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=126552#126552" target="_new">Barton 2500+ Preview</A>' thread? Hell, his pointing out the new throttling feature of the Barton is about the <i>only</i> thing in that review that I'll give kudos to the author for.

Why it'd go untalked about, or at least hyped in the hardware market, seeing as everyone has been waiting for AMD to develop something against core frying, is something I don't get, if true.

Why? I'll give you two reasons:
1) Because AMD doesn't want to admit that Intel was right all along and that they've only <i>now</i> implemented something that Intel has done for ages.
2) Because AMD marketting is so hyped up on selling to AMD fanboys that they don't care about advertising features that only really appeal to customers who can see actual advantages in Intel chips.

Not to knock AMD, but their marketting stragegies have been far from sensible, logical, or even comprehendable. They make good chips, but they really suck at marketting, and product announcements like this is all supposed to be done by marketting.


PC Repair-Vol 1:Getting To Know Your PC.
PC Repair-Vol 2:Troubleshooting Your PC.
PC Repair-Vol 3:Having Trouble Troubleshooting Your PC?
PC Repair-Vol 4:Having Trouble Shooting Your PC?

 

[eden]

Actually I didn't read the article, just skimmed through.
I'd rather see a THG or Anandtech professional and more official or authentic article.
Again I do find it surprising if it has thermal throttling, though I'd like some testing, a new THG video perhaps? If it has that btw, AMD is currently even more advanced than Intel in thermal management, because if the CPU overheats too much even with throttling, it will eventually turn off by the diode. So there is no dead-end, it's a huge wall in any drastic case.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden.