Is the new Barton a preferable solution for race simulators ?
Could the 512 kb of L2 cache be a potential benefit for this kind of
applications or the higher MHz of the "old" version is more appropriate?
> > Is the new Barton a preferable solution for race simulators ?
> > Could the 512 kb of L2 cache be a potential benefit for this kind of
> > applications or the higher MHz of the "old" version is more appropriate?
>> It depends how much cash you have, the barton's cashe does make a
> difference
>> but not enough to justify the price difference for me, certain
>> batches of XP1700 thoroughbreds are hitting 2.4Ghz+ for less than
>> 50.
>> > Is the new Barton a preferable solution for race simulators ?
>> > Could the 512 kb of L2 cache be a potential benefit for this kind
>> > of applications or the higher MHz of the "old" version is more
>> > appropriate?
dave henrie
My recommendation is to pay attention not only to the cpu speed itself but
the components around it (mobo + ram + cooling + psu), which will allow you
to gain free speed with some simple bios settings, in particular newer
motherboards that officially support 200fsb.
As for Barton vs. XP, there has just been a major price-drop on Bartons, and
the 2500+ Barton is a bargain at $125 or so.
rms
A7N8X Deluxe (nForce 2)
AMD Barton 2800 (not oc'ed--it's plenty fast at it's stock speed of 2.08ghz)
1 Gig Gorilla PC 3200 (DDR 400) ---2 x 512
WD 80 Gig se (8 meg cache)
Radeon 9700 pro (an unbelieveable step up from my GF2 GTS 64 Meg)
> > So we must consider the MHz rather than the CPU architecture ?
> >> It depends how much cash you have, the barton's cashe does make a
> > difference
> >> but not enough to justify the price difference for me, certain
> >> batches of XP1700 thoroughbreds are hitting 2.4Ghz+ for less than
> >> 50.
> >> > Is the new Barton a preferable solution for race simulators ?
> >> > Could the 512 kb of L2 cache be a potential benefit for this kind
> >> > of applications or the higher MHz of the "old" version is more
> >> > appropriate?
> The tests I have seen, shows the Barton, even with a slower clock
speed,
> to be faster than the previous top AMD chip. Whether it's fast enough to
> justify a large price gap compared to other Athlons remains to be seen.
> Certainly if you can afford either chip, you are NOT going to have a
bad
> system. Either one is very very strong.(as are the top Pentium 4's btw)
> dave henrie