I am trying to decide on a processor to install on a A7N8X.
The Barton 2500+ and Thoroughbred 2600+ sell for around the same price
around $100. Which is the better choice?

Ed

"Ed T Wilson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I am trying to decide on a processor to install on a A7N8X.
> The Barton 2500+ and Thoroughbred 2600+ sell for around the same price
> around $100. Which is the better choice?
>
> Ed
>

I bought a 2100XP with the Asus A7N8X dx board a couple of months ago.

If I were buying now, I would go for the Barton 2500 with extra cache. Not
sure if it overclocks better than the 2660XP also.
--
Doug Ramage

Doug Ramage wrote:
> "Ed T Wilson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>>I am trying to decide on a processor to install on a A7N8X.
>>The Barton 2500+ and Thoroughbred 2600+ sell for around the same price
>>around $100. Which is the better choice?
>>
>>Ed
>>
>
>
> I bought a 2100XP with the Asus A7N8X dx board a couple of months ago.
>
> If I were buying now, I would go for the Barton 2500 with extra cache. Not
> sure if it overclocks better than the 2660XP also.
> --
> Doug Ramage
>
>
Put a Barton 2500+ in my A7N8X-Dlx Rev 2.0 last Monday. Overclocks to 12
easily. Running at 1992 MHz or 1.9 Ghz. As an aside, Aida32 describes my
multiplier as 6x333.

On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 16:48:40 +0100, "Doug Ramage"
<doug-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>"stanmc" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>newsQYLa.7633$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Doug Ramage wrote:
>> > "Ed T Wilson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >
>> >>I am trying to decide on a processor to install on a A7N8X.
>> >>The Barton 2500+ and Thoroughbred 2600+ sell for around the same price
>> >>around $100. Which is the better choice?
>> >>
>> >>Ed
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > I bought a 2100XP with the Asus A7N8X dx board a couple of months ago.
>> >
>> > If I were buying now, I would go for the Barton 2500 with extra cache.
>Not
>> > sure if it overclocks better than the 2660XP also.
>> > --
>> > Doug Ramage
>> >
>> >
>> Put a Barton 2500+ in my A7N8X-Dlx Rev 2.0 last Monday. Overclocks to 12
>> easily. Running at 1992 MHz or 1.9 Ghz. As an aside, Aida32 describes my
>> multiplier as 6x333.
>>
>
>You could probably push it higher - my 2100XP is running at 2250MHZ (12.5*
>180). Aida32 says 2255MHZ (6.25*361).

hmm, maybe I can push my 2600XP+ a bit higher then....it's currently
sitting at 2200Mhz (a 2700XP+ according to Aida).....

*thinks*

cheers

witchy/binarydinosaurs

"Toby Groves" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:E$Cim6AEuKA$(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <bdpkfn$v1fld$(E-Mail Removed)>, Doug Ramage <doug-
> (E-Mail Removed)> writes
> >
> >"Ed T Wilson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> I am trying to decide on a processor to install on a A7N8X.
> >> The Barton 2500+ and Thoroughbred 2600+ sell for around the same price
> >> around $100. Which is the better choice?
> >>
> >> Ed
> >>
> >
> >I bought a 2100XP with the Asus A7N8X dx board a couple of months ago.
> >
> >If I were buying now, I would go for the Barton 2500 with extra cache.
Not
> >sure if it overclocks better than the 2660XP also.
>
> I'm totally unconvinced that the extra cache is worth more in
> performance terms than the 233Mhz speed advantage the XP2600 has on it.

It's not.
BUT, the 233MHz speed difference doesn't count for anything when you're
discussing CPUs of 2GHz. The extra cache is a much better option. Would you
rather have a 2GHz Barton, or a 2GHz Thoroughbred ? 2500 Barton vs 2600
TBred isn't really a fair comparison - they run at different speeds.

"Nom" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> "Toby Groves" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:E$Cim6AEuKA$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > In article <bdpkfn$v1fld$(E-Mail Removed)>, Doug Ramage <doug-
> > (E-Mail Removed)> writes
> > >
> > >"Ed T Wilson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > >news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > >> I am trying to decide on a processor to install on a A7N8X.
> > >> The Barton 2500+ and Thoroughbred 2600+ sell for around the same
price
> > >> around $100. Which is the better choice?
> > >>
> > >> Ed
> > >>
> > >
> > >I bought a 2100XP with the Asus A7N8X dx board a couple of months ago.
> > >
> > >If I were buying now, I would go for the Barton 2500 with extra cache.
> Not
> > >sure if it overclocks better than the 2660XP also.
> >
> > I'm totally unconvinced that the extra cache is worth more in
> > performance terms than the 233Mhz speed advantage the XP2600 has on it.
>
> It's not...

....hence one is a 2500 and one is a 2600.
I'd still go for the extra cache though - the miniscule speed increase
counts for nothing.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nom
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>"Toby Groves" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:E$Cim6AEuKA$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> I'm totally unconvinced that the extra cache is worth more in
>> performance terms than the 233Mhz speed advantage the XP2600 has on it.
>
>It's not.
>BUT, the 233MHz speed difference doesn't count for anything when you're
>discussing CPUs of 2GHz. The extra cache is a much better option. Would you
>rather have a 2GHz Barton, or a 2GHz Thoroughbred ? 2500 Barton vs 2600
>TBred isn't really a fair comparison - they run at different speeds.

Exactly. The OP asked which was a better bet, and didn't refer to
overclocking, unless I'm much mistaken.
--
Toby

Toby Groves wrote:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nom
> <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>> "Toby Groves" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:E$Cim6AEuKA$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> I'm totally unconvinced that the extra cache is worth more in
>>> performance terms than the 233Mhz speed advantage the XP2600 has on
>>> it.
>>
>> It's not.
>> BUT, the 233MHz speed difference doesn't count for anything when
>> you're discussing CPUs of 2GHz. The extra cache is a much better
>> option. Would you rather have a 2GHz Barton, or a 2GHz Thoroughbred
>> ? 2500 Barton vs 2600 TBred isn't really a fair comparison - they
>> run at different speeds.
>
> Exactly. The OP asked which was a better bet, and didn't refer to
> overclocking, unless I'm much mistaken.

In that case, the 2600 for most tasks.

I'd buy the Barton though - they're practically the same core, made with the
same process, hence capable of the same maximum speed.

I'd get PC3200 and run the FSB and memory bus at 200MHz * 10 or 11, maybe
more depending on temps.

Ben
--
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a string...

"Ben Pope" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bdulv9$11cjhd$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Toby Groves wrote:
> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nom
> > <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
> >> "Toby Groves" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >> news:E$Cim6AEuKA$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >>> I'm totally unconvinced that the extra cache is worth more in
> >>> performance terms than the 233Mhz speed advantage the XP2600 has on
> >>> it.
> >>
> >> It's not.
> >> BUT, the 233MHz speed difference doesn't count for anything when
> >> you're discussing CPUs of 2GHz. The extra cache is a much better
> >> option. Would you rather have a 2GHz Barton, or a 2GHz Thoroughbred
> >> ? 2500 Barton vs 2600 TBred isn't really a fair comparison - they
> >> run at different speeds.
> >
> > Exactly. The OP asked which was a better bet, and didn't refer to
> > overclocking, unless I'm much mistaken.
>
> In that case, the 2600 for most tasks.
>
> I'd buy the Barton though - they're practically the same core, made with
the
> same process, hence capable of the same maximum speed.
>
> I'd get PC3200 and run the FSB and memory bus at 200MHz * 10 or 11, maybe
> more depending on temps.

Agreed.
When run at the same speed, the Barton is quicker.

On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 16:32:18 +0100, "Nom" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>"Ben Pope" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:bdulv9$11cjhd$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Toby Groves wrote:
>> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Nom
>> > <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>> >> "Toby Groves" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> >> news:E$Cim6AEuKA$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >>> I'm totally unconvinced that the extra cache is worth more in
>> >>> performance terms than the 233Mhz speed advantage the XP2600 has on
>> >>> it.
>> >>
>> >> It's not.
>> >> BUT, the 233MHz speed difference doesn't count for anything when
>> >> you're discussing CPUs of 2GHz. The extra cache is a much better
>> >> option. Would you rather have a 2GHz Barton, or a 2GHz Thoroughbred
>> >> ? 2500 Barton vs 2600 TBred isn't really a fair comparison - they
>> >> run at different speeds.
>> >
>> > Exactly. The OP asked which was a better bet, and didn't refer to
>> > overclocking, unless I'm much mistaken.
>>
>> In that case, the 2600 for most tasks.
>>
>> I'd buy the Barton though - they're practically the same core, made with
>the
>> same process, hence capable of the same maximum speed.
>>
>> I'd get PC3200 and run the FSB and memory bus at 200MHz * 10 or 11, maybe
>> more depending on temps.
>
>Agreed.
>When run at the same speed, the Barton is quicker.
>
.... & cooler.
--
Peter Langley