Torn between XP 2100+ and Barton 2500+

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gabagimpy
  • Start date Start date
G

Gabagimpy

2100+ (Thoroughbred B) has a 266 fsb, and 256k L2 cache for $62.

2500+ has 333 fsb, and 512 L2 cache for $91.

Whichever one I buy I plan on overclocking on an Asus A7V8X-X. Can anyone
tell me if the 2500+ is worth the extra $30? And how does it overclock
compared to the 2100?
 
Here's my story with similar chips. Abit nf7s v2.0. The barton is the way to
go with no hesitation. My bios sees my 2500 barton as both a 2500 running at
333 and a 3200 running at 400 bus speed. Of course I run it in the 3200 mode
with 1 512mb and a pair of 256mb sticks all happy together in dual channel
mode.

The 2100 thorobred or palomino runs with a 266 fsb and there is your major
limitation with that chip. they have a 256 cache.

So even if you got one of the newer so-called ("super locked") barton chips,
it would still outperform the 2100 in it's lamest settings. Not to mention
the 512 cache on the barton as an additional performance kicker would be a
shame.

Buy the Barton and be happy!

Regards, Bob "hopelessly insane machine warrior" Troll
 
Thanks for your reply. I read about the Barton's "super-lock", is it true
that soon all Athlon XP's will have this (or do they already have it)?
Also, what kind of Ram do you need to OC via the FSB on the Barton? PC3200
or higher? Thanks.
 
Thanks for your reply. I read about the Barton's "super-lock", is it true
that soon all Athlon XP's will have this (or do they already have it)?
Also, what kind of Ram do you need to OC via the FSB on the Barton? PC3200
or higher? Thanks.
Click to expand...
The PC 2700 is faster as the CL factor is slightly faster to the
PC3200 CL.



Christopher
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Kites rise highest against
the wind - not with it."
Winston Churchill
 
Bob Troll said:
Here's my story with similar chips. Abit nf7s v2.0. The barton is the way to
go with no hesitation. My bios sees my 2500 barton as both a 2500 running at
333 and a 3200 running at 400 bus speed. Of course I run it in the 3200 mode
with 1 512mb and a pair of 256mb sticks all happy together in dual channel
mode.

The 2100 thorobred or palomino runs with a 266 fsb and there is your major
limitation with that chip. they have a 256 cache.

So even if you got one of the newer so-called ("super locked") barton chips,
it would still outperform the 2100 in it's lamest settings. Not to mention
the 512 cache on the barton as an additional performance kicker would be a
shame.

Buy the Barton and be happy!
Click to expand...



If the 2100 is unlocked, then he can run it at 166 (DDR333) with a lower
multiplier. This gives the Barton's only advantage as being the extra cache.
Does the extra cache make much difference, I'm not sure. But, I'm also not
sure if all the newer XP's are locked as is the Bartons. If they are then
the Barton would be the best choice. I have read of unlocked 2100's as being
great overclockers.

bluestringer
 
2100+ (Thoroughbred B) has a 266 fsb, and 256k L2 cache for $62.
2500+ has 333 fsb, and 512 L2 cache for $91.

Whichever one I buy I plan on overclocking on an Asus A7V8X-X. Can anyone
tell me if the 2500+ is worth the extra $30? And how does it overclock
compared to the 2100?
Click to expand...

The 2500 overclocks to 3200 speeds... The 2100 will never does this
because the lack of cache. All the new AMD XP chips are 'superlocked'.
Anything after week 39 it's most likely locked.

As for the ram, if you overclock the 2500 to 3200 speeds then you'll
want to get some 3200 (400Mhz) ram as well. So it's all nicely in
sync. If you've got a locked 2500 and want to overclock then the
400Mhz ram is better because at least you'll know it will keep up with
the faster speeds since it's the FSB you'll be increasing!
 
Gabagimpy said:
2100+ (Thoroughbred B) has a 266 fsb, and 256k L2 cache for $62.

2500+ has 333 fsb, and 512 L2 cache for $91.

Whichever one I buy I plan on overclocking on an Asus A7V8X-X. Can anyone
tell me if the 2500+ is worth the extra $30? And how does it overclock
compared to the 2100?
Click to expand...

It's worth it.

My barton 2500+/Biostar kicks the ass of my P4 2.4G Dell when running
the number-crunching app I wrote. It's more than twice as fast. They
both have 512M cache and PC2100. Probably the AMD cache arrangement is
better for my app's memory pattern. I guess that's not a comparison
between the barton and the 2100+, but ...
 
John said:
The 2500 overclocks to 3200 speeds... The 2100 will never does this
because the lack of cache. All the new AMD XP chips are 'superlocked'.
Anything after week 39 it's most likely locked.

As for the ram, if you overclock the 2500 to 3200 speeds then you'll
want to get some 3200 (400Mhz) ram as well. So it's all nicely in
sync. If you've got a locked 2500 and want to overclock then the
400Mhz ram is better because at least you'll know it will keep up with
the faster speeds since it's the FSB you'll be increasing!
Click to expand...

does this mean the MULTIPLIER's locked but the FSB isn't? hope so as i
usually just push the FSB up to 200 to get a 3200 equivalent overclock....
 
If you happen to get an earlier than week 38 or so Barton 2500 xp+ chip,
matched with a abit nf7s v2.0 board, the likelihood that a simple bios
adjustment will upgrade it to a 3200xp+ is very high.

Whether the Asus board you mentioned would act the same way as my Abit is
unknown to me so I can not speak to that.

I have a week 34 2500xp+ Barton running as a 3200 (11 x 200 = 2200) with
just a hint of a vcore raise to 1.67v. Will run 100% stable with memtest86
or 3DMark 2001SE for days.

I haven't done any overclocking at all to it since I'm pretty happy I got a
3200 for the price of a 2500. And it runs anything I wanty it to run with no
issues other than my hosed up networking issue.

I just got a new thermaltake slk-900A something or other that will handle a
92mm fan. That will be my next project and then the clocking will begin if
the heat spreader can do me good justice.

Regards, Bob "hopelessly insane machine warrior" Troll
 
Back
Top