Whats better...XP2400 or XP2500 Bartons?

[Vito]

May be a newbie question here:

Whats going to give me faster performance for my new dualie im planning on building.........modded XP2400s or the Xp2500s?
And why are the Xp2500s better...or are they?
Is it because of the 512 cache? How does this, if it does, make this cpu better?

[bulk88]

thearetically the 2500s because they are bartons.

[Karifan]

XP 2100s will give you more performance. If you are going to overclock. With the 2500s u will have to overclock and play with the multi vs fsb on the L3 bridge.

My dual 2100 xp outperforms the dual 2500 xp on a clock for clock benchie.

Here is the 2100s benchies. And I will post benchies for the 2500 a little later.

http://www10.brinkster.com/karifan/Benchmarks.html

[Vito]

Thanks Karifan....
.Rock solid at those speeds?

Im thinking of either the Iwill MPX2 or the MSI K7D Master L for the mobo.

[cmcquistion]

Originally posted by Karifan
XP 2100s will give you more performance. If you are going to overclock. With the 2500s u will have to overclock and play with the multi vs fsb on the L3 bridge.

My dual 2100 xp outperforms the dual 2500 xp on a clock for clock benchie.

Here is the 2100s benchies. And I will post benchies for the 2500 a little later.

http://www10.brinkster.com/karifan/Benchmarks.html

WHAT!!!

Clock for clock, Bartons will outperform T-breds. Now, some T-breds may overclock higher than Bartons and may beat them with clock speed, but at the same clock speed, Bartons outperform T-breds, no question...

*EDIT* This goes for the same clock speed and same FSB. As you may know, Bartons have a FSB of 166 by default, so you have to mess with the multipliers, to make up for lowering the FSB. If you compare T-breds and Bartons at the same clock speed AND the same FSB, then the Bartons will outperform the T-breds because of their additional cache.

[Karifan]

My personal Experience is that the dual Barton does not outperform the dual Tbred.
However my statement may be only true in regards to dual bartons vs dual tbreds.
The Barton is meant to run on a higher bus, which compensates throughout the benchmarks.

Clock for clock on different fsb speeds , the Barton will outperform the Tbred. However if you are running a dual Barton you will most likley have to run it at a much lower fsb than its meant to run, and will see big performance decreases.

between the 2400 and the 2500 in dual systems I'd go with the 2400, but if you can get ahold of a DLT3C 2100 then that is even better.

I am trying to recover info from one of my hd/s and can then post the Barton benchie.
I am running a dual Barton currently at 16*133=2130 mhz, and its way lower than what a dual 2600 tbred does even though it has the same clock speed.

[Karifan]

The Iwill MPx2 would be a much better choice. Not sure if it has a locked divider for the pci and agp bus, but I know someone is running dual 1700 xps, @2400 mhz each rock solid on a high fsb >> 160 mhz or more.

To answer your question the dual Tbred at 2208 mhz was rock solid.

The question is, can you get your hands on an Iwill board. They are a rare thing to find.

[Karifan]

I have to disagree with you cmcquistion.

Lets put it with figures.

If you run dual Bartons vs dual Tbreds around 133 mhz fsb +-10 fsb the Tbreds will win.

If you compare a single Tbred vs a single Barton at anything higher than 166 mhz fsb, then the Barton win.

Unfortunatley they do not make dual Barton motherboards that support high fsb, and that is why you can't see the performance increase in dual systems.

I have tested 4 Bartons in dual configs and 6 Tbreds in dual configs.

The Tbreds always whooped the Bartons in dual configs.

(Heck thats why the Barton 2500+ runs only at 1826 mhz, at 11 x 166 mhz and yet they rate it at 2500.)

[ninthebin]

er let me get this straight - the exact same CPU, will outperform the exact same CPU clock for clock? - thats gonna mess up the PR schemes :)

I think your arguement a tad floored as your talking about giving one a higher FSB than the othe, and if the extra cache on the barton is not as important in whatever the particular benchmark your using, then they will be the same clock for clock. In anycase where the 256K on the tbred runs full then the Barton will outperform.

when you have your dual systems do you have A dual system that you keep swapping CPUs in and out of?

[Karifan]

My answer is strictly regarding dual cpu/s as per the question of this thread.

one more time:
In a dual configuration a set of Tbreds WILL outperform a set of Bartons!

This is based on my own tests. And I explained why I think so in the prior posts. I could be wrong as to why the Tbred dual outperforms a Barton dual. But I tested 5 systems and my conclusion was such.
If anyone would like to run tests and let us know the results, and if they negate my explanations and reasoning, then you are more than welcome.

No offense intended fellas.

[cmcquistion]

At the same multiplier and the same FSB, the Bartons will outperform the T-breds.

The CPU's are identical, except the Barton has more cache.

The Barton's PR numbers are higher, because AMD thinks that a higher FSB and more cache deserve a higher PR number. Whether they are wrong or right is irrelevant.

All things being equal (multi and FSB), Bartons will outperform T-breds.

If you can prove me wrong with some benchmarks, then please post them.

All of the hands-on reviews and information everywhere show that Bartons outperform T-breds, when measured clock-for-clock.

There is no reason that a Barton would be slower. It has the same architecture, except it has more cache than the T-bred and it's default FSB is higher. What I am referring to, however, is a modded Barton that runs the SAME multi and SAME FSB. In that case, the Barton will outperform the T-bred (probably by only a small amount.)

[verbatim]

I agree with cmcquistion that all things equal bartons are faster.

But the thing with dualy mobos is that they dont cater 4 barton fsb's. Isnt the 2500barton designed to run at 11*166? How can this be done on the (for example) k7d master where the fsb only goes to 150? Play with the multi's?

[Karifan]

Originally posted by cmcquistion
At the same multiplier and the same FSB, the Bartons will outperform the T-breds.

The CPU's are identical, except the Barton has more cache.

The Barton's PR numbers are higher, because AMD thinks that a higher FSB and more cache deserve a higher PR number. Whether they are wrong or right is irrelevant.

All things being equal (multi and FSB), Bartons will outperform T-breds.

If you can prove me wrong with some benchmarks, then please post them.

All of the hands-on reviews and information everywhere show that Bartons outperform T-breds, when measured clock-for-clock.

There is no reason that a Barton would be slower. It has the same architecture, except it has more cache than the T-bred and it's default FSB is higher. What I am referring to, however, is a modded Barton that runs the SAME multi and SAME FSB. In that case, the Barton will outperform the T-bred (probably by only a small amount.)

Sorry for nagging the issue, but can you answer one question for me?
If you say the Barton and the Tbred are one and the same cpu.
How come they are designed for Different systems.
Bartons are designed to run at 166x2=333 mhz fsb
and
Tbreds are designed to run at 133x2=266 mhz fsb

Does that not make them different???

These are two different cpu/s my friend, if they were not different they would both have been called Tbred 256 k L2 and Tbred 512 k L2. I hope u see my point.

(I do agree that the Barton was designed on the same platform as the Tbred, but it evolved into something slightly different.)

Plain and simple, Anything above 166 mhz fsb the Barton wins, anything around 133 mhz fsb the Tbred wins. You have Bartons and Tbreds don't you cmcquistion, Just try and compare them in a dual, with all factors being the same, lets say 133x16 for both, that is what had the systems set to when i tested on Sisoft Sandra, PCMark and on pcpitstop.com

[cmcquistion]

Originally posted by verbatim
I agree with cmcquistion that all things equal bartons are faster.

But the thing with dualy mobos is that they dont cater 4 barton fsb's. Isnt the 2500barton designed to run at 11*166? How can this be done on the (for example) k7d master where the fsb only goes to 150? Play with the multi's?

Yes, that is correct. Bartons are designed for 166 FSB, so we have to mess with the multi's to make up for lowering the FSB.

I have a dual Barton XP2500 system running 15*133, right now. (It's capable of more, but I need better/quieter cooling.)

Unfortunately, I don't have any T-breds that will run this speed, without better cooling, than what I currently have, so I can't do a T-bred->Barton benchmark comparison.

Originally posted by Karifan


Sorry for nagging the issue, but can you answer one question for me?
If you say the Barton and the Tbred are one and the same cpu.
How come they are designed for Different systems.
Bartons are designed to run at 166x2=333 mhz fsb
and
Tbreds are designed to run at 133x2=266 mhz fsb

Does that not make them different???

These are two different cpu/s my friend, if they were not different they would both have been called Tbred 256 k L2 and Tbred 512 k L2. I hope u see my point.

(I do agree that the Barton was designed on the same platform as the Tbred, but it evolved into something slightly different.)

Plain and simple, Anything above 166 mhz fsb the Barton wins, anything around 133 mhz fsb the Tbred wins. You have Bartons and Tbreds don't you cmcquistion, Just try and compare them in a dual, with all factors being the same, lets say 133x16 for both, that is what had the systems set to when i tested on Sisoft Sandra, PCMark and on pcpitstop.com

I know that they are different CPU's. I am talking about MODDED Bartons. Bartons modded for higher multiplier, than stock. At stock multiplier, they can't even run rated speed.

Those who buy Bartons for duallies are modding the multi and running them that way.

This is what I am referring to, when I say "clock-for-clock, same multi, same FSB."