• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Can you guys help settle a disagreement?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
fluxcapacitor

fluxcapacitor

Registered
​
Joined
Mar 19, 2001
My uncle is trying to tell me that he's been reading up on the Athlon architecture and I'm better off getting a desktop Barton for my 2nd system instead of another mobile 2500. He's saying that because desktop chips are rated at a higher fsb than a mobile, bandwidth will be better with a desktop chip. I told him he's full of ****. AMDs rated fsb speed is not a limiting factor assuming the rest of the components in can handle whatever bus speed your going to through at it is my understanding. Any input?
 
you know your stuff, you dont even need to ask us, but if it helps settle the argument, yes you are right, if get a mobile and a desktop running the same fsb/mulit, they will perform identical. you may also be able to acheive higher fsb in a mobile when compared to a locked barton.
 
just show him what people have gotten with desktop bartons and mobile bartons and let him decide for himself, but if my imput helps, HE is WRONG, YOU are RIGHT!
 
Last time I checked its just silicon.... plus mobiles are unlocked so the bus is a non-issue.

You want the fastest chip with the least amount of voltage... which would be a mobile
 
get the moble, forget what he says, the moble is way better. desktop bartons dont always even to 2.2GHz, mobles can do 2.2 to as high as 2.6GHz in rare cases
 
1) Mobiles = unlocked
2) Mobiles = hand-picked for low Vcore operation (and hence greater overclockability)
3) Mobiles != that much more expensive

Yes they have a lower bus speed but that means what?
 
I'm not sure if you guys are correct in what your saying, or I'm just not following(tired).

If a Desktop, and mobile were compared at the same speeds, but the desktop having a higher FSB, they would perform the same?

If your going to be overclocking, go for the mobile.

And since you've won..Tell him "You've been studying the architecture, and you can only complain about the FSB?!?!"

:)
 
The mobiles have a default FSB of 133MHz, while you can get a high end barton desktop chip that runs at 200. What everyone is saying is that you can run the mobile at 200+ FSB just like you can with the desktop chip so the bandwidth is irrelevant.

If you compared a desktop 200FSB chip to a mobile 133FSB chip at the same clock speed the desktop would outperform the mobile at some things but don't forget that the mobile really is just another desktop chip (as stated a hand picked, low voltage, unlocked one that runs at a lower default FSB).
 
if you are going to run mobile at default, 133fsb, of course desktop bart. would be faster. but you take the mobile and set everything manually (i know, not plug and play :p); to whatever highest fsb you m/b can do, lower the multiplier and voila! your mobile beats the pants of any desktop barton without even sweatin.

then the overclocking comes along :p (see posts above and check the signatures :p)

mine's @ 2530MHz, btw, on a very conservative air cooling. but considering the fsb i run it at, 220, well, not a whole lot of locked desktop bartons can do that.
 
Last edited:
The argument that the Intel bus is 'quad pumped' and the AMD bus is only 'double pumped' is irrelevant; they are different architectures tailored to different purposes.

AMD processors, traditionally, have been tailored to give more performance for less money, excepting the Opteron and FXen and maybe even then. Athlons fufill their purpose rather well as many of us have found out.

Plug and tinker should be just fine for you.
 
I hate to be a b*tch but damn it hurts to be right. I can't wait to send my uncle the link for this thread. Damn, that was soo juvenile of me. Whatever.
 
Mame,
The point of the argument though was that a mobile chip will give the same results a desktop will when running at the same clock and bus speeds.
 
MameXP said:
omg.... :rolleyes:

You guys just think about overclocking. His uncle is right at somepoint you know..

"let it burn" -usher
Click to expand...

Must be the blonde hair tickeling the brain...but I thought this was a overclockers forum :confused:

*rechecks just to make sure*

Yeap...says Overclockers Forum...no matter how many times I hit F5 or log out and log back in...;)
 
Captain Newbie said:


With the exception of the rated FSB and the size of the core (correct me if I'm wrong, it can happen :p) the mobiles are the same.
Click to expand...

Core size is identical.. mobile = exceptional dekstop, and thats it. My barton woulda been a mobile if it ran at low voltage ;)
 
Lets not forget not everyone overclocks there system or even knows what overclocking is. Speaking from a strictly stock viewpoint the desktop part would be somewhat faster. Not alot but faster. I saw no mention of any overclocking in the first post.

Now we all know that stock speeds are meant to be changed and that the mobile will almost certainly be able to reach a higher clockspeed thatn the desktop but does your uncle know that you will be overclocking it hence changing the fsb speed? If he doesn't then the argument is mute because your talking about 2 completely different things. If he does then you need to inform him that he is incorrect. Never the less everyone previous is correct in saying that the mobile is the best bet for any overclocking system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Al_bundy
Alucryl - 3DFX - CNC - Retro pc
Replies
2
Views
390
EarthDog
EarthDog
funsoul
Need build oc help (5900x, 3600 b-die, 3090ti)
Replies
16
Views
2K
funsoul
funsoul
mackerel
Coffee Lake vs Zen 2 performance per watt
Replies
3
Views
2K
Mandrake4565
Mandrake4565
D
NEED HELP OVERCLOCKING SAMSUNG B-DIE (3200 CL14) ON MY NEW ASUS ROG STRIX X570-E
Replies
11
Views
15K
Woomack
W
N
Multiplier vs BCLK - which is better?
Replies
3
Views
11K
UltraTaco
UltraTaco
Back