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

I thought I paid too much for MY Barton...

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
Yeah, but you might not get anything that nice. I do think that it is one of the nicest steppings. Its what I have, and it really screams.
 
If the price goes any higher, why not just grab an Athlon 64 3200+ instead? Much faster. Like the seller mentioned, he wants to replace this 2.8GHZ barton with an Athlon 64 for himself. In fact for $240, an Athlon 64 3000+ will perform better after overclocking, at least in gaming.
 
Somethings are worth more to others than you would think. I should sell mine, seeing that price now.
 
Maybe you should, then grab yourself an Athlon 64 which is superior compare to a 2.8GHZ Barton.
 
I didn't need to see that, just getting comfortable with my IQYFA 0343 MPMW. I guess the moral of the story is check the forums often and buy quick.
 
Truly a legendary stepping, but at that price you practically ****ing the money away at this point. With all the new stuff coming out within the next 6 months the money could be a little better spent IMO.
 
{PMS}fishy said:
Somethings are worth more to others than you would think. I should sell mine, seeing that price now.

Yeah, but then I need a MB too, and more memory.

Ill wait and see what 939 has to offer.
 
Grrr thats why Amd Locks their chips. I got a feeling that someone on the forums (the seller) is abusing their knowledge:mad:
 
Most of mobile batrons can do 2.5 - 2.6+ GHz stable on air.

To run that chip at 2.8 GHz stable, probably water is needed.

Unless one wants that chip for some reasons (competition), and already have good water setup, otherwise would have to spend an extra $300 = cost of addup + cost of water to make good use of it, for that 200-300 MHz gain, it would not be price effective at all. Further, the new water block may not be good for the 64-bit chips.

Also paying $140 extra of a CPU is risky, in case something goes wrong, ....
 
I'd take my chances with watercooling and a new Mobile 2500+ instead of that e-bay crap...no matter how golden a stepping it is, it isn't worth $240 compared to $90.
 
Sentential said:
Grrr thats why Amd Locks their chips. I got a feeling that someone on the forums (the seller) is abusing their knowledge:mad:

No that is not why. The chip is in no way modded. The seller also stated that it is a 2500+ running a 1ghz O/C.

AMD was locking chips because people/vendors were hard modding the chips to faster speeds and selling them to unknowing customers.

There is a big difference between the two issues.
 
You know gus i was looking at this and something seems off, like really off. Take a look at this blown up image of the one the seller posted:
 

Attachments

  • fdg.jpg
    fdg.jpg
    24.2 KB · Views: 289
There's nothing suspicious. He easily could've photoshopped it but that's a typical speed on such a good stepping. And unless I'm mistaken, the math adds up too :)
 
Crap meant to add more to that before I posted, but I’ll just do a 2nd post so you can all see the image. Ok think about this:

1. The seller listed the CPU as 9.8GHz, the picture clearly shows 2.9GHz almost 3Ghz, I know they said stable at 2.8GHz but that image just doesn’t fit.

2. Plus think about this, the guy listed the FSB as 266 which is a lot higher than the FSB pictured but think about the math:
10x266 = 2.6
10.5x266 = 2.7
11x266 = 2.9
11.5x266 = 3.0
Possible to reach 2.8, indeed but again it’s just strange.

3. Anyone remember a few days ago when someone posted a 2.9 O\C chip a few days ago on the forums? I’m going to search around for it but I swear I remember seeing one posted here recently and the numbers seem very similar to those of this picture.

Maybe I’m just over thinking this because I’m bored, but something just seems fishy.
 
Hagakure said:
Crap meant to add more to that before I posted, but I’ll just do a 2nd post so you can all see the image. Ok think about this:

1. The seller listed the CPU as 9.8GHz, the picture clearly shows 2.9GHz almost 3Ghz, I know they said stable at 2.8GHz but that image just doesn’t fit.

2. Plus think about this, the guy listed the FSB as 266 which is a lot higher than the FSB pictured but think about the math:
10x266 = 2.6
10.5x266 = 2.7
11x266 = 2.9
11.5x266 = 3.0
Possible to reach 2.8, indeed but again it’s just strange.

3. Anyone remember a few days ago when someone posted a 2.9 O\C chip a few days ago on the forums? I’m going to search around for it but I swear I remember seeing one posted here recently and the numbers seem very similar to those of this picture.

Maybe I’m just over thinking this because I’m bored, but something just seems fishy.

lol...man you're thinking too much. AMD double-pumps their FSB, kind of like how Intel quad-pumps their FSB. He is right in listing the stock FSB as 266MHz, since 266/2=133MHz, the real FSB. Apparently he pushed it to 248x12 which about equals 2.9GHz. He said it's fully stable at 2.8GHz so maybe he just posted a 2.9GHz screenie showing windows stability. Or maybe he didn't have time to push it more :)
 
Hagakure said:
Crap meant to add more to that before I posted, but I’ll just do a 2nd post so you can all see the image. Ok think about this:

1. The seller listed the CPU as 9.8GHz, the picture clearly shows 2.9GHz almost 3Ghz, I know they said stable at 2.8GHz but that image just doesn’t fit.

2. Plus think about this, the guy listed the FSB as 266 which is a lot higher than the FSB pictured but think about the math:
10x266 = 2.6
10.5x266 = 2.7
11x266 = 2.9
11.5x266 = 3.0
Possible to reach 2.8, indeed but again it’s just strange.

3. Anyone remember a few days ago when someone posted a 2.9 O\C chip a few days ago on the forums? I’m going to search around for it but I swear I remember seeing one posted here recently and the numbers seem very similar to those of this picture.

Maybe I’m just over thinking this because I’m bored, but something just seems fishy.

If its listed at 9.8ghz thats deffinatly a typo.

266mhz MEMORY BUS. Which is correcet for this chip. That makes it a 133mhz FSB.

Is this the thread that you are looking for?

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=277454


I have a 2.9xx screen shot on there, as well as the person that is selling this chip. Ill let you see whos it is.
 
Back